BIBLICAL MONOTHEISM

It is mistaken to assume that we can evaluate ancient

Jewish texts and beliefs in terms of whether or how
closely they meet our own preconceived idea of pure
monotheism If we are to avoid a priori definitions and
the imposition of our own theological judgments, we have
no choice but to accept as monotheism the religion of
those who profess to be monotheists, however much their
religion carries and may seem complicated with other
beings in addition to the one God. 3
The monotheistic belief of early Jewish and Christian believers is to
be understood by evaluating their writings. Though priority should be
given to canonical texts, extra-biblical Jewish texts should not be
ignored.

God Use and Meaning

Biblical times found the words translated "god" applied both to false
gods and the Almighty, and it is within these two categories that biblical
monotheism is founded. While these two are most common, the term
included applications between the extremes, identifying various gods
who were neither false nor Almighty. It is this often neglected middle
range that demands analysis.
Commenting on the various uses of the word god, the New Ungers
Bible Dictionary relates:
This term for deity is used in a threefold connotation in the
O[ld]T[estament]: (1) In a singular sense of the one true God in a
plural of majesty and excellence. It is construed with a singular
verb or adjective (Gen. 1:1; 2 Kings 19:4, 16; Pss. 7:10; 57:3;
78:56) but with a plural verb only in certain phrases (3) Of
judges or prophets as to whom the word of God came (John
10:35; Ps. 82:6), and whom God consequently dignified with
authority to bear His own name (Ex. 21:6, see marg.; 22:8;
4
judges)
Murray Harris similarly remarks:
For any Jew or Gentile of the first century A.D. who was
acquainted with the OT in Greek, the term qeo,j would have
seemed rich in content since it signified the Deity, the Creator of
3
Larry W. Hurtado, How on Earth Did Jesus Become a God?: Historical Questions
about Earliest Devotion to Jesus (Grand Rapids: Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Co., 2005),
113-114.
4
Merill F. Unger, The New Ungers Bible Dictionary, Revised and Updated Edition,
Edited by R.K. Harrison (Chicago: Moody Press, 1988), 482.
2
 BIBLICAL MONOTHEISM

heaven and earth, and also could render the ineffable sacred
name, Yahweh, the covenantal God, and yet was capable of
extremely diverse application, ranging from the images of pagan
deities to the one true God of Israel, from heroic people to
angelic beings. Whether one examines the Jewish or the Gentile
use of the term qeo,j up to the end of the first century A.D., there
is an occasional application of the term to human beings who
perform divine functions or display divine characteristics. 5
Several passages exemplify the various uses of god. For example,
Moses was a god to Pharaoh (Ex. 7:1). Jehovah had not exalted his
nature to make him something other than a human, but he gave him
authority to act in his behalf, allowing Moses to speak for him and carry
out his works. In all Moses did to Pharaoh he was performing divine
functions and displaying divine characteristics, making the identification
of him as a god appropriate.
The judges of Israel were on several occasions identified as gods:
God judges in the midst of the gods I have said, You are gods, And
all of you are sons of the Most High (Psa. 82:1, 6). On this text The
Bible Knowledge Commentary explains:
The psalmist envisioned God presiding over an assembly
of judges. The word gods (lhm) is used here for
authorities in Israel (cf. 45:6; Ex. 21:6; 22:8-9). Some have
thought this refers to angels (e.g., the Syriac trans.) in
Gods heavenly court. However, the remainder of the
psalm clarifies that these are Gods representatives who
6
are in authority on earth.
Keil and Delitzsch further note:
Everywhere among men, but here pre-eminently, those in
authority are God's delegates and the bearers of His
image, and therefore as His representatives are also
themselves called elohim, gods 7
Denying the implications of Psalm 82:6, some argue the passage
presents the referenced ones as gods only in sarcasm or irony. This
notion is foreign to the text as Keil and Delitzsch note:

5
Murray J. Harris, Jesus as God: The New Testament use of Theos in Reference to
Jesus (Grand Rapids: Baker Book House, 1992), 270.
6
J.F. Walvoord and R.B. Zuck, The Bible Knowledge Commentary: An Exposition of
the Scriptures, 2 Volumes (Wheaton, IL: Victor Books), 1:854.
7
C.F. Keil and F. Delitzsch, Commentary on the Old Testament, 10 Volumes (Grand
Rapids: William B. Eerdmans Publishing Co., repr. 1978), 5:2:402.
3
 BIBLICAL MONOTHEISM

