The Divine Council: Uncovering the Supernatural Realm in Biblical Texts
The concept of the Divine Council offers a profound lens through which to understand the biblical portrayal of spiritual beings and their interactions with God. This heavenly assembly, often described as the "heavenly host," encompasses a hierarchy of divine entities that play roles in governing the cosmos and executing God's will. While this topic may challenge preconceived beliefs rooted in traditional religious perspectives, it provides a critical context for comprehending the rich and complex supernatural worldview presented in the Hebrew Scriptures, the New Testament, and Second Temple literature. By stepping away from preconceived notions and immersing ourselves in the text, we can appreciate how the ancient Israelites and early Christians understood their relationship with God and the spiritual world around them. One thing that should be encouraged is to take a step back from any religious tradition that you are currently a part of, and just read the text and see what the text is saying.
Introduction to the Divine Council
The Divine Council is essentially God’s heavenly assembly (heavenly host), consisting of a celestial entourage.
"The term divine council is used by Hebrew and Semitics scholars to refer to the heavenly host, the pantheon of divine beings who administer the affairs of the cosmos. All ancient Mediterranean cultures had some conception of a divine council. The divine council of Israelite religion, known primarily through the psalms, was distinct in important ways." (Michael S. Heiser, "Divine Council," in Dictionary of the Old Testament: Wisdom, Poetry & Writings, 112)
Monotheism and Henotheism
The Bible, particularly in Christian interpretation, is often regarded as strictly monotheistic, affirming belief in one God. However, some scholars argue that applying the term "monotheism" to Christian and Jewish studies can be misleading, as it has sometimes been inaccurately defined and does not always reflect a close reading of the scriptures. A deeper examination of the Hebrew Scriptures, the New Testament, and rabbinic literature reveals a more nuanced perspective that aligns with henotheism.
Henotheism refers to the belief in and worship of one primary god without denying the existence or potential worship of other deities by various groups or in different contexts. In the biblical context, this means that Israel is devoted to the one true God while acknowledging the presence of other heavenly beings. The God of Israel is at the pinnacle of a divine hierarchy and presides over a council of spiritual entities.
The Supremacy of the God of Israel
The God of Israel is distinguished from these other beings by His unique name in the Hebrew Scriptures: YHWH (The Tetragrammaton), often pronounced "Yahweh." This personal name of God was revealed to Moses at the burning bush (Exodus 3:14-15) and is commonly translated as "I AM WHO I AM" or simply "I AM" (Hebrew: Ehyeh Asher Ehyeh), signifying God’s eternal, self-existent, and unchanging nature. The original Hebrew text did not contain vowels, which were added later by the Masoretes in the Middle Ages to assist with pronunciation. As a result, the precise pronunciation of YHWH remains uncertain. Out of reverence, ancient Jewish tradition avoided vocalizing YHWH, often substituting it with Adonai ("Lord") or HaShem ("The Name"), further contributing to the mystery surrounding its pronunciation.
The Divine Council in Scripture and Navigating Divine Hierarchies
Psalm 82:1 introduces the concept of a divine council:
"God (Heb. elohim) has taken his place in the divine council (ba-adat el); in the midst of the gods (elohim) he holds judgment." (Psalm 82:1)
"Elohim" is the plural form of the word "El," meaning "god" or "mighty one." In Hebrew, the grammatical form of a word does not always determine its functional meaning. While some words may have plural endings, this does not necessarily imply plurality. Verbs associated with these words are especially important, as they indicate whether the action involves one or multiple entities. In the case of "Elohim," it can be interpreted both as singular and plural, depending on the context. When referring to the God of Israel, it is typically used with singular verbs, emphasizing His unique sovereignty and majesty, while in other contexts, it may denote multiple gods or divine beings. The term El Elyon (אֵל עֶלְיוֹן) - "God Most High" (e.g., Genesis 14:18), highlighting God’s supreme authority and exalted position above others deities.
In the New Testament, demons recognize and refer to Jesus as the "Son of the Most High God":
“What do you want with me, Jesus, Son of the Most High God? In God’s name, don’t torture me!” (Mark 5:7, NIV)
In Luke 8:28, the parallel passage records the demon's words similarly: “What do you want with me, Jesus, Son of the Most High God? I beg you, don’t torture me!”
One could argue that if there is only one God in the entire universe, the term "Most High God" would not be necessary. While this term does not directly affirm the existence of multiple gods in a strictly monotheistic sense, it does suggest that other spiritual beings or entities were recognized as powerful, though subordinate to the supreme Most High God.
The concept of a divine council may seem unusual to some Bible readers, as it evokes associations with polytheism—the belief in and worship of multiple gods. Polytheism, evident in cultures surrounding ancient Israel, such as Babylonian, Egyptian, Greek, and Roman societies, involved worshippers interacting with, praying to, and offering sacrifices to numerous gods.
Efforts to define the divine council have yielded varying interpretations, with some suggesting the presence of “other gods.” What remains clear is that humankind does not belong to this divine realm of spiritual beings.
