How is elohim to be translated?

[Michael Doyle]

In my doctrine of man class, I am looking at the image and likeness of God in man. I have come across Psalm 8 and in verse five it speaks of man being made a little less than (elohim). Is this man being made a little less than God, hence the RSV or a little lower than the angels in the KJV?
I would suggest the former as man is the only one bearing the image of God and the highest amongst the created order.
What say you?

 

[Marrow Man]

Elohim can also convey the meaning "heavenly beings" (hence, "angels" in the KJV). The LXX understood it that way as well. Thus, Hebrews 2:7, in quoting Psalm 8, opts for that designation (i.e., "angels"). It would be inconceivable (to me at least) that the author of Hebrews, under the inspiration of the Holy Spirit, would be in error here.

Interestingly however, Calvin notes the following in commenting on Psalm 8:

The Septuagint render אלהים, Elohim, by angels, of which I do not disapprove, since this name, as is well known, is often given to angels, and I explain the words of David as meaning the same thing as if he had said, that the condition of men is nothing less than a divine and celestial state. But as the other translation seems more natural, and as it is almost universally adopted by the Jewish interpreters, I have preferred following it. Nor is it any sufficient objection to this view, that the apostle, in his Epistle to the Hebrews, (Hebrews 2:7) quoting this passage, says, little less than the angels, and not than God; for we know what freedoms the apostles took in quoting texts of Scripture; not, indeed, to wrest them to a meaning different from the true one but because they reckoned it sufficient to show, by a reference to Scripture, that what they taught was sanctioned by the word of God, although they did not quote the precise words. Accordingly, they never had any hesitation in changing the words, provided the substance of the text remained unchanged.

 

[Michael Doyle]

Thanks Tim. That is interesting and very hard to ignore. I am reading created in God`s image by Anthony Hoekema, and he makes the argument I originally stated. I definitely see your point here though