The idea that the appellation elohim, which they have

given to themselves, is only sarcastically given back to
them in Psa[lm] 82:1 (Ewald, Olshausen), is refuted by
Psa[lm] 82:6, according to which they are really elohim by
the grace of God. 8
They are gods by the grace of God just as it is by this that they are
"sons of the most high." Though they shall die as men, this tells only
that because of their sin they shall die as common men irrespective of
their position. Many commentators have recognized the meaning of
such texts while missing the implications for a proper monotheistic
doctrine, as John Gill:
[In Exodus 22:8 the judges are] called Elohim, gods,
because they were God's vicegerents, and represented
him, and acted under his power and authority; and who at
this present were Moses, and those that judged the
people under him, and afterwards the seventy elders, and
all such who in succeeding times were judges in Israel,
and bore the office of civil magistrates. 9
Angels, too, are given this appellation (Psa. 8:5). Referencing man
as a little lower than ~yhil{a/(God/gods), 10 this is not the Almighty who is
infinitely greater. The Septuagint translators and the author of Hebrews
understood ~yhil{a/ in this context to be angels. The psalmist, speaking of
man's creation and the book of Hebrews applying this text to Jesus
becoming a man, presents a contrast between the higher nature of
angels with the lower nature man. In their existence as spirits (Heb.
1:7 NET) they are gods.
Early Jewish literature other than the Bible substantiates allowing for
others termed gods within monotheistic thought. The story of Joseph and
Asenetha work likely penned between the 1st centuries B.C. and
A.D.speaks of an angel who is the chief of the house of the Lord
(14:8), identifying him as a god (17:9). From the Dead Sea Scrolls
another example comes with reference to angels:
And exalt his exaltation to the heights, gods of the august
divinities, and the divinity of his glory above all the august
heights. For he is the God of the gods Sing with joy

8
Ibid., 5:2:404.
9
John Gill, Exposition of the Bible, [www reference cited Oct. 15, 2005],
http://www.studylight.org/com/geb/, Psa. 82:6. See also Warren W. Wiersbe, The Wiersbe
Bible Commentary: Old Testament, (Colorado Springs, CO.: David C. Cook, 2003), 186.
10
This can be used as either a plural of majesty, reflecting Gods exalted position
(used for God and others with singular pronouns), or a true plural with reference to more
than one god. The translation is my own.
4
 BIBLICAL MONOTHEISM

those of you enjoying his knowledge, with rejoicing among

the wonderful gods Praise him, divine spirits, praising
for ever and ever the main vault of the heights The
spirits of the holy of the holy ones, the living gods, the
spirits of everlasting holiness. 11
From this sampling there are two apparent applications for the word
god outside of the traditional monotheistic contrast between the true God
and false gods. The first is principally of men who possess divinely
granted authority, having been ordained by God and given special
authority to act on his behalf. This authority was extended to the judges
and kings of Israel (Psa. 82:6; 45:6). The second applies to beings of a
higher order as the angels. So in Psalm 8:5 the angels are gods in
contrast to the lower nature of man. These spirits are powerful beings,
unmatched by any human but not vastly superior as Jehovah.
An important consideration is that those termed gods outside of the
strict monotheistic definition were not entitled to divine worship. Worthy
of great respect and honor, on occasion having been given homage (cf.
Gen. 19:1), such never crossed the line into divine worship that God
alone was counted worthy of. They were not rivals to God and those
who made themselves into such, in turn, became false gods. In doing
this they would have exalted themselves to a higher level, creating
expectations with those who might follow them that they were unable to
fulfill and perhaps even demanding divine worship of which they were not
worthy.

No Other Gods Interpreting in Context

With evidence supporting the proper identification of gods other than
the true God, some suggest that several passages contradict this notion.
Indeed, numerous theologians have argued that certain passages
expressly deny the existence of gods in any sense other than the true
God. 12 As the scriptures are not contradictory careful examination of
these texts is required.

11
4QSongs of the Sabbath, The Dead Sea Scrolls Translated: The Qumran Texts in
English, Second Edition, Edited by Florentino Garcia Martinez, translated by Wilfred G.E.
Watson, (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1996), 422, 427.
12
Some limit their opinion to gods by nature, borrowing Paul's language at
Galatians 4:8. This qualifier imported into other passages is entirely unjustified and done
only out of theological necessity as will be demonstrated. Those appealing to Isaiah in
defense of a strict monotheism include White, Forgotten Trinity; Richard Bauckham, God
Crucified: Monotheism & Christology in the New Testament (Grand Rapids: Wm. B
Eerdmand Publishing, 1998). As will be seen, these texts present only the Father speaking
(Heb. 1:1-2) and the limitations on deity and other functions would thus exclude the Son
even if the Trinity was a reality and these interpretations were accurate.
5
 BIBLICAL MONOTHEISM

