DIVINE COUNCIL

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.
1. Textual Evidence.
1.1. The Council of the Gods/God. Comparison of the
Hebrew Bible with other ancient religious texts reveals
overlaps between the divine councils of the surrounding
nations and Israels version of the heavenly bureaucracy.
The parade example is the literature from Ras Shamra
(Ugarit). Translated shortly after their discovery in the
1930s, these tablets contain several phrases describing a
council of gods that are conceptually and linguistically
parallel to the Hebrew Bible. The Ugaritic council was led by
El, the same proper name used in the Hebrew Bible for the
God of Israel (e.g., Is 40:18; 43:12). References to the
council of El include pr ilm (the assembly of El/ the
gods [KTU 1.47:29; 1.118:28; 1.148:9]); pr bn ilm (the
assembly of the sons of El/the gods [KTU 1.4.III:14]); mprt
bn il (the assembly of the sons of El [KTU 1.65:3; cf.
1.40:25, 42]); dr bn il (assembly [circle, group] of the sons
of El [KTU 1.40:25, 3334]); dt ilm (assembly of El/the
gods [KTU 1.15.II:7, 11]). Phoenician texts, such as the
Karatepe inscription, also describe a Semitic pantheon: wkl
dr bn lm (and all the circle/group of the sons of the
gods [KAI 26.III.19; 27.12]).

The dt ilm (assembly of El/the gods) of Ugaritic texts

represents the most precise parallel to the data of the
Hebrew Bible. Psalm 82:1 uses the same expression for the
council (dt ilm), along with an indisputably plural use of the
(God, gods): God [lhm
] stands in the
word lhm
council of El/the divine council [badat l]; among the gods
] he passes judgment. The second occurrence of
[lhm
must be plural due to the preposition in the midst
lhm
of. The Trinity cannot be the explanation for this divine
plurality, since the psalm goes on to detail how Israels God
with corruption and sentences
charges the other lhm
them to die like humankind. Psalm 89:57 (89:68 MT)
places the God of Israel in the assembly of the holy
) and then asks, For who in the clouds
ones (biqhal qdm
can be compared to Yahweh? Who is like Yahweh among
], a god greatly feared in the
the sons of God [bn lm
]? Psalm 29:1
council of the holy ones [bsd qdm
) to praise
commands the same sons of God (bn lm
Yahweh and give him due obeisance. These heavenly sons
or bn hlhm
) appear in other
of God (bn lhm
biblical texts (Gen 6:2, 4; Deut 32:89, 43 [LXX, Qumran];
Job 1:6; 2:1; 38:7) (Heiser 2001).
Another biblical Hebrew term matching Ugaritic
terminology is dr, which often means generation but, as
with Ugaritic and Phoenician dr, may also refer to the
circle (group) of godsthat is, the divine council (Amos
8:14 [emendation]; Ps 49:19 [49:20 MT]; 84:10 [84:11 MT]).
1.2. The Abode and Meeting Place of the Divine Council.
At Ugarit the divine council and its gods met on a cosmic
mountain, the place where heaven and earth intersected
and where divine decrees were issued. This place was at the
source of the two rivers (mbk nhrm) in the midst of the
fountains of the double-deep (qrb apq thmtm). This wellwatered mountain was the place of the assembled

congregation (pr md). El dwelt on this mountain and, with

his council, issued divine decrees from the tents of El (d
il) and his tent shrine (qr [KTU 1.1.III:23; 1.2.III:5; 1.3.V:
2021; 1.4.IV:2223; 1.6.I:3435; 1.17.VI:48]). In the Kirta
Epic, El and the gods live in tents (ahlm) and tabernacles
(mknt [KTU 1.15.3.1819]). The Ugaritic god Baal, the deity
who oversaw the council for El (see 1.3 below), held
meetings in the heights (mrym) of the mountain apnu,
apparently located in a range of mountains that included
Els own abode. In Baals palace in apnu there were
paved bricks (lbnt) that made Baals house a house of the
clearness of lapis lazuli (bht hrm iqnum).
These descriptions are present in the Hebrew Bible
with respect to Israels God and his council. Yahweh dwells
on mountains (Sinai or Zion [e.g., Ex 34:26; 1 Kings 8:10;
Ps 48:12]). The Jerusalem temple is said to be located in
the heights of [yarkt] the north [pn] (Ps 48:12). Zion
is the mount of assembly (har md ), again located in
yarkt pn (Is 14:13). Additionally, Mount Zion is
described as a watery habitation (Is 33:2022; Ezek 47:1
12; Joel 3:18; Zech 14:8). A tradition preserved in Ezekiel
28:1316 equates the holy mountain of God with Eden,
the garden of God. Eden appears in Ezekiel 28:2 as the
). The description of Eden
seat of the gods (mab lhm
in Genesis 2:615 refers to the ground flow that watered
the entire face of the earth. At Sinai, Moses and others saw
Yahweh and feasted with him (Ex 24). The description of
this banquet [p. 114] includes the observation that under
Gods feet was a paved construction of sapphire
stone (libnat hassappr [Ex 24:10]), just as with Baals
dwelling. Other striking parallels include Yahwehs frequent
presence in the tabernacle (mikan [Ps 26:8; 74:7) and Zion
as Yahwehs tent (hel [Is 33:20; cf. 1 Chron 9:23]).

