City Fan:
The context shows the opposite, that they are lesser gods, sons of the Most High Elyon.
No, it really doesn't. Not unless you are reading it with an agenda.
The psalm is speaking of those who "judge unjustly and show partiality to the wicked," and who should "Give justice to the weak and the fatherless; maintain the right of the afflicted and the destitute. Rescue the weak and the needy; deliver them from the hand of the wicked." It seems clear to me that these are human judges and rulers, who are behaving in an autocratic manner and are not rendering real justice as they should. Because of their self-exaltation, God refers to them sarcastically as "gods" (the NIV actually puts the word "gods" inside quotation marks), not because they actually are gods, but because they have arrogated godlike status to themselves. In quoting these verses at John 10:34, Jesus also applies the text to humans, not to members of some pantheon.
The idea that God is presiding over a heavenly court is an image that is used numerous times throughout scripture and carries the image of his rendering of justice. It need not imply that the ones being judged are themselves necessarily heavenly beings. For this psalm to carry the interpretation you suggest would place it at odds with the rest of the Bible. Doesn't it make more sense to understand the religion of the Hebrews consistently?
This verse is an Elohist passage from the northern Israelite tribes.
The superscription of the Psalm attributes it to Asaph, who was a Levite serving at the Temple. Why would you think that it came from another source?
El was viewed as the supreme God and Most High or El Elyon. He gave the nations to his sons as an inheritance so that each nation had its own god, This can be seen from an old passage in Deutoronomy 32:8,9:
8: When the Most High gave to the nations their inheritance, when he separated the sons of men, he fixed the bounds of the peoples according to the number of the sons of God.
9: For the LORD's (Yahweh’s) portion is his people, Jacob his allotted heritage.
I'm curious what translation you are citing. I just did a cursory review of a half-dozen Bible translations that I had at hand, and all of them except one (Byington's) translated the end of verse 8 as 'children or sons of Israel', not "sons of God". Without actually researching it (I'm supposed to be working now ), I'd guess that "sons of God" may be a less reliable reading in a minority of texts which has been rejected by the majority of translators. Among the translations that used "Israel" rather than "God" were the King James, NIV, NASB, Amplified Bible, and even the NWT. All of which (except for the NWT) I would regard as being more reliable than Byington's translation. Additionally, the Zondervan NIV Exhaustive Concordance lists the root word in verse 8 as yisra'el.
Even if the phrase "sons of God" was correct, it could easily refer to the nation of Israel rather than some group of miscellaneous gods in the heavens, and such a reading would clearly be in better harmony with the rest of the Pentateuch.
Again, taking Deuteronomy 32:8,9 in context, we find a description of God's deliverance of Israel from Egypt. He 'divided mankind' and 'set boundaries for the people' in the sense of making a place for His people among the other nations. The other nations had to yield their place in favor of Israel, because the Israelites were God's favored people.