Ellen White's work "Yahweh's Council: Its Structure and Membership," offers an organized perspective on the roles and hierarchy of spiritual beings within the biblical understanding of the Divine Council, highlighting Yahweh's preeminence and the distinct roles of other entities involved in divine deliberation and administration. She divides the Divine Council into three tiers:
Tier 1 is occupied solely by Yahweh, who is described as the chief God of the nations of Israel and Judah, indicating supreme authority and sovereignty over the council and creation.
Tier 2 comprises councilors actively engaged in the council's functions, including judicial officials such as ha-Satan (translated as "the accuser" or adversary) and Malakh YHWH (the "Angel of the LORD"), as well as advisors like ha-Ruach (the Spirit). This tier reflects entities with specialized roles, contributing to judicial and advisory tasks.
Tier 3 includes court officers or agents, exemplified by beings such as the Seraphim, who fulfill specific duties or roles within the divine framework.
Ellen White’s proposal uses the familiar structure of the Western judicial system to assign roles to the divine council. This approach reflects our cultural perspective and an effort to understand the divine council in terms we can relate to. While it represents a sincere attempt to grasp the concept, it remains largely speculative.
If God is the Most High, the creator of all things, does He truly need a council? Perhaps our attempts to define the "council" are misapplied. Is it a body that merely affirms God’s choices, or does it serve a distinct function for Him? It may be worth considering whether our understanding of a court system is an accurate representation of divine reality at all.
"Terms like beney elohim (sons of God) or beney elim (sons of the mighty) can either denote rank in the divine council (e.g., Job 1:6, 2:1; Psa 89:6 [Heb: 89:7]) or, more generally, speak of spiritual beings (Job 38:7; Psa 29:1). All spiritual beings are members of the heavenly host, the divine council (1 Kgs 22:19-23), in the sense they all have some role to play." (Michael Heiser, The Unseen Realm: Recovering the Supernatural Worldview of the Bible, p. 33 n. 8)
Although the exact rank structure within the Divine Council remains unclear, one thing is certain: God holds the highest position of authority.
Sons of God Versus The Son of God
In John’s Gospel it begins by saying:
1 In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. 2 He was in the beginning with God…14 And the Word became flesh and dwelt among us, and we have seen his glory, glory as of the only Son from the Father, full of grace and truth. (John 1:1-2, 14, ESV Bible)
The phrase "only Son" in John 1:14 is translated differently across various Bible versions to reflect the Greek term μονογενής (monogenēs). Historically, this term has been rendered as "only begotten Son" or "one and only Son," emphasizing the unique and special relationship between the Son and the Father. The most accurate understanding of monogenēs is "one of a kind" or "unique." It does not strictly mean "only begotten," which can be misleading, as the Hebrew Scriptures mention other "sons of God." If there are plural "sons of God," it raises the question of how Jesus is the "only Son." The term highlights His distinctive and unparalleled status, not numerical exclusivity.
In Hebrews 11:17, monogenēs is used to describe Isaac, underscoring his "unique" status as the child of promise. The verse states:
"By faith Abraham, when he was tested, offered up Isaac, and he who had received the promises was in the act of offering up his only son." (Hebrews 11:17, ESV)
In this context, monogenēs is used to describe Isaac, despite the fact that Abraham also had another son, Ishmael. This shows that monogenēs is not meant to emphasize Isaac as the "only begotten" in terms of being Abraham's sole child but rather to highlight Isaac’s unique status as the child of promise through whom God’s covenant would be fulfilled.
Similarly, this understanding of monogenēs applies to Jesus. He is the "one of a kind" Son of God, distinct and unique among the many sons of God.
Earthly Reflections of Divine Realities
Although, some scholars suggest that earthly institutions may mirror divine realities. The Sanhedrin, as the highest judicial and legislative body in ancient Jewish society, was responsible for interpreting and enforcing religious law, administering justice, and guiding the community. This role aligns with the idea of a heavenly council, where God presides over a divine assembly tasked with judicial, advisory, and governing functions. The Sanhedrin evolved from earlier systems of governance and justice in Israel, including the leadership of elders, judges, kings, priests, and the Great Assembly.
The phrase "the Torah speaks in the language of men" (Hebrew: "dibra Torah kilshon b'nei adam") reflects a principle in Jewish interpretation that the Torah (or more broadly, scripture) communicates using human language, expressions, and concepts to convey its divine message. This idea, often attributed to Rabbinic teachings and commentators like Rashi and Maimonides, suggests that the Torah uses familiar terms, metaphors, and modes of speech that people can understand and relate to. In both Jewish and Christian thought, there is an acknowledgment that humans cannot fully grasp or know the complete realities and absolute truths of existence. The Bible, at its best, provides glimpses into realities that lie beyond our perception.
Understanding the Word Demon
In ancient Greek culture, δαιμόνια (daimonia) and δαίμονες (daimones) referred broadly to spiritual beings or intermediary powers. Unlike the modern negative connotation of "demons" as purely malevolent entities, in Greek thought, daimones were often seen as neutral or even benevolent spirits that influenced human affairs, acted as guardians, or served as intermediaries between gods and humans. The philosopher Socrates famously claimed to have a personal daimonion that guided him, emphasizing a protective or advisory spirit rather than an evil one. Hesiod and other Greek poets sometimes referred to deceased human spirits as daimones. Thus, the term had a broad and flexible usage, spanning everything from divine spirits and minor gods to deceased ancestors.