1.3. The Structure and Bureaucracy of the Divine

Council. The council at Ugarit apparently had four tiers
(Smith 2001, 4153). The top tier consisted of El and his
wife Athirat (Asherah). The second tier was the domain of
their royal family (sons of El; princes). One member of
this second tier served as the vicegerent of El and was,
despite being under Els authority, given the title most
high (Wyatt, 419). A third tier was for craftsman deities,
while the lowest tier was reserved for the messengers
(mlkm), essentially servants or staff. In Ugaritic council
scenes lower deities are established or granted spheres of
authority and at times are depicted as challenging or
confronting El (KTU 1.3.V.1936; 1.6.I.3655; 1.4.VII.2125;
1.16.V.2627) (see Handy 1993).
Evidence for exactly the same structures in the Israelite
council is tenuous. Despite the fact that popular Israelite
religion may have understood Yahweh as having a wife,
Asherah (see Hess), it cannot be sustained that the religion
of the prophets and biblical writers contained this element
or that the idea was permissible. There is also no real
evidence for the craftsman tier. However, the role of the
n (see Satan), the accuser who openly challenges God
on the matter of Jobs spiritual resilience, is readily
apparent (Job 1:612; 2:16). In the divine council in
Israelite religion Yahweh was the supreme authority over a
divine bureaucracy that included a second tier of lesser
(bn lm
; bn lhm
or bn hlhm
) and a third
lhm
(angels). In the book of *Job some
tier of malkm
members of the council apparently have a mediatory role
with respect to human beings (Job 5:1; 15:8; 16:1921; cf.
Heb 1:14).
The vicegerent slot in the Israelite council represents
the most significant difference between Israels council and
all others. In Israelite religion this position of authority was
filled not by another god but by Yahweh himself in another

form. This hypostasis of Yahweh was the same essence as

Yahweh but a distinct, second person. This is most plainly
seen via the Name theology of the Hebrew Bible and the socalled angel of Yahweh (for the angels connection to the
Name, the essence of Yahweh, see Ex 23:2033; see Heiser
2004, 3467).
2. Monotheism in the Hebrew Bible and the Divine Council.
2.1. Biblical Polytheism? Many scholars have concluded
that the presence of a divine council in the Hebrew Bible
means that Israels religion was at one time polytheistic
(there are many gods) or henotheistic (there are many gods,
but one is preferred) and only later evolved to monotheism.
Polytheism and monolatrous henotheism both presume
species sameness among the gods. Henotheism in
particular assumes the possibility of a power struggle for
supremacy in the council, where the supreme authority
could be displaced if another god defeats or outwits him.
This does not reflect orthodox Israelite religious belief. The
biblical data indicate that orthodox Israelite religion never
considered Yahweh as one among equals or near equals.
The biblical writers refer exclusively to Yahweh as the God
[1 Kings 18:39]) when that term occurs with
(hlhm
respect to a singular entity. Yahweh is the true
met [Jer 10:10]). The assertion points to the
God (lhm
, he was
belief that although Yahweh was an lhm
. The primary
qualitatively unique among the lhm
distinguishing characteristic of Yahweh from any other
was his preexistence and creation of all things (Is
lhm
45:18), including the host of heaven (Ps 33:6; 148:15; cf.
Neh 9:6), language that at times clearly refers to the other
divine beings (cf. 1 Kings 22; Job 38:78; Is 14:13; cf. Deut
4:1920; 32:89, 43 [LXX, Qumran] with Deut 17:3; 29:25;

