Monolatry

There are many instances in the Hebrew Bible where the plural אֱלֹהִים is used with reference to individual persons, such as Solomon, (Psa. 45:6) Dagon, (1Sam. 5:7) and Marduk, (Dan. 1:2) in which cases there is no hint of a plurality of persons within the figures mentioned. Aside from the majestic plural just described, אֱלֹהִים may also signify a plurality of spirit-beings such as angels, or generally persons in authority, As in Exod. 22:28; cf. Acts 23:5 and also Deut. 5:7; 6:14; 8:19; 10:17; Psa. 82:1, 6; 136:2; 138:1. and Harris listed many applications of the noun אל to creatures as follows,

Murray J. Harris: “Human rulers or judges, regarded as divine representatives or as bearers of divine authority and majesty (Exod. 21:6; 22:8 (cf. 1 Sam. 2:25); Judg. 5:8; Psalm 82:1, 6) b. Spiritual or heavenly beings, including God (Gen. 1:27) and angels (Psalm 8:6 (Engl. V. 5)) (...) (Ps. 97:7; 138:1 (95:3)) d. Heathen gods with their images (Exod. 20:23; Jer. 16:20) (...) both אל, (meaning ‘god’) and אֱלֹהִים (meaning ‘gods’), have extended or ‘irregular’ applications to angels or to persons who represent on earth divine power, judgment, or majesty.” —  Jesus as God: The New Testament Use of Theos in Reference to Jesus (Grand Rapids, Michigan: Baker Book House, 1992), p. 24, 26.

Harris documented, there are many occasions in the Old Testament where Israelite prophets, kings, judges, and the like are called “god(s).” (Gen. 23:6; Exod. 7:1; 15:11; 18:11; 21:6; 22:8; Deut. 10:17; Josh. 22:22; Psa. 8:5; 82:1, 6; 97:7; 138:1.) In other words, the Biblical terms translated “god(s)” might be used as honorific titles, to signify "divine representatives or as bearers of divine authority and majesty." (M. Harris, Jesus as God, p. 24.) There is also a more specific application of the term, the prophet David wrote that humankind was “made a little lower than God,” (NASB.) or more properly rendered “lower than gods.” (Psa. 8:5, ERV) These “gods” mentioned by David, are identified as “angels” by Paul when he quotes the passage as “a little lower than the angels.” (Heb. 2:9) Therefore, in reference to their nature, David called angels “gods.” The term “gods” has an ontological connotation in Psa. 8:5, because it is put in contrast with human nature, and it means something akin to “spirits,” “spiritual beings,” or “godlike beings.” 

Philo of Alexandria a prominent representative of Hellenistic Judaism in the first century who Eusebius calls the ambassador of the Jews to the Roman government, wrote various commentaries on the Torah. Philo discussed the extended use of θεός and equivalent terms in the Greek versions of the Old Testament. Three citations are of particular interest here: 

“Has he [Moses] not also enjoyed an even greater communion with the Father and Creator of the universe, being thought unworthy of being called by the same appellation? For he was also called the god and king of the whole nation [Exod. 4:16; Deut. 33:5].” — De Vita Mosis 1.158. 

“And any one must be content to whom it has been allowed to use the privilege of blessing. And to be able also to procure good for others belongs to a greater and more perfect soul, and is the profession of one who is really inspired by God, which he who has attained to may reasonably be called God.” — De Mutatione Nominum 128. 

“There is one true God only: but they who are called Gods, by an abuse of language, are numerous; on which account the holy scripture on the present occasion indicates that it is the true God that is meant by the use of the article, the expression being, "I am the God (ὁ Θεός);" but when the word is used incorrectly, it is put without the article, the expression being, "He who  was seen by thee in the place," not of the God (του̃ Θεου̃), but simply "of God" (Θεου̃); and what he here calls God is his most ancient Word (λογός), not having any superstitious regard to the position of the names, but only proposing one end to himself, namely, to give a true account of the matter; for in other passages the sacred historian, when he considered whether there really was any name belonging to the living God, showed that he knew that there was none properly belonging to him; but that whatever appellation any one may give him, will be an abuse of terms; for the living God is not of a nature to be described, but only to be.” — De Somniis 1.229-1.230.