By the Hellenistic period, Jewish writers—faced with widespread pagan worship and Greek religious influences—began using δαίμονες in a more pejorative sense, aligning it with the idea of false gods or malevolent spiritual beings. In the Septuagint (LXX), δαίμονες is often used to describe foreign gods worshiped by other nations. This usage carried a negative connotation, implying that these so-called gods were either deceptive spirits or powerless in comparison to the God of Israel.
In Greek usage, the term "demon" is often best understood as a reference to another person’s deity or deities. Consider Isaiah 65:3 in both the Masoretic Text and the Septuagint translations. While the Greek Septuagint aligns closely with the Masoretic Text, it adds a notable detail: the sacrifices and incense offerings are directed to demons:
"The people who provoke me, before my face continually, who sacrifice in gardens and burn incense on the tiles.!" (Isaiah 65:3 MT)
"This is the people who provoke me, before me continually, who sacrifice in gardens and burn incense on the tiles to the demons (τοῖς δαιμονίοις) who are not (οὐκ εἰσίν; transliterated as "ouk eisin”)." (Isaiah 65:3 LXX)
The Hebrew text describes sacrifices made to other gods, distinct from the God of Israel. In the Greek translation, these other gods are specifically referred to as demons. An interesting detail in this verse is that, in some English translations, the final Greek phrase “who are not (οὐκ εἰσίν)” is rendered as “who do not exist.” This phrasing underscores a monotheistic view, emphasizing the God of Israel’s assertion that these so-called gods are not real.
The issue with this English translation is that the Greek text does not actually say “they do not exist”; it says “who are not.” So, what is the Greek truly conveying? To better understand this phrase in the Greek version of Isaiah 65:3, it is helpful to explore how the phrase "who are not" (οὐκ εἰσίν; transliterated as "ouk eisin") is used throughout Isaiah. Interestingly, Isaiah frequently employs this expression, offering context and insight into its intended meaning. What becomes clear is that Isaiah uses the phrase οὐκ εἰσίν not to imply the non-existence of other gods but rather to emphasize their lack of quality or power compared to the God of Israel. The focus is on the superiority of the God of Israel over these other entities, which the Greek text refers to as demons (τοῖς δαιμονίοις). This distinction is demonstrated in the following examples:
"I am the Lord God, and there is none (οὐκ ἔστι) besides me.... I am the Lord God and there is no other (οὐκ ἐστὶν ἔτι)." (Isaiah 45:5-6 LXX; cf. Isa 45:14, 21)
At first glance, God's declaration here appears to be a clear statement of monotheism, and it is easy to draw that conclusion, particularly from English translations. However, the Greek phrase “οὐκ εἰσίν” (transliterated as "ouk eisin") does not suggest that no other beings exist. Instead, it conveys that there are no others who are as great or as superior as God. Examining another example from Isaiah, we observe a similar use of the phrase “οὐκ εἰσίν” (transliterated as "ouk eisin") when Isaiah addresses the nation of Babylon and their wickedness:
"Being confident in your wickedness, you [Babylon] said, 'I am, and there is no other (οὐκ ἐστὶν ἑτέρα)'.….. You said in your heart, 'I am, and there is no other (οὐκ ἐστὶν ἑτέρα).'!" (Isaiah 47:10 LXX)
This is the same language that God uses in Isaiah 45 and elsewhere, but what does it signify? When Babylon declares, “I am and there is no other,” it is certainly not asserting that no other nation-states exist. At that time, Babylon was clearly not the only nation or culture in existence. Instead, this statement is Babylon's claim to supremacy and greatness compared to other nations. Similarly, in Isaiah 45, God is emphasizing that no other god can match Him in greatness or superiority. It is not a denial of the existence of other gods, but rather an assertion of God's unparalleled status and supremacy over them.
Are Demons Fallen Angels?
The idea of fallen angels goes back to Genesis chapter six.
1 Now it came to pass, when men began to multiply on the face of the earth, and daughters were born to them, 2 that the sons of God saw the daughters of men, that they were beautiful; and they took wives for themselves of all whom they chose. 3 And the Lord said, “My Spirit shall not strive with man forever, for he is indeed flesh; yet his days shall be one hundred and twenty years.” 4 There were giants on the earth in those days, and also afterward, when the sons of God came in to the daughters of men and they bore children to them. Those were the mighty men who were of old, men of renown. 5 Then the Lord saw that the wickedness of man was great in the earth, and that every intent of the thoughts of his heart was only evil continually. (Genesis 6:1-5)
Genesis 6 refers to “sons of God” having relationships with the women of the earth: “When the human beings (האדם; ha’adam) began to increase on the face of the ground, and daughters were born to them, the sons of God (בני אלהים; benei elohim) saw that the daughters of the humans (בנות האדם; benot ha’adam) were beautiful, and they took as their wives any they chose” (6:1-2). Though the identity of these “sons of God” is a matter of debate, it is most likely that they were lesser deities who rebelled against the authority of Israel’s God.
