MrMacSon wrote: ↑Wed Mar 13, 2024 8:38 pm
2. Two Gods in Heaven: Jewish Concepts of God in Antiquity
by Peter Schäfer (translated by Allison Brown)
"Two Gods in Heaven reveals the long and little-known history of a second, junior god in Judaism, showing how this idea was embraced by rabbis and Jewish mystics in the early centuries of the common era and casting Judaism's relationship with Christianity in an entirely different light. Drawing on an in-depth analysis of ancient sources that have received little attention until now, Peter Schafer demonstrates how the Jews of the pre-Christian Second Temple period had various names for a second heavenly power-such as Son of Man, Son of the Most High, and Firstborn before All Creation. He traces the development of the concept from the Son of Man vision in the biblical book of Daniel to the Qumran literature, the Ethiopic book of Enoch, and the Jewish philosopher Philo of Alexandria." https://www.amazon.com/Two-Gods-Heaven- ... 1322&psc=1
From Schäfer's Introduction to Two Gods in Heaven: Jewish Concepts of God in Antiquity:
"... Just as Christianity emerged through recourse to and controversy with Judaism, so too the Judaism of the period following the destruction of the Second Temple was not a Judaism identical to that of its early precursors but instead developed in dialogue and controversy with Christianity.
"Therefore, I prefer to define the relationship between Judaism and Christianity not as linear from the mother to the daughter religion but rather as a dynamic, lively exchange between two sister religions—a process in which the delimitation tendencies steadily grew, leading ultimately to the separation of the two religions. The second part of this book is devoted to this dialectic process of exchange and delimitation.
"The title of this examination, Two Gods in Heaven, is pointedly based on the rabbinic phrase “two powers in heaven” (shetei rashuyyot), which clearly implies two divine authorities side by side. This does not refer to two gods who fight each other in a dualistic sense (“good god” versus “evil god”), as we are familiar with primarily from 'Gnosticism,' but rather two gods who rule side by side and together—in different degrees of agreement and correlation. Scholarship has developed the term “binitarian” to describe this juxtaposition of two powers or gods, analogous to the term “trinitarian” associated with Christian dogma.
"The theme of two divine authorities in the Jewish heaven is not new. Almost all pertinent studies follow the key rabbinic concept of “two powers,” concentrating on the period of classical rabbinic Judaism. After the pioneering work of R. Travers Herford, the revised dissertation of Alan Segal, Two Powers in Heaven, is considered a milestone in more recent research.10 Despite their indisputable merits, however, both works set out from the premise that the rabbis, in their polemics against “two powers,” were referring to clearly identifiable “heretic sects” that were beginning to break off from “orthodox” Judaism. For Herford, it was overwhelmingly Christianity that incurred the wrath of the rabbis, whereas Segal attempted to address an entire spectrum of pagans, Christians, Jewish Christians, and Gnostics. But ultimately, even Segal’s Two Powers in Heaven remains caught in the methodological straitjacket of dogmatically established “religions” that defended themselves against “sects” and “heresies.”
"Since then, the binitarian traditions of ancient Judaism have increasingly moved into the spotlight of research, though with different premises for early and rabbinic Judaism. Research in the field of Jewish studies continues to concentrate primarily on emerging rabbinic Judaism and its confrontation with nascent Christianity. The programmatic works of Daniel Boyarin have pride of place here. With his book Border Lines: The Partition of Judaeo-Christianity and an impressive series of articles, Boyarin attempted to break down the rigid fronts of “Christianity” versus “Judaism” and “orthodoxy” versus “heresy” in favor of a more differentiated picture, according to which the rabbis were not (yet) fighting against external enemies, but were arguing primarily with opponents within their own rabbinic movement.
"I joined the discussion with my books Die Geburt des Judentums aus dem Geist des Christentums ('The Birth of Judaism out of the Spirit of Christianity) and The Jewish Jesus: How Judaism and Christianity Shaped Each Other; and in recent years, this conversation has been carried on predominantly between Boyarin and myself.