A fundamental principle of interpretation is to read in context. One

would avoid taking a passage out of context to make blanket application
when the context dictates a meaning that is specific. For example,
Exodus 20:4 (NET) provides a command to not make a carved image or
any likeness of anything that is in heaven above, or that is on earth
under it, or that is in the water below. This language at first seems clear
and absolute, but there appears to be a contradiction when the Bible
later condones its violation. In fact, any non-religious statue or carving
would violate the command as here quoted.
Examples of this laws violation would be in the building of Solomons
temple. Solomon is said to have engraved cherubs on the walls (2Ch.
3:7) and to have carved engravings of cherubim, palm trees, and open
flowers (1Ki. 6:29 NASB). Similarly, Solomon built for himself a house
with images of oxen (1Ki. 7:25). Yet with these both Solomon and the
temple remained acceptable to Jehovah (1Ki. 9:3).
How, then, is the command of Exodus 20:4 understood? Verse 3
narrows the command to be against having other gods before Jehovah.
Verse 5 further clarifies, instructing that they should not bow to or
serve the carved images. Keil and Delitzsch relate:
It is not only evident from the context that the allusion is
not to the making of images generally, but to the
construction of figures of God as objects of religious
reverence or worship, but this is expressly stated in ver[se]
5; so that even Calvin observes, that there is no necessity
to refute what some have foolishly imagined, that
sculpture and painting of every kind are condemned
13
here.
Exodus 20 defines the type of carved image prohibited. That Calvin
tells of ones who have gone so far as to argue that sculpture and
painting of every kind are condemned here cannot be overlooked when
this is plainly not the case. The context speaks against this, as do other
texts. Similarly, the application of passages appealed to for denying the
proper identification of others as gods is refuted by these passages own
context.
Isaiah provides the principle proof texts from which strict, absolute
monotheism is derived. Passages have been isolated as some have
done with Exodus 20:4, making an absolute statement out of what must
be understood contextually. Prominently featured but misapplied in this
discussion is Isaiah 43:10. Here God speaks: Before me there was no
God formed; nor shall any be after me. This verse is often read to be a
statement about the non-formation of other gods, but in fact it is a

13
Keil and Delitzsch, 1:2:115.
6
 BIBLICAL MONOTHEISM

statement about the sovereignty of Jehovah. Note that the text

addresses specific times during which no gods have been or will be
formed. These times are before and after Jehovah.
It is necessary to ask when Jehovah has ever not been so that gods
might have been formed before him. Having existed throughout all
eternity there is no time when he did not exist, so there has never been a
time that was before him nor will there be any after him. This does
not deny that other gods have been formed, but it is expresses
Jehovahs eternal duration where there will never be a time either
before or after him. A credible understanding of why Jehovah
expressed himself this way may be presented:
This is already evident in the contrast between the pantheon of
benevolent and dangerous gods and Israels God who is the same
in his judgments, 42.22ff., and in the salvation which he promises,
431ff. This v. emphasizes the contrast in the sense that Yahweh
has no beginning and no end. The epic Enuma Elish (ANET,
60ff.) gives a good example of the theogony in Mesopotamia. In
the course of history one deity is ousted by another, depending on
the political powers of their worshippers. Morgenstern also draws
attention to an ancient Semitic concept of three aeons,
14
successively ruled by various deities.
With Isaiah 43:10 shown as not particularly relevant to the discussion,
an examination of its context is worthwhile, for it limits the scope of the
verse and more importantly, those that are to come. Early in and
throughout the significant texts of Isaiah clarity is given as to the gods in
view. 15 Intending to demonstrate the absurdity of accepting these things
as gods, the manner in which they derive their existence is explained.
Isaiah 40:19 The craftsman pours out the casted image,
the smelter spreads it with gold; and he casts the chains
of silver. 20 He too poor for that offering chooses a tree
that will not rot; he seeks a skilled artisan for him, to
prepare a carved image that will not be shaken.
The preceding continues with God focusing his attention on these
idols as man-made creations, not beings properly identified as gods.