In understanding the “sons of God,” the Bible reader has multiple options. Since Scripture sometimes refers to the Davidic king as God’s “son” (בן; ben, e.g., 2 Sam 7:14; Ps 2:7), it’s possible that the “sons of God” in Genesis 6 were royal men who “took women for themselves” (יקחו להם נשׁים; yiqkhu lahem nashim) as an abuse of their power. Others have read these entities as fallen angels, noting the fact that their offspring are called the Nephilim (נפלים)--in Hebrew, “fallen ones.” However, since the “sons of God” are never called “angels” (מלאכים; malakhim), this interpretation goes beyond the textual data.
Based on other biblical appearances of the “sons of God,” it is more likely that these entities are lesser gods over whom the God of Israel has authority. The beginning of Job presents a heavenly court scene in which “the sons of God (בני אלהים; benei elohim) came to present themselves before the Lord” (1:6; cf. 2:1). When God speaks to Job toward the end of the narrative, the Lord refers to the heavenly “sons of God” existing prior to earthly creation. God asks Job, “Where were you when I laid the foundations of the earth… when the morning stars sang together and all the sons of God (בני אלהים; benei elohim) shouted for joy?” (38:7). Since in Job the “sons of God” are divine underlings in the Lord’s entourage, it is best to view the episode in Genesis 6 as an instance of the lesser gods leaving their heavenly realm and taking human women; the sons of God choose to abandon their posts under the Lord and enter the earthly realm. This rebellious divine behavior is met with the subsequent flood (cf. Gen 6:11-13) but, ultimately, the Lord exercises continued authority over such rebellion in the preservation of humanity through Noah.
In Second Temple Jewish literature, the narrative of fallen angels serves as a foundational explanation for the origin of demons, as seen in texts like 1 Enoch. This theme continues in the New Testament and later Jewish thought, where the terms "angel" and "demon" evolve into broader categories for understanding the "children of God" or lesser divine beings in the heavenly realm. When 1 Peter references the rebellious angels, it is rooted in the story of Genesis 6. As previously mentioned, a demon is best understood as a lesser god, distinct from a "bad" or fallen angel.
Understanding Angels
The Hebrew word for "angel" is מַלְאָךְ (mal'akh), meaning "messenger." Rather than being an ontological category, "angel" describes a role or function. For example, an elohim (a term for a divine being) can also serve as a mal'akh(messenger). Additionally, the term רוח (ruach), which translates to "spirit" or "wind," is sometimes associated with divine action and can function as a messenger or convey messages from God. An example of this is found in 1 Kings 22:19-23, where a "spirit" (ruach) stands before the Lord, volunteering to deceive Ahab and acting as a divine agent to fulfill God's plan.
Any divine being can function as an angel. However, we often categorize angels too rigidly, treating them as a distinct class of beings. By the Second Temple period, the term "angel" became a broad label for various divine entities. In Second Temple literature, "angel" lacks specificity due to its expansive usage. For clarity, we should revisit Genesis 6 and its reference to the "sons of God" (בני אלהים; benei elohim). This passage clearly indicates the existence of "lesser gods" or supernatural beings created by and subordinate to the God of Israel. The term elohim encompasses a wide range of divine beings, highlighting the complexity and diversity within the spiritual realm.
Who are the Nephilim?
In the Book of Enoch, specifically within the Book of the Watchers (chapters 1-36), the Nephilim are not equated with the Watchers themselves but are the offspring produced by the union between the Watchers and human women. The Watchers are a group of divine entities who descended to earth and, in defiance of God's will, took human wives. This rebellion led to the birth of the Nephilim, described as giant, mighty beings with great strength and, in many interpretations, as a corrupting force on earth.
Understanding Elohim: Translating Ancient Concepts of God and How it May Challenge our Beliefs
In our modern understanding, the term "god" often presents challenges when translating the Hebrew word elohim, which can refer to "god" or "gods." For contemporary readers, it may be more accurate to think of elohim as "spiritual beings." This is because what we mean by "god" today differs significantly from what it meant 2,000 years ago. In modern language, "god" typically refers to the creator, the supreme being. When someone claims there is one god, they generally mean there is one creator, which aligns with the Hebrew Bible’s depiction of the God of Israel. However, the Hebrew Bible also acknowledges the existence of other elohim, or supernatural beings, who inhabit the spiritual realm.
To truly grasp the meaning behind elohim, we need to go beyond the surface of the text and consider the intent of the biblical authors. The words themselves are important, but their significance extends further. If we broaden our understanding beyond the constraints of our preferred translations, we can better appreciate the original message and its context. Sometimes, translations limit our comprehension and keep us from fully engaging with the text's deeper meaning.
Using "supernatural beings" as a substitute for elohim can be an effective way to convey this concept in a way that resonates with modern readers. Many people today can accept and understand the idea of supernatural beings, whereas the notion of other "gods" may be difficult for some to reconcile with their beliefs. This shift in language can make the concept more approachable. Over time, certain terms and translations become deeply ingrained, often taking on a static, fixed meaning that feels almost sacred. However, it is important to recognize that translations are human interpretations of ancient concepts, and broadening our understanding does not diminish their holiness—it brings us closer to the intent of the original text.