Psa. 97:7 exhorts “Worship him, all you gods,” and here as well, these “gods” are identified by angels when this passage is quoted by Paul, in Heb. 1:6 “all God's angels worship him.” (It is also worthwhile to compare Heb. 1:6 with the Septuagint of Psa. 97:7 (96:7), from which it is obvious that both the author of Hebrews and the LXX translators understood these “gods” to be angels.) Modern readers are often unaware of this usage of the term “god(s)” and if it were commonly known it would do away with a great deal of confusion. 

Edward Burton: "The Arians professed to believe that Jesus Christ is God: they even called him very God of very God: but then they used the term God in a different sense, when applied to the Son, from what it bears, when applied to the Father. They believed that there was a time, when the Son did not exist: they believed him to have been created by the Father: and by this twofold meaning of the term God, they avoided the charge of holding a plurality of Gods."  — Testimonies of the Ante-Nicene Fathers to the Doctrine of the Trinity and of the Divinity of the Holy Ghost (England: Oxford University Press, 1831, p. iv.

 

The Arians indulged in this ambiguity in their arguments. According to most translations, angels are referred to as “Sons of God” five times in the Hebrew Bible, (Gen. 6:2, 4; Job 1:6; 2:1; 38:7.) and this language has more significance than identifying Jehovah God as the Father of the angels by virtue of his being their creator, Gesenius explained,

“There is another use of בֶן־ or בְנֵי to denote membership in a guild or society (or of a tribe, and any definite class). Thus בְנֵי־הָֽאֱלֹהִים֙ (commonly translated ‘sons of God’) Gn 6:2, 4, Jb 1:6, 2:1, 38:8 (...) properly means not sons of god(s) but beings of the class of אֱלֹהִים֙ (gods).” — W. Gesenius, Hebrew Grammar, p. 428.

This conclusion of Gesenius is supported by comparing these passages in the Hebrew Bible with the Septuagint, (The Septuagint or LXX is a Greek translation of the Hebrew Bible which was composed sometime during the reign of Ptolemy by Jewish scholars. The purpose of the translation was to provide a version of the Hebrew Bible that Greek-speaking Proselytes could readily understand. Hebrew was nearly a dead language by the time of the apostles, and it was necessary for the Jews to have a Greek translation of their scriptures. The Septuagint is the translation of the Scriptures that the apostles quote most frequently in their writings, around seventy percent of the time they have preferred the Septuagint over other translations of the Hebrew Bible. The “Septuagint” in so named because the extant historical accounts attribute the translation to seventy Jewish scholars, the Latin numeral for seventy is septuaginta, which is represented as LXX in Roman numerals.) where these “gods” or “sons of God” are often said to be “angels (ἄγγελοι (an·gel·oi)).” (Gen. 6:4; Job 1:6; 2:1; 38:7; Psa. 8:5; 97:7 (96:7).) Of further interest are occurrences in which the term generally signifies power, even being applied to inanimate objects or abstract nouns. (Gen. 30:8; 31:29; 1Sam. 14:15; Ezek. 32:21; Psa. 36:6.) In the Greek tradition, θεὸς (the·os) had a broad application, to Zeus, (Herodotus, The Histories, II, 13, § 3.) his blood-descendants, (Herod., Hist.., II., 7, § 1; 43, § 1, 2, 3, 4.) pagan deities in general, (Homer, The Iliad, I., Line 544.) and exalted or deified humans. (Herod., Hist., I., 65, § 3.

“Whether one examines the Jewish or the Gentile use of the term θεὸς up to the end of the first century A.D., there is an occasional application of the term to human beings who perform divine functions or display divine characteristics.” — Murray J. Harris, Jesus as God: The New Testament Use of Theos in Reference to Jesus Grand Rapids: Baker Books, 1992, p. 270.

In light of these facts, it is clear that New Testament authors and their contemporaries in Judaism took no issue calling righteous creatures “god” or “gods,” in the sense of their being divine representatives, or spiritual beings, Parkhurst commented that θεὸς is “applied personally” and “spoken of magistrates. John x. 34, 35. Comp. Ps. lxxxii. 6.” (John Parkhurst, A Greek and English Lexicon to the New Testament (London: Printed by Thomas Davison, Whitefriars, 1829), p. 300.)