14
Jan L. Koole, Isaiah, Part 3, Volume 1: Isaiah 40:48, Historical Commentary on
the Old Testament, ed. by Corelis Houtman, Willem S. Prinsloo, Wilfred G.E. Watson, Al
Wolters (Kampen, The Netherlands: Kok Pharos Publishing House, 1997), 310-311. See
too BN, 6:2:118.
15
This is not to suggest that there may have been other gods outside of those
specified by the context that existed before Jehovah, but only that this context is
addressing specific ones and by recognizing this we better understand this passage and
others surrounding it.
7
 BIBLICAL MONOTHEISM

While God strengthens his people, idols must be strengthened by their

makers.
Isaiah 41:7 So the carver strengthens the refiner; and he
smoothing with the hammer, him who struck the anvil,
saying of the soldering, It is good. And he made it strong
with nails; it will not totter.
Those idolaters who come to realize the truth will be ashamed of their
former course; they will realize all of the activities that centered on these
gods were in vain.
Isaiah 42:17 they are turned back; they are ashamed
with shame, those trusting in the carved image, who say
to cast images, You are our gods.
Isaiah 44:9-20 continues the argument against the so-called gods
with these in view when statements are made denying their existence.
Not discussed are those created by Jehovah as highly exalted beings or
humans who have been appointed by God to exercise divinely granted
authority. It is the idol makers who form their gods out of various
materials so that they are not gods at all.
Isaiah 41:29 NASB "Behold, all of them are false; Their
works are worthless, Their molten images are wind and
emptiness.
The context thus established, it is easy to identify the similarity
between these passages and Exodus 20:4. While Exodus 20:4 had
specific carved images in view, Isaiah had specific gods in mind.
These gods are discussed in the second passage necessary to review.
Isaiah 44:6 So says Jehovah, the King of Israel, and his
Redeemer, Jehovah of Hosts: I am the First, and I am
the Last; and there is no God except Me.
The denial of any other god is plainly in reference to idols as man's
creation. This does not extend to others whom we have considered
rightfully identified as gods. The contextual limitation is similarly
necessary in Isaiah 43:11 when we are told that there are no saviors
other than God himself. This statement is certainly true, but it is true
within this context.
On a number of occasions Scripture identifies various individuals as
saviors. One is of Ehud. Not a savior of himself or in opposition to God,
he is said to have been raised up as a savior by Jehovah (Jdg. 3:15). In
other words, Jehovah established Ehud as a savior, and so the title is
appropriately applied to him. Were Isaiah 43:11 removed from its

8
 BIBLICAL MONOTHEISM

context there would be clear contradiction, but by considering the context

this interpretive issue is resolved. Ehud is appropriately termed a savior
not only because the context is contrasting Gods saving ability and the
lack of such with idols, but also because God granted him the position so
that Ehud saved by Gods own power.
Isaiah establishes within itself a context, providing a specific contrast
between the Almighty Jehovah and the idols of the nations as man made
gods. The negative statements within these texts do not deny the
existence of others who are properly identified as gods, but the existence
of the idols and in principle all made into gods by men.
Other passages similar to those in Isaiah include Jeremiah 10:11
where it is stated that the gods who have not made the heavens and the
earth shall perish. Here, too, the context removes any difficulty
potentially.
Jeremiah 10:3 For the ordinances of the people are vanity. For
one cuts a tree out of the forest with the axe, the work of the
hands of the craftsman. 4 They adorn it with silver and with gold;
they make them strong with nails and hammers, so that it will not
wobble. 5 They are like a rounded post, and they cannot speak;
carrying they must be carried, because they cannot walk. Do not
be afraid of them, for they cannot do evil nor good; it is not with
them.
These words refer to the specific gods made by men with reference to
the idols formed directly by human hands. This does not mean that
those not made directly by human hands such as emperors, the sun or
the moon could be identified as gods. The principle behind these texts
extends into anything made into a god by man (or a demon), be it by
16
direct formation or mere identification. This sharply contrasts those
Jehovah has made into gods by creation or through the bestowal of
divine authority.

16
Brief comments are necessary on Galatians 4:8 and 1 Corinthians 10:20.
Galatians refers to that which by nature are no gods, referencing the idols formerly
worshiped by the Galatians and having nothing to do with those properly termed gods. 1
Corinthians 10:20 speaks of demons, but whether or not this refers to wicked spirits or only
to the gods imagined to be behind the idols is questionable with the term possibly
referencing either. If we accept the former we must answer Paul's rhetorical inquiry of
whether an idol is anything negatively, recognizing that as in Isaiah it would make little
sense to deny that a mere statue is a god, instead denying the existence of any god
represented by an idol. The sacrifices made would not have a god to accept them and with
the sacrifices in opposition to god the demons would take them unto themselves. Nothing
indicates that the fallen angels were somehow the gods behind the idols. Such would have
required these demons to communicate with men, representing themselves as these gods
to have the idols formed, but this lacks any supporting evidence.
9