Confused by the lemma of Elohim

In Psalm 82:1 of the KJV, the lemma for Elohim is אלהים. In Psalm 82:6, the lemma for Elohim is אלה. Can someone explain the difference to me? I noticed that the manuscript form is the same for both verses. If the difference is an issue of morphology, I thought that was indicated with the manuscript form and not the lexical form. Why does the BHS have the lemma's identical in these two verses? Thanks for your help!

Find more posts tagged with

Comments

EDUARDO JIMENEZ

What an issue!

George Somsel

In Psalm 82:1 of the KJV, the lemma for Elohim is אלהים. In Psalm 82:6, the lemma for Elohim is אלה. Can someone explain the difference to me? I noticed that the manuscript form is the same for both verses. If the difference is an issue of morphology, I thought that was indicated with the manuscript form and not the lexical form. Why does the BHS have the lemma's identical in these two verses? Thanks for your help!

אֱלֹהִ֣ים is actually the plural of אֱלוֹהּ so there is no lemma אֱלֹהִ֣ים. The plural can be considered differently as either the plural of majesty of as a true plural.

Keep Smiling 4 Jesus :)

In Psalm 82:1 of the KJV, the lemma for Elohim is אלהים. In Psalm 82:6, the lemma for Elohim is אלה. Can someone explain the difference to me? I noticed that the manuscript form is the same for both verses. If the difference is an issue of morphology, I thought that was indicated with the manuscript form and not the lexical form. Why does the BHS have the lemma's identical in these two verses? Thanks for your help!

אֱלֹהִ֣ים is actually the plural of אֱלוֹהּ so there is no lemma אֱלֹהִ֣ים. The plural can be considered differently as either the plural of majesty of as a true plural.

Personally learned Lexham Hebrew Interlinear (LHI) displays one lemma in Psalm 82:6 interlinear, yet right click shows a homograph, which was used to open HALOT and BDB (part of definition 1.a agrees with George). For screen shot, clicked TWOT number in BDB to open TWOT:

Keep Smiling [:)]

EDUARDO JIMENEZ

What makes this issue even more interesting is that Jesus quoted in NT. If at that time caused great controversy, one might ask several questions. What was the purpose of Jesus to cite this text? Does he want only to confound the Pharisees? (Of course not!) So, how he read the text and how the jews did? On this matter (John 10:34), the IVP says:

"Psalm 82:6 in context refers to powerful people, probably the kings of the earth viewed as God’s divine council; those kings considered themselves divine, but they would perish like mortals. In Jewish tradition, however, this verse was sometimes applied out of context to Israel as recipients of the divine law, as Jesus apparently knows." (Keener, C. S., & InterVarsity Press. (1993). The IVP Bible background commentary : New Testament (Jn 10:34). Downers Grove, Ill.: InterVarsity Press.)

What about the lemmas? A very very new stuff. Don't think it can helps even a little in this.

The Stone Edition of The Tanach keep both terms v.2 and v. 6, identical: אֱֽלֹהִ֗ים, but it translates (verse 6), as "your are angelic..." (¡?) and claims to use the traditional texts Mikraos Gedolos edition.

Saludos.

Lankford Oxendine

Thanks for the responses. I must admit that I am still confused as to what is taking place. I'm trying to determine how may times Elohim occurs in the Old Testament. If I click on Hebrew Elohim in KJV Psalm 82:1 and click "search this resource" I get 1064 results. If I do the same thing for Elohim in Psalm 82:6 I get 1541 results (2 different Lemmas but same manuscript form?) If I do the same search in BHS, I get 2601 results for Ps 82:1 and Ps 82:6. So why does BHS indicate the same Lemma for vs 1 and 6, but the KJV is indicating two different Lemmas?

fgh

In Psalm 82:1 of the KJV, the lemma for Elohim is אלהים. In Psalm 82:6, the lemma for Elohim is אלה. Can someone explain the difference to me?

Most likely this is a typo in the KJV Interlinear.

No, I don't think it's a typo per se. This is what I think is going on:

Psalm 82:6

This אלהים is a perfectly normal plural, gods. Hence the manuscript form is given as אלה, god.

Psalm 82:1a

This אלהים, on the other hand, is being seen as a proper noun, God. In translations the first letter will normally be capitalized. And proper nouns are, by definition, already singular. Hence no special manuscript form. I base this judgement on:

a quick look at Gen 1:1, which also lists the manuscript form as אלהים.
that little line with letters above. Spelt out that reads noun, proper, divine, singular, masculine, normal (note that the first example has CcP instead of PDS).

Psalm 82:1b

This, however, is another case. This does look like an erroneous tagging. It is clearly plural in English, and I can't see how it can be judged to be a proper noun. Anyone with better Hebrew than me who can?