By exploring the Greek and Hebrew understanding of these concepts, we aim to address and counteract translation biases. Many of us come from diverse religious backgrounds, shaped by specific "truths" taught through the lens of the Bible or tradition. When we examine ancient Hebrew and Greek writings, it often becomes clear that there is a gap between modern translations and the original source texts. Historical developments in theology and religious interpretation have further influenced our understanding over time. To genuinely seek and uncover the truth, we must be willing to follow the evidence wherever it leads, unbound by any particular religious preconceptions. Engaging with the text, history, language, and culture allows for a more accurate understanding of its meaning.
We have all experienced moments within our religious communities where we are taught certain doctrines that may not fully align with our own perceptions, creating a sense of cognitive dissonance. As seekers of truth, we must approach these traditions with respect, while also examining the text openly and honestly to see where the evidence takes us. This balanced approach ensures that we honor the richness of tradition while striving to understand the original intent and message of the scriptures.
Many people hesitate to delve into challenging areas of biblical understanding due to their specific faith communities, which are often built upon rigid beliefs and deeply rooted theological interpretations. This can make it difficult for individuals to shift their perspectives. However, there is a sense of freedom that comes with breaking away from institutional constraints to pursue truth for the sake of truth itself. The text of scripture should hold the utmost importance, and our dedication should be to the text above all else. Traditional or denominational viewpoints can sometimes obscure or hinder a clear understanding of scripture. Confronting challenges to our beliefs is much like stepping into a hot tub: at first, the heat can feel overwhelming, even painful, as we grapple with unfamiliar biblical concepts. Yet, over time, as we grow accustomed, the discomfort fades, and it becomes a source of comfort and growth. It is essential to seize opportunities to engage with and confront difficult passages or ideas in the text that challenge our understanding.
Elohim = Supernatural Beings/”Lesser gods” - Are They of Consequence?
The Bible often highlights the issue of other gods posing a challenge to the God of Israel, so much so that the Most High repeatedly demonstrates His supreme authority over these lesser deities. This dynamic is evident throughout scripture, as God asserts His unmatched power and reminds these entities of His sovereignty. One such example is found in Exodus 12:12, a pivotal verse in the Passover narrative. It reads:
"For I will pass through the land of Egypt on that night, and will strike all the firstborn in the land of Egypt, both man and beast; and against all the gods of Egypt I will execute judgment: I am the Lord." (Exod 12:12; cf. Num 33:4, NKJV)
One of the primary reasons God delivers the Israelites from Egypt is to execute judgment on Egypt’s gods. Each plague that God unleashes upon Egypt serves as a direct challenge to many of these deities, demonstrating their powerlessness.
It is not only the deaths of the firstborn that undermine Egypt’s deities; much of the divine action against Pharaoh’s land reflects warfare between the God of Israel and the Egyptian pantheon. Unfortunately, sometimes our English translations obscure the original Hebrew so that we miss the specifics of this heavenly battle.
One such translational issue appears in the description of the (eighth) plague of locusts. The vast majority of modern English Bibles follow the King James Version, in which the locusts “covered the face of the whole earth, so that the land was darkened” (Exod 10:15 KJV; cf. 10:5). However, the Hebrew does not say that the locusts covered the “face” of the earth—that is, the original language does not describe locusts covering the ground. Instead, the Hebrew states that the locusts “covered the eye (עין; ayin) of all the land, so that the land was darkened.” Our English translations favor “face” rather than “eye” because, to modern readers, the precise meaning of “eye of the land” is not immediately apparent; the ancient Egyptians, however, would have understood the phrase in the context of an attack against their gods.
According to Egyptian theology, the highest of all deities was the sun-god Amun-Ra. As a deification of the sun, Amun-Ra was responsible for all of Egyptian life. More, the sun was said to be the “eye” of Ra—the means by which the deity watched over the people and land of Egypt. The fourth line of the Egyptian Stela of Somtutefnakht summarizes this long-held belief about Egypt’s supreme solar god, “whose rising illuminates the land, whose right eye is the disk of the sun.” When the locusts blot out the sun during the eighth plague, the God of Israel blinds the “eye” (עין; ayin) of Amun-Ra, which was supposed to survey and protect the Egyptians. While the Lord says, “I have surely seen (ראה ראיתי; raoh raiti) the affliction of my people who are in Egypt” (Exod 3:7), Amun-Ra can no longer see the affliction of his people. In this way, the God of Israel shows superiority over Egypt’s gods and brings judgment upon them through the events of the exodus.
One could argue that the God of Israel is directly confronting what Egypt revered as gods, exposing them as powerless and false. It is as though Egypt’s worship of these so-called deities is being shattered by the God of Israel to prove that He alone is the true God. If the Egyptian gods were nonexistent, inconsequential, or so ineffective that they might as well not exist, then God would be contending against nothing. If there were no other forces to be superior over, such claims would seem perplexing. This perspective challenges a purely monotheistic interpretation, suggesting it may not fully capture the biblical narrative.