32:17). Yahwehs utter uniqueness against all other lhm

is monotheism on ancient Semitic terms, and orthodox

Israelite religion reflects this at all stages.
as Human Beings? Many scholars
2.2. Plural lhm
of Psalms 82; 89 as human
understand the plural lhm
rulers, the elders of Israel, no doubt due to the specter of
polytheism. This position is highly problematic. If these
are humans, why are they sentenced to die like
lhm
humans? A clear contrast is intended by both the grammar
and structure of the Hebrew text (Prinsloo; Handy 1990). At
no time in the Hebrew Bible did Israels elders ever have
jurisdiction over all the nations. There is no scriptural basis
for the idea that God presides over a council of humans
that governs the nations of the earth. In [p. 115] fact, the
situation is exactly the opposite: Israel was separated from
the nations to be Gods own possession, while the other
nations were abandoned by Yahweh to the rule of other
in the wake of the incident at Babel (Deut 4:1920;
lhm
32:89 [LXX, Qumran]; cf. Dan 10:13, 20; see Heiser 2001).
It is also difficult to see how the corrupt decisions of a
group of humans would shake the foundations of the earth
(Ps 82:5). Furthermore, it is clear from Psalm 89:67 (89:7
) in the council of
8 MT) that the sons of God (bn lm
) meet in the
the holy ones (bsd qdm
clouds (baaaq).
are not merely idols. Deuteronomy
The lesser lhm
32:17, when understood against a broad view of
Deuteronomys statements about gods and idols, nullifies
] who
this explanation: They sacrificed to demons [dm
] they
are not God [lah, a singular noun], to gods [lhm
did not know, to new gods that had come along recently,

whom your fathers had not reverenced. If the lesser lhm

are demons, their existence cannot be denied. One psalmist
(Ps 97:7), while mocking the lifeless idols, demands that

 *worship Yahweha puzzling command if

the lesser lhm
there were no such entities.
2.3. No Other Gods Beside Me? How is one to
reconcile Israels divine council with statements in the
Hebrew Bible that there is none beside Yahweh? Such
statements are taken by critical scholars as evidence that
Israel had shed its polytheism, and by others as
necessitating the strained interpretations noted above.
Neither view can be sustained in light of the references to
and lm
in Second Temple period Jewish
plural lhm
texts (roughly 185 in the Qumran material alone [see Heiser
2004, 189210]) and the Jewish belief in two powers in
heaven during that same period (Segal). Analysis of the
Hebrew text demonstrates that several of the most
common phrases in the Hebrew Bible allegedly used for
denying the existence of other gods (e.g., Deut 4:35, 39;
32:12, 39) appear in passages that affirm the existence of
other gods (Deut 4; 32). The result is that these phrases
express the incomparability of Yahweh among the other
, not that the biblical writer contradicts himself or is
lhm
in the process of discovering monotheism. The situation is
the same in Isaiah 4066. Isaiah 40:18 is familiar to
scholars (via the plural imperatives in Is 40:12) as a divine
council text (Cross; Seitz). Isaiah 40:2226 affirms the
ancient Israelite worldview that described heavenly beings
with heavenly host terminology (Heiser 2004, 11418).
That Isaiahs denial statements should be understood as
statements of incomparability, not as rejections of the
existence of other gods, is made clear in Isaiah 47:8, 10,
where Babylon boldly claims, I am, and there is none else
beside me. The claim is not that Babylon is the only city in
the world, but rather that it has no rival.
Some would argue that the descriptions of a divine
council are merely metaphoric. Metaphoric language,

however, is not based on what a writers view of reality

excludes. Rather, the metaphor is a means of framing and
categorizing something that is part of a writers worldview.
When in Exodus 15:11 the biblical writer asserts, Who is
]? or in
like you, O LORD, among the gods [lm
Deuteronomy 10:17, For the LORD your God is God of
], this reflects a sincere belief and is neither
gods [lhm
dishonest nor hollow. Comparing Yahweh to the ancient
equivalent of an imaginary or fictional character cheapens
the praise. The psalms contain many exclamations of the
incomparability of Yahweh to the other gods (Ps 86:8; 95:3;
96:4; 135:5; 136:2). David (Ps 138:1) proclaims that he will
sing the praise of the God of Israel before the gods (neged
)a declaration that makes little sense if lesser
lhm
did not exist.
lhm
3. The Divine Council, Jewish Binitarianism and New
Testament Christology.
Numerous descriptions and epithets of Ugaritic El and Baal
are attributed to Yahweh in the Hebrew Bible (Day, 13127;
Smith 2002, 32107). This was done for polemic reasons to
challenge the authority of El and Baal. For the Israelite, high
sovereignty and chief administration of the cosmos was
conducted only by Yahweh. Nevertheless, Israels own
divine council had a bureaucratic hierarchy, and that order
is consis-tently described in terms of Yahweh being both
the high sovereign and the vicegerent. Orthodox Israelite
religion instead had Yahweh as sovereign and a second
person who was Yahwehs mediating essence as the
vicegerent of the council. This structure reflected Israels
belief in Yahwehs ontological uniqueness as creator of all
of the council. The
things, including the other lhm
notion of two distinct deities at the top of the hierarchy was
unthinkable to Israel.