"In 2012 and 2013, Menahem Kister added two articles to the debate that are as significant as they are comprehensive, but that unfortunately exist up to now only in Hebrew.14 Kister again invokes the old static model of “Judaism” and “Christianity” as two religions that were permanently separated early on, claiming, that in contrast to the Christians, who were driven by theological questions, the rabbis were concerned “only” with solving exegetical problems that arose from contradictory Bible verses. Accordingly, binitarian ideas in Judaism are a construct of modern research and thus never considered by the rabbis.
"Early Judaism—that is, the period prior to rabbinic Judaism and the New Testament—has up to now been examined predominantly by Christian New Testament scholars. With his seminal contribution on the Son of God, Martin Hengel opened up an entire field of research that has since gained considerable influence especially in Anglo-Saxon research under the heading of “High Christology”.15
< .. some omitted .. >
"A few years ago, Boyarin attempted with his book The Jewish Gospels: The Story of the Jewish Christ to supplement his works on rabbinic Judaism by including early Jewish literature from the Hebrew Bible up to New Testament Christianity. In my review of this book, I drew attention to the copious postexilic literature on our topic, which has not yet received sufficient attention, not even by Boyarin.21 With the present book, I would like to venture to bring together the two eras and for the first time focus on ancient Judaism in its entirety from the Hebrew Bible to the end of the rabbinic period—that is, the Second Temple period or early Judaism and rabbinic Judaism. In doing this, I expressly do not wish to get involved in the sophisticated New Testament discussion on the divinity of Jesus and its roots in early Judaism, but it will certainly not hurt if my considerations from a strictly Jewish studies perspective are heard in this to some degree very heated debate.22 My integration of early Jewish mysticism on equal terms with classical rabbinic Judaism gives this book a particular focus.
"Accordingly, this book is divided into two parts. The first part, on “Second Temple Judaism,” starts with the Son of Man in the Book of Daniel, which determines a great share of the subsequent discussion. He can likely be interpreted as the angel Michael, the divine representative of the people Israel, who anticipates in heaven the expected earthly victory of Israel over the pagan nations. With him, for the first time an angel enters the scene who is elevated to quasi godlike status, and in this capacity, represents in heaven the interests of God’s earthly people. This is followed by a chapter on the wisdom literature, as reflected in the canonical Proverbs and noncanonical books Jesus Sirach (Ecclesiasticus) and Wisdom of Solomon (Sapientia Salomonis). Here two competing strands of tradition become visible—namely, first a strand that is traditionally biblical, according to which wisdom was created as a child (more precisely, a daughter) of God prior to the creation of the world, initially enthroned with God in heaven, and then sent as his envoy to humankind (more precisely, the people Israel) on earth. The second strand, which is largely influenced by Platonic philosophy, regards wisdom as the archetype of divine perfection that imparts divine strength to the earthly world in various stages of emanation. In Judaism, this became the Torah; in Christianity, it became the personified Logos.
"The next two chapters deal with two texts of the Qumran community, both of which further develop the theme of the divinization of an angel or human being, as laid out in Daniel. Whereas Daniel does not clarify the origin of the “Son of Man,” in the first text, the so-called self-glorification hymn, for the first time it is clearly a human being who appears and is elevated to heaven in a previously unheard-of manner, and is then enthroned there as a divine-messianic figure among and above the angels. The second text, the so-called Apocryphon of Daniel, is an interpretation of the biblical Book of Daniel. It raises the “Son of Man” of Daniel 7 to the “Son of God” and “Son of the Most High,” expecting from him the eschatological redemption of the people Israel.
"Two chapters follow on key themes of the so-called Pseudepigrapha of the Hebrew Bible. The first is dedicated to the Similitudes of the Ethiopian Book of Enoch, in which the Son of Man, who is seated on the throne of God’s glory as an eschatological judge, is none other than Enoch, the human being elevated into heaven. The second deals with the Fourth Book of Ezra’s Son of Man, who is equated with the Messiah, and thus will conquer the pagan nations at the end of time and reveal himself to be the “Son of God.” We can observe in these texts the two constantly overlapping lines from an angel who is elevated to a divine or semidivine figure, and who will appear at the end of time as the redeemer of Israel, and that of an immortal human being who ascends into heaven, and once there, transformed into an angel, takes his place as a virtually godlike figure of redemption.
