0

Who were the sons of God in Job 1 & 2? Could we say that they are the council of the elohim referred to in Psalm 82? Also alluded to in Psalm 89:5-7, 1 Kings 22 and in Daniel 4 referred to as the watchers. God is often called Lord of hosts. Are all these terms relating to the same concept of there being a heavenly council? Are these angels that partake in God's decision making process as depicted in 1 Kings 22?

Harel13
  • 25,676
  • 4
  • 58
  • 136
Lisa Cremer
  • 143
  • 7
  • This does deserve an appropriate answer, verse-by-verse, but in short -- you're using Christian translations here and thus talking a different language. – Shalom Sep 10 '23 at 10:22
  • Please go to Sefaria.org and check out the Jewish translations on these verses -- especially Silverstein's and the Jerusalem translations. (JPS and NJPS are less-good.) – Shalom Sep 10 '23 at 10:26
  • This might provide an answer to your second question. – Shmuel Sep 10 '23 at 11:59
  • 1
    Partial duplicates: https://judaism.stackexchange.com/q/8858 and https://judaism.stackexchange.com/q/59041 – msh210 Sep 10 '23 at 12:15
  • @Shalom would you like to explain why a Christian translation is a problem? I use an interlinear Bible web site so that I can see what the word used was in Hebrew as I understand that the only way to understand something is to read it in its original language. If the Hebrew word used is indeed ben elohim then that is son of 'god' as translated in the English bible. Therefore I dont understand your comment. Or perhaps you are referring to translations that are based on commentaries or opinions of the translators? – Lisa Cremer Sep 12 '23 at 03:36
  • @LisaCremer trust me, it is still full of Christological implications. There are places where elohim means "the mighty" or "the authorities", for instance. And sometimes it's "God" and sometimes "a god." (A solid Jewish ninth grader will learn to pronounce them differently in Hebrew.) – Shalom Sep 12 '23 at 12:26
  • @Shalom. Thank you for your response. Please don't interpret my next question as being argumentative as I am only trying to understand the Hebrew text. I have gleaned from research that the Torah, written in ancient Hebrew meant that there were no dagesh nor niqqud used. What would make the reader translate elohim as any one of those words? It would then seem to me that the choice of word used would be up to the reader or translator depending on which translation he or she thought would better fit the context? But aren't we then reading what someone's opinion was of what God was saying? – Lisa Cremer Sep 13 '23 at 12:47
  • @LisaCremer I'm going to foot-stomp here for a minute. If I can interpret any word the way I like it, then the laws mean nothing. And we view all of those laws as binding! Jews view the Talmud's interpretation -- based on, according to belief, a spoken tradition that was passed down to accompany the text -- as binding. There is a "right" way and a "wrong" way to read certain verses. In fact, when a scribe handwrites a Torah scroll, he has to concentrate additionally when writing "God", as that needs additional sanctity. He thus has to check when elohim means "God" and when it doesn't! – Shalom Sep 15 '23 at 00:29
  • @Shalom. Thank you - I understand: the translation used is based on the Talmud's interpretation being a spoken tradition. Much like Christians use a commentary although one cannot compare a commentary to the Talmud. I however am trying to stay away from other's interpretations and commentaries and trying to read the text as is due to the travesty done to the Word of God by commentaries and translations. – Lisa Cremer Sep 16 '23 at 05:47
  • @LisaCremer ever heard the saying? "Solo scriptura makes every man his own pope..." – Shalom Sep 18 '23 at 01:14
  • @LisaCremer and you're not going to find an explanation that ties together all the detailed Hebrew loose ends than the Jewish ones. – Shalom Sep 18 '23 at 01:28
  • @Shalom. I agree with you completely. That is why I joined this site. I am only searching for the truth and the deeper meaning of God's word. I recognize completely that the Christian interpretation of scripture is lacking and often times misses the point completely. And I really appreciate all your comments. Thank you. – Lisa Cremer Sep 20 '23 at 05:21

1 Answers1

2

Refer to Rashi on Job 1:2. The posuk (Koren translation) says:

Now there was a day when the sons of G-d came to present themselves before the L-rd

Rashi says that this means:

and the angels of G-d came to stand beside the L-rd to contend with Him, because the expression of standing refers only to judgment, as it is stated (Isa. 3:13): “The L-rd stands to plead.”

The Malbim has a lengthy explanation and quotes the Rambam. He says:

Behold, we have a tradition that each of the natural forces of creation is governed by a superior agency that is also its source. These are the 'sons of G-d' who were in attendance before the L-rd; angels that are controlled by and receive their power from G-d and who are in turn appointed over each of the forces of existence. As the Talmudic Sages said: There is no plant that does not have an angel appointed over it telling it to grow. Likewise, an ethereal agent has also been appointed over the force of extinction and destruction: Satan, the adversary, the killer and the destroyer. As the Talmudic Sages said: He is Satan, he is the evil inclination, he is the Angel of Death (Baba Batra 16a), He is the accuser, the one permitted to corrupt and destroy.

Shmuel
  • 9,843
  • 1
  • 7
  • 38
  • @Shmeul. Thank you for your answer. I am beginning to understand the concept of "satan" better. Christianity views 'satan' as a being in opposition to God. I have started to understand that this is not what "satan" is. Especially in the Hebrew scriptures when they refer to "satan" and 'hasatan" - I am still trying to renew my mind in this aspect as years of christian teaching is embedded in my way of thinking. – Lisa Cremer Sep 20 '23 at 05:31