[Sleeping in EQ]

The KJV renders these verses:

4 What is man, that thou art mindful of him? and the son of man, that thou visitest him?

5 For thou hast made him a little lower than the angels, and hast crowned him with glory and honour.

6 Thou madest him to have dominion over the works of thy hands; thou hast put all things under his feet.


The Septuagint version of these verses, the version used by early Christians, is quoted in Hebrews 2:6-8, and uses the term "angels" in verse 5. This term eventually made it into the Latin manuscripts, and eventually into the KJV.

What I find interesting in all of this is that the Hebrew OT uses the term "elohim" instead of "angels" in verse 5.

The NRSV renders the verse: "Yet you have made them a little lower than God..." and indicates in a footnote "Or than the divine beings or angels. Heb. elohim.

The conservative, but very literal, NASB reads: "Yet You have made him a little lower than God..."

The ESV reads: "Yet you have made him a little lower than the heavenly beings..." with a footnote declaring that, "Or than God; Septuagint than the angels."

The ever-popular NIV compromises with: "You made him a little lower than the heavenly beings..." and forgoes any footnote.

I can't help but think that Psalm 82:6, where even the KJV translates the term "elohim" as "gods" when declaring, "I have said, Ye are gods; and all of you are children of the most High," and Genesis 1:26, with it's famous use of "us," suggest that the Hebrew OT's use of "elohim" in Psalm 8 need not be considered anti-biblical. It certainly might have been thought of as putting humans too close to God.

A significant bone of contention here seems to be whether or not every time "elohim" is used in the plural, "angels," or "God and angels" are being referred to. To assume that "angels" or "God and angels" is always meant seems wholly axiological to me, as does it's very selective translation. Why would the Jews in John 10 want to stone Jesus over referencing the Psalm 82 passage?