Throughout the Hebrew Scriptures, there is an ongoing battle for the hearts and minds of God’s people. God frequently declares Himself as a jealous God. But why would He be jealous if these other gods were nothing and held no power? The reality is that the people treated these other entities as if they were equal to the God of Israel—as if these false gods had delivered them from Egypt or provided manna in the wilderness. The covenantal relationship between God and Israel is rooted in their shared history and experiences. God’s acts of deliverance and provision evoke a response from His people, forming a bond of loyalty and devotion. When Israel turns away to seek fulfillment and purpose from other entities, God’s anger is stirred. The foundational commandment, "You shall have no other gods before Me," underscores the significance of these competing forces. These other beings must have some level of consequence; otherwise, God’s grief and concern would be inexplicable. In this way, the simplistic view of monotheism may obscure the deeper, more complex message presented in the Hebrew Scriptures.
The concept of other lesser gods or deities makes the God of Israel more relatable and emphasizes His desire for a genuine relationship with His people. It deeply grieves Him to see them turn to other gods, and His jealousy is not a self-centered, petty emotion. Some of these other gods demanded horrific acts from their followers, such as child sacrifice. God’s jealousy and grief, therefore, reflect not only the betrayal of His people turning away from Him but also His anguish over their devotion to cruel and destructive forces.
If we disregard the presence of other beings within the narrative, it can strip the text of its deeper meaning. Recognizing the existence of multiple gods and understanding the gravity of Israel’s spiritual infidelity reveals more about God’s character. It dismantles the simplistic view of a wrathful deity and instead portrays a God whose hurt stems from love and commitment. A surface-level reading might depict God as jealous or possessive, leading to a perception of Him as wrathful. However, why would God punish His people for chasing after other gods? The answer becomes clearer through a relational lens.
Imagine reading a story about a married couple where one partner continually cheats, while the faithful partner strives to save the relationship. By the end of the book, would you be angry at the betrayed spouse for their jealousy and hurt? No, of course not. You would understand their pain and their desire to keep the relationship intact. In the same way, the God of Israel is not driven by reckless wrath but by a broken heart over His people's betrayal. Even in their unfaithfulness, He does not abandon them and remains committed to their relationship. This speaks volumes about His character, highlighting a love that transcends mere jealousy and wrath.
God Consults with the Divine Council
These other divine entities or supernatural beings are of consequence. The quote from Patrick D. Miller in Israelite Religion and Biblical Theology emphasizes the concept of the divine council in the context of ancient Israelite religion and biblical narratives. In this council, significant decisions affecting human affairs, history, and the cosmos are made and carried out:
"Kings are raised up and put down, war is declared and carried out, judgment against peoples and cities is decreed and enacted, salvation and blessing are announced - all through the machinery of the divine council!" (Patrick D. Miller, Israelite Religion and Biblical Theology, p. 433)
The Jewish phrase "everything is from heaven" (in Hebrew, הכל מן השמים or hakol min ha-shamayim) reflects a central belief in Jewish thought that all events, circumstances, and outcomes in life are ultimately determined or guided by God. It underscores the idea of Divine Providence, where everything that occurs, both good and bad, is part of God's plan and under His control. As humans, we are at his mercy. Any authority we have comes from heaven.
God consults with the divine council. In the Book of Job, particularly in chapters 1 and 2, we see a depiction of God consulting with the divine council. This is portrayed as a heavenly assembly over which God presides. "Satan" (Hebrew: שָׂטָן, ha-satan, meaning "the accuser" or "adversary") appears among the council, serving a role that is somewhat akin to a prosecutor in a court of law. What is the council talking about? They are conducting the business of the world.
These other beings have a say within the discussion with God. God does not appear to "need" the council’s input but engages with it to carry out divine plans and judgments, showcasing His authority while also allowing for deliberation and participation by other beings.
In 1 Kings 22:13-23, we encounter a dramatic and vivid account of the prophet Micaiah having a vision of the divine council. This passage offers a rare and detailed glimpse into the workings of God’s heavenly court, revealing how divine decisions and judgments are determined and executed, particularly concerning the fate of King Ahab of Israel.