This religious structure is the backdrop to the ancient

Jewish acceptance of two powers in [p. 116] heaven (Segal).
Since both powers were believed to be good, the belief
does not reflect Zoroastrian influence. The belief in two
powers in heaven was a contributing factor in the advent of
what scholars have termed binitarian monotheism in
Second Temple period Judaism (Hurtado 1999), which in
turn contributes to our understanding of the advent of NT
Christology. This contextualizes the description of Jesus as
the monogens (unique [see Grudem, 123334]) son of
God in the NT. Since the Hebrew Bible is clear that there are
), NT writers clarify that
other sons of God (bn [h ]lhm
Jesus, as the same essence as the Father, is unique among
all heavenly sons of God.
See also CREATION THEOLOGY; DIVINE PRESENCE;
GOD; MOUNTAIN IMAGERY; ROYAL COURT; THEOPHANY.
BIBLIOGRAPHY. R. J. Clifford, The Cosmic Mountain in
Canaan and the Old Testament (HSM 4; Cambridge, MA:
Harvard University Press, 1972); F. M. Cross, The Council
of Yahweh in Second Isaiah, JNES 12 (1953) 27477; J. Day,
Yahweh and the Gods and Goddesses of Canaan (JSOTSup
265; Sheffield: Sheffield Academic Press, 1994); W.
Grudem, Systematic Theology (Leicester: Inter-Varsity
Press; Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 1994); L. K. Handy,
Sounds, Words, and Meanings in Psalm 82, JSOT 47
(1990) 6073; idem, The Authorization of Divine Power
and the Guilt of God in the Book of Job: Useful Ugaritic
Parallels, JSOT 60 (1993) 10718; idem, Among the Host of
Heaven: The Syro-Palestinian Pantheon as Bureaucracy
(Winona Lake, IN: Eisenbrauns, 1994); M. S. Heiser,
Deuteronomy 32:8 and the Sons of God, BSac 158 (2001)
5274; idem, The Divine Council in Second Temple
Literature (Ph.D. diss., University of Wisconsin, 2004);

idem, Monotheism, Polytheism, Monolatry, or Henotheism?

Toward an Assessment of Divine Plurality in the Hebrew
Bible, BBR (forthcoming); R. S. Hess, Yahweh and His
Asherah? Epigraphic Evidence for Religious Pluralism in Old
Testament Times, in One God, One Lord in a World of
Religious Pluralism, ed. A. D. Clarke and B. W. Winter
(Cambridge: Tyndale House, 1991) 533; L. W. Hurtado,
One God, One Lord: Early Christian Devotion and Ancient
Jewish Monotheism (Philadelphia: Fortress, 1988); idem,
The Binitarian Shape of Early Christian Worship, in The
Jewish Roots of Christological Monotheism: Papers from the
St. Andrews Conference on the Historical Origins of the
Worship of Jesus, ed. C. C. Newman, J. R. Davila and G. S.
Lewis (JSJSup 63; Leiden: E. J. Brill, 1999) 187213; Min Suc
Kee, The Heavenly Council and its Type-Scene, JSOT 31:3
(2007): 259273; E. T. Mullen Jr., The Divine Council in
Canaanite and Early Hebrew Literature (HSM 24; Chico, CA:
Scholars Press, 1980); idem, Divine Assembly, ABD 2.214
17; S. B. Parker, Sons of (the) God(s), DDD 79498; W. S.
Prinsloo, Psalm 82: Once Again, Gods or Men? Bib 76
(1995) 21928; A. F. Segal, Two Powers in Heaven: Early
Rabbinic Reports about Christianity and Gnosticism (SJLA
25; Leiden: E. J. Brill, 1977); C. R. Seitz, The Divine Council:
Temporal Transition and New Prophecy in the Book of
Isaiah, JBL 109 (1990) 22947; M. S. Smith, The Origins of
Biblical Monotheism: Israels Polytheistic Background and
the Ugaritic Texts (New York: Oxford University Press,
2001); idem, The Early History of God: Yahweh and Other
Deities in Ancient Israel (2nd ed.; Grand Rapids: Eerdmans,
2002); N. Wyatt, The Titles of the Ugaritic Storm God, UF
24 (1992) 40324
M. S. Heiser