Do These Verses Call Humans “Elohim”? A Closer Look at Exodus 7:1, 21:6, and 22:8

When interpreting Scripture, it’s not enough to point to a verse where a certain word appears and assume we’ve proven our case. Words have ranges of meaning, and the correct meaning in any given passage is determined by context — both the immediate passage and the larger storyline of Scripture.

We know this from other theological debates. In the justification debate, some quote James 2—“you see that a person is justified by works”—as if the phrase alone proves salvation by works, without considering how James is using “justify” in context. In the free-will debate, some quote John 3:16—“whoever believes in him”—as if the word “whoever” settles the question, without reading it alongside Jesus’ teaching on the new birth earlier in the same chapter (John 3:3–8).

The same principle applies to the word Elohim. Pointing to a verse where it appears and assuming it must mean “human” (or “judge”) does not prove that’s how the word is being used. We must look at the immediate context, the broader biblical context, and the way the passage functions in the covenant storyline.

With that in mind, let’s look at three commonly quoted texts — Exodus 7:1, 21:6, and 22:8 — and ask if they truly call humans Elohim.

1. Exodus 7:1 — A Functional Analogy, Not a Title

In Exodus 7:1, God tells Moses, “I have made you Elohim to Pharaoh, and Aaron your prophet.”

This verse is often quoted in isolation, as if it were a precedent for calling humans Elohim. But those who use it this way almost always ignore the prior context in Exodus 4:10–17 — the moment when God first established this arrangement.

After Moses protests his lack of speaking ability (4:10), God appoints Aaron to be his spokesman (4:14–15) and then explains the relationship in verse 16:

“He shall speak for you to the people, and he shall be your mouth, and you shall be as God to him.” (ESV)

The context makes the meaning clear: Aaron will serve as Moses’ mouthpiece, and Moses will serve as if he were God to Aaron — functionally, not ontologically. This is about role and communication order, not about conferring a divine title.

Here’s how other major translations render it:

• NKJV — “You shall be to him as God.”

• NASB — “You are to him as God.”

• NET — “It will be as if he were your mouth and as if you were his God.”

All preserve the comparative sense — as God / as if you were his God — rather than the indefinite a god. Why? Because the surrounding narrative demands it: God is describing a chain of communication, not elevating Moses into the category of Elohim.

Normally, God speaks to an Elohim (a divine being), who delivers the message to a prophet, who then speaks to people. Here, Moses receives the word directly from God, and Aaron serves as his prophet. The emphasis is functional and relational — “as Elohim to him” / “to Pharaoh” — not ontological.

Paul uses a similar analogy in 1 Corinthians 4:15:

“I became your father in Christ Jesus through the gospel.”Paul wasn’t literally their biological father, but in the relational context of gospel ministry, he functioned as one. Likewise, Moses could be “as Elohim” to Pharaoh without actually being in the category of Elohim.

Quoting Exodus 7:1 without Exodus 4:16 is like quoting a courtroom verdict without reading the judge’s explanation. The meaning is in the setup — and in this case, the setup removes any claim that Moses is literally bearing the title Elohim.

2. Exodus 21:6 — A Covenant Oath Before Yahweh

In Exodus 21:6, when a servant chooses to remain with his master, “his master shall bring him to the Elohim.”

In context, Elohim here refers to God Himself. This law describes a covenant oath — not a mere civil agreement — and in Israel, such oaths were made before Yahweh’s presence, often at the sanctuary (cf. Deut. 17:8–9; 19:17). The priests facilitated the act, but the true witness to the oath was God.

Why translate ha-Elohim as “God” here? The covenant-oath setting, the sanctuary context, and the Bible’s pattern of Yahweh as final witness naturally point to God as the referent. This is why some translations render “God” and others at least note “God” in the margin — the context drives a divine, not merely civil, reading.

3. Exodus 22:8 — God as the Final Judge

Exodus 22:8 addresses theft cases where guilt could not be established: “the master of the house shall be brought to the Elohim.”

Here again, Elohim refers to God. In unresolved cases, the Law required that the matter be brought before Yahweh for judgment (cf. Num. 27:21; Deut. 19:17–18). This meant appearing at the sanctuary, with priests facilitating, but the decision and verdict came from God Himself.

Why read ha-Elohim as “God” in this case law? When human investigation stalls, the Law escalates the matter to God’s tribunal via the sanctuary and priestly mediation. The judicial flow of the passage fits a divine adjudication reading, which is why certain translations prefer “God” (and others flag it in notes).

Why the “God’s Representative” View Fails the Text

Some argue that Elohim is simply a generic label for humans who stand in positions of power as God’s representatives. But in these three passages, the term is not being applied to humans themselves — it is referring to God, whose authority is sometimes mediated through human agents.

Moses in Exodus 7:1 is functioning in a unique prophetic arrangement, not bearing the title Elohim. In Exodus 21:6 and 22:8, the parties are brought into God’s presence for an oath or judgment, with priests facilitating the process. In each case, Elohim points to the divine authority behind the action, not to the human mediators involved.

The Old Testament uses Elohim about 2,500 times, and overwhelmingly it refers to Yahweh, other gods, angels, or disembodied spiritual beings — never as a routine honorific for powerful humans. These three texts do not overturn that pattern; they fit it perfectly when read in their covenant and narrative contexts.

Conclusion: Exodus 7:1, 21:6, and 22:8 are not examples of humans bearing the title Elohim. They are examples of God’s authority, presence, and judgment being brought to bear in specific situations — sometimes through human mediators, but never redefining the word Elohim to mean “a human in power.”