Then the messenger who had gone to call Micaiah spoke to him, saying, “Now listen, the words of the prophets with one accord encourage the king. Please, let your word be like the word of one of them, and speak encouragement.” And Micaiah said, “As the Lord lives, whatever the Lord says to me, that I will speak.” Then he came to the king; and the king said to him, “Micaiah, shall we go to war against Ramoth Gilead, or shall we refrain?” And he answered him, “Go and prosper, for the Lord will deliver it into the hand of the king!” So the king said to him, “How many times shall I make you swear that you tell me nothing but the truth in the name of the Lord?” Then he said, “I saw all Israel scattered on the mountains, as sheep that have no shepherd. And the Lord said, ‘These have no master. Let each return to his house in peace.’”And the king of Israel said to Jehoshaphat, “Did I not tell you he would not prophesy good concerning me, but evil?” Then Micaiah said, “Therefore hear the word of the Lord: I saw the Lord sitting on His throne, and all the host of heaven standing by, on His right hand and on His left. And the Lord said, ‘Who will persuade Ahab to go up, that he may fall at Ramoth Gilead?’ So one spoke in this manner, and another spoke in that manner. Then a spirit came forward and stood before the Lord, and said, ‘I will persuade him.’ The Lord said to him, ‘In what way?’ So he said, ‘I will go out and be a lying spirit in the mouth of all his prophets.’ And the Lord said, ‘You shall persuade him, and also prevail. Go out and do so.’ Therefore look! The Lord has put a lying spirit in the mouth of all these prophets of yours, and the Lord has declared disaster against you.” (1 Kings 22:13-23)
This passage depicts a genuine exchange between God and a divine entity, referred to as a ruach or spirit, from the divine council. In Jewish literature, God is often portrayed as seated while the members of the divine council stand around Him. This depiction highlights God's supreme authority and suggests that He is at rest, overseeing the work while the other entities carry out tasks on His behalf. Here is another example of God interacting with other divine entities:
"You [are those who forsake me and forget my holy mountain and prepare a table for the demon (τῷ δαιμονίῳ) and fill the drink offering for Tyche (τύχην)." Isaiah 65:11 LXX
"You [are those] who forsake me and forget my holy mountain and prepare a table for Gad (גַּד) and fill a drink offering for Meni (מְנִי)." Isaiah 65:11 MT
Notice that the Septuagint refers to other gods as demons, with Tyche specifically named as the goddess of fortune. In Greek, a demon can simply signify a foreign god or spiritual entity. In the Hebrew version of the same text, the deities are identified as Gad and Meni, representing other gods. Gad, a Canaanite god, appears elsewhere in the Bible, and places are named after him, as noted in the Book of Joshua. According to this passage, Gad and Meni are part of the divine council, and the Septuagint categorizes them as demons. This suggests that demons, in this context, are viewed as members of the divine council.
The Testament of Solomon
The Testament of Solomon is a pseudepigraphal text traditionally attributed to King Solomon, though it is not considered canonical by Jewish or Christian traditions. Scholars believe it was composed between the 1st and 5th centuries CE, likely during the late Roman period. The text reflects a blend of Jewish, Christian, and Greco-Roman influences and belongs to the genre of magical and demonological literature. Why is this text relevant? It offers valuable insight into the Hebraic context of demonology, revealing how Jewish thought on demons evolved and influenced later narratives, including those found in the Apostolic Scriptures.
Modern beliefs and interpretations of demons are shaped by a wide range of sources, including cinema and literature, such as Dante’s Inferno. These contemporary understandings often bear little relation to the biblical perspective or the views held in the first century. It is important not to let modern interpretations distort or influence our reading of ancient texts. Instead, our focus should be on beliefs prevalent around the Second Temple period.
Historians examine texts like the Testament of Solomon as historical and cultural artifacts within Jewish lore. While these writings are not considered divinely inspired or part of the biblical canon, they offer valuable insights. Are such extra-biblical sources reliable? They are as credible as any other work from their time, reflecting the genuine beliefs and experiences of the people who wrote them. These texts are not fabrications but portray the worldview and cultural context of their authors. As such, they provide a window into the beliefs, practices, and spiritual perspectives of their era.
Unfortunately, we do not possess the Testament of Solomon in its original form, as it has been altered by later editors, including monks, who blended Christian elements into the text. The Testament centers on King Solomon's interactions with demons, emphasizing his legendary wisdom and divine authority. In this narrative, Solomon is depicted as receiving a magical ring from the archangel Michael, a ring bearing the seal of God—often shown as a pentagram or hexagram—which grants him the power to command, control, and interrogate demons.
5 When I, Solomon, heard these things, I went into the Temple of God and, praising him day and night, begged with all my soul that the demon might be delivered into my hands and that I might have authority over him. 6 Then it happened that while I was praying to the God of heaven and earth, there was granted me from the Lord Sabaoth through the archangel Michael a ring which had a seal engraved on precious stone. 7 He said to me, "Solomon, Son of David, take the gift which the Lord God, the highest Sabaoth, has sent to you; (with it) you shall imprison all the demons, both female and male, and with their help you shall build Jerusalem when you bear this seal of God." (Testament of Solomon 1, c. 1-3 cent CE)
The Talmud contains numerous stories of Solomon constructing the Temple with the assistance of supernatural beings. While the Talmudic accounts were written later, the Testament of Solomon demonstrates that these traditions have much earlier origins.
It is interesting that the text mentions demons, both female and male. Some scholars argue that the different sexes are necessary to play on the human opposite sex. For example, female demons would entice male humans.
