How did Psalm 82:6-7 apply to Jesus?

The Jewish leaders accused Jesus Christ of blasphemy for saying that he and the Father were one. Jesus defended his statement by appealing to Psalm 82:6-7. How did that Psalm verse apply to him?

Interpretation 1: When in Psalm 82 ordinary people can be called gods, how much more would God’s special envoy be entitled to call himself God, being one with the Father (John 10:30)?

Arguments in favour of this view:

1.     In Psalm 82:1–8 God addressed men, earthly judges, as gods—yes, as sons of the Most High.

2.     Isn’t Jesus so much more than these judges?

Arguments against this view:

1.     In Psalm 82:1–8 God did not address men, judges, but the gods of the heathen nations.

2.     The phrase how much more is not used by Jesus—while that is the very reason that he is being attacked. For a defence of his statement, that he is allowed to call himself the Son of God, more is required than an appeal to a title previously given to men. For then those judges of Psalm 82 could also have said that they and the Father were one. And the same would apply to the Jewish leaders of Jesus’ time.

Interpretation 2: In Psalm 82, God addressed the Israelites because God had spoken his word to them at that time. They could therefore also call themselves gods. Why then would they wish to deny that name to Jesus?

Arguments in favour of this view:

1.     Christ characterizes those addressed in Psalm 82:1–8 especially as those to whom the word of God came. That is a clear reference to the special privilege that God’s people Israel enjoyed (see Deuteronomy 4:10, Deuteronomy 4:33, and Deuteronomy 4:36).

Arguments against this view:

1.     The formulation to whom the word of God came is not a standard formulation that applies exclusively to God’s people Israel. Jesus’ reference to Psalm 82:6–7 can only have referred to those who were addressed by God there. And even now the defence of his statement, that he and the Father are one, required more than an appeal to a name that God formerly used for all his people. In that case the Jews of Jesus’ time could also say of themselves that they and the Father were one.

Interpretation 3: In Psalm 82, God addressed the idols of the Gentiles as accusers. They were addressed on trying to be god. The Lord wanted to give them that honour for a while. This gave them the opportunity to prove themselves and show that they deserved that title. However, they could not live up to their pretensions. Therefore, as the Most High, God tells them that they will die as human beings.

Jesus Christ now challenges the Jews to judge him by his actions. Didn’t he fully live up to whom he made himself out to be? Didn’t his works prove that he and the Father are one? And that therefore he may lay claim to the title: Son of the Most High God?

 Arguments in favour of this view:

 1.     In Psalm 82:1 it is more plausible to translate “elohim” not with judges, but with gods—this time in the plural. Psalm 82:2–4 appears to indicate that earthly authorities, especially Israelite judges, are addressed. But such an interpretation runs stuck at Psalm 82:7, where “elohim” parallels sons of the Most High and where it is said of them: like men you shall die, and fall like any prince. It is difficult to conclude from this anything else but that the “elohim” themselves are not terrestrial beings. Psalm 82 deals with the contrast between gods (who are believed to be immortal) and humans (who are well-known to be mortal).

2.     The author of Psalm 82 made use of the idea among the heathen peoples that their gods regularly came together in an assembly of the gods. Such a divine council is a well-known religious motif in ancient Near Eastern literature. The name for the LORD in Psalm 82 as the Most High also fits very well over against those so-called gods. The LORD is characterized several times in the Old Testament as the God of gods (see Joshua 22:22, 1 Chronicles 16:25, 2 Chronicles 2:5, Psalm 50:1–23, Psalm 96:4, Psalm 135:5, Psalm 136:2, Daniel 11:36) where we should not be thinking of judges or rulers. In the Old Testament the Lord himself also addresses the gods and idols of the heathen peoples as if they were living opponents (see, e.g., Jeremiah 46:25, Jeremiah 50:2).

3.       The discussion between Jesus and the Jewish leaders is not just about the use of a title (God or Son of God), but about Jesus’ alleged pretension: he calls God his own Father (Jeremiah 50:2, John 10:17,John 10:25, John 10:29, John 10:32). He—a man—makes himself God (see also John 19:7)!

In defence of this claim, Jesus always invokes his actions. Don’t these prove that he does not claim too much (John 10:24, John 10:32, John 10:37–38)? Doesn’t he differ unmistakably from the idols in Psalm 82, who proved unworthy of the title god?

4.       According to Psalm 82, the Most High God gave the idols the chance to prove themselves and show that they deserved their title (gods). The Jewish leaders, on the other hand, do not even want to give Jesus a chance to prove himself as the Son of God. They immediately condemn him for the use of this title, without first judging his divine actions.

The most plausible interpretation:

Interpretation 3