"The two final chapters in the first part pursue the philosophically informed theme of the wisdom literature. In the Prayer of Joseph, the highest angel Israel, as the firstborn before all creation, is identical with the human Jacob, patriarch of Israel. The highest angel in heaven is hence in reality a human being, who as the sole creature was with God in heaven prior to all creation. The role of wisdom in the canonical and noncanonical books of the Bible is now assumed by a human being who, however, does not need to be transformed into an angel, but from the very beginning is equated with a human being: the angel is a human being, and the human being is an angel. The parallels to the godlike Jesus Christ, who as the firstborn before all creation was always with God, but who had to assume human form in order to complete the divine work of redemption, are obvious. For the Jewish philosopher Philo, it is the Logos, the creative power of God, who is not only characterized as the firstborn before all creation and highest among the angels but also as the archetypal human being created in the image of God. It is virtually impossible to get any closer to the idea of two gods in heaven, and it is hardly surprising that Philo’s later Christian followers elevated him to the status of the church fathers."
Schäfer goes on to say, "Striking differences become apparent between rabbinic Judaism in Palestine, on the one hand, and Babylonian rabbinic Judaism and Jewish mysticism, on the other." He does not see "any evidence in the sources of Palestinian Judaism for the Son of God as a second deity next to the biblical God of creation," but says binitarian ideas survived in Babylonian Judaism, noting the Babylonian Talmud identifies the Messiah-King David as a divinised Son of Man of Daniel, sitting on a throne next to God, but only together with polemics against it; and notes in the David Apocalypse in the Hekhalot literature that David as the Messiah-King was elevated into heaven and enthroned next to God.
With respect to the traditions surrounding Enoch—the only antediluvian patriarch who did not die a natural death but instead was received alive in heaven—Schäfer says "the Hekhalot literature again reveals the ambivalence of adoption and rejection" whereas the only Palestinian midrash that discusses Enoch’s fate rejects his ascension to heaven in a polemic which, in marked contrast to the Second Temple period, considered Enoch evil: the Palestinians felt not only that Enoch had died a natural death but also that he deserved it.
"Early Jewish mysticism responded in a very different way. In the Third Book of Enoch, the latest of the Hekhalot literature, the human Enoch is transformed into the highest angel Metatron and given the honorific title “Younger” or “Lesser God” (YHWH ha-qatan). This represents the pinnacle of binitarian traditions in late antique Judaism. How dangerous these thoughts could be viewed is demonstrated in the midrash on the ascent of Elisha ben Avuyah to the seventh heaven, where he sees Metatron sitting on a divine throne and concludes from this that there must be “two powers” in heaven, God and Metatron—an insight that is interpreted as heresy, bringing with it the immediate punishment of both the rabbi and Metatron. Here too the tone in the Hekhalot literature is much more reserved than in the parallel account in the Babylonian Talmud.
"The same applies to the complex of traditions surrounding Akatriel, an angel who is identical with Metatron. Whereas in the Hekhalot literature it is not the rabbi but rather God himself who becomes the protagonist of a second divine being at his side, it is once again the Babylonian Talmud that adjusts the standards in a parallel version, reestablishing the “pure doctrine” of the one and only God. This pattern is repeated in the final source on Rav Idith and Metatron. In a midrash that appears only in the Babylonian Talmud, the rabbi and an unknown heretic argue over Metatron; the rabbi imprudently admits that Metatron has the same name as God, thereby inadvertently representing the notion of a second God—which the horrified rabbi then awkwardly denies.
"Thus the Talmud again attempts to use polemics to defuse the binitarian idea. Here too, texts from the Hekhalot literature that have been largely neglected up to now offer evidence that within the