I interrogated him and said, "Tell me, who are you?" The demon said, "I am Beelzeboul, the ruler of the demons." I demanded that without interruption he sit next to me and explain the manifestations of the demons. Then he promised to bring to me all the unclean spirits bound. Again, I glorified the God of heaven and earth, continually giving thanks to him... I commanded another demon be brought to me; and he (Beelzeboul) brought me the evil demon Asmodeus, bound. I asked him, "Who are you?" He scowled at me... do not ask me so many things, Solomon, for eventually your kingdom will be divided. This glory of yours is temporary. You have us to torture for a little while; then we shall disperse among human beings again with the result that we shall be worshiped as gods because men do not know the names of the angels who rule over us." When I, Solomon, heard this things, I bound him with greater care.. I asked him again, saying, "Do not hide anything from me, for I am Solomon, Son of David. (Testament of Solomon 4-5, c. 1-3 cent CE)
The connection between unclean spirits and demons is evident in various texts. For example, Asmodeus, a demon known from the Book of Tobit, is depicted as a specific entity that afflicts marriages. This text, among others, highlights the belief that human beings often worship such entities as gods. It can be argued that the gods of the nations are actually demons, or δαιμόνια (daimonia), posing as high gods. The nations of the world, lacking true wisdom, are unable to recognize the deception.
Demon Possession within the Apostolic Scriptures
Theology evolves over time, and by the period of the Gospels and the Apostolic writings, terminology such as "demon possession" emerges. This concept is also evident in extra-biblical sources from the same era, such as the writings of Josephus.
The idea that a spirit can inhabit a person is already present in the Hebrew Bible. For example, in Ezekiel chapter 2, the Spirit of God enters Ezekiel. This suggests that the human body can act as a permeable vessel for spirits, allowing their entry and departure. If this is true for God’s Spirit, it can also apply to other spiritual beings or elohim. While terminology shifted over time, partly due to the New Testament being predominantly written in Greek rather than Hebrew, these foundational ideas are deeply rooted in the Hebrew Scriptures. Furthermore, divine entities are depicted as being capable of inhabiting objects or animals. In Ancient Near Eastern cultures, rituals such as "mouth opening" ceremonies were performed on idols to invite supernatural beings to dwell within them.
Who is Beelzebul?
When Jesus performs exorcisms, he is accused of doing so with the help of “Beelzebul, the prince of demons” (Matt 12:24; Lk 11:15; cf. Matt 10:25; 12:27; Mk 3:22; Lk 11:18-19). While Yeshua’s response associates this figure with “Satan” (Σατανᾶς; cf. Matt 12:26; Mk 3:24-26; Lk 11:18), Beelzebul’s identity is not limited to the Satan, or “the accuser” (השׂטן; ha’satan), that we encounter in the Hebrew Bible (cf. Job 1:6-12; 2:1-7; Zech 3:1-2; 1 Chron 21:1). According to Scripture, Beelzebul was a Philistine god with whom the Israelites came into contact through their neighbors in the land of Canaan.
“Beelzebul” (בעל זבול; Βεελζεβοὺλ) is made up of two Hebrew words that have equivalents in related languages: “Baal” (בעל) means “lord” or “master,” and “zebul” (זבול) means “high” or “exalted.” Thus, the name for this deity would mean something like, “Exalted Master,” or “Lord of the Heights.” Israel’s Scriptures contain an episode involving Ahaziah, a king of Israel, who becomes sick and asks his messengers, “Go, inquire of Baal-zebub (בעל זבוב), the god of Ekron, whether I shall recover from this illness” (2 Kings 1:2). In response, the prophet Elijah asks Ahaziah, “Is it because there is not God in Israel that you are going to inquire of Baal-zebub (בעל זבוב) the god of Ekron?” (1:3). Elijah tells the king that because he has chosen the help of Baal-zebub over the God of Israel, the monarch shall not recover (1:4).
You may have noticed a slight difference between the names in the New Testament and the Tanakh: in the Gospels, the latter half of the name is “zebul,” but the Hebrew Bible has “zebub.” Whereas the New Testament Greek preserves this deity’s proper name, the Hebrew makes it into a derisive wordplay: by changing the final “l” (ל) to a “b” (ב), the Hebrew author makes Baalzebul (Exalted Lord) into Baalzebub: “Lord of the Flies.” One reason for this change may have been the tendency for flies to congregate on ancient sacrifices that were not properly consumed as burnt offerings. Israel was told to burn the uneaten parts of the offering so that the smoke would ascend to God as a “sweet-smelling savor” (ריח ניחח; reach nichoach; e.g., Lev 1-8), but the Israelites could mock the sacrifices of other nations when they saw flies covering the leftovers. In this way, the Hebrews highlight the superiority of their God over Baalzebul: with the switch of a single letter, the Israelites could say to their neighbors, “You think that your Baal is the ‘exalted lord,’ but we know that he’s really just the lord of the flies!”
Conclusion
Exploring the concept of the Divine Council reveals a complex and captivating dimension of biblical theology that underscores God's supremacy while acknowledging the existence and influence of other spiritual beings. This assembly functions as a reflection of divine order and authority, bridging the heavenly and earthly realms. By understanding the roles and significance of these spiritual entities, we gain a deeper appreciation for the richness of the biblical text and the ways it has shaped our theological and cultural heritage. Engaging with this topic encourages us to approach scripture with humility and curiosity, allowing the ancient worldview to challenge and deepen our own understanding of God's unfolding plan in history and eternity.
References
This lesson was adapted from teachings in The Powers of the Divine Realm, as presented on the Israel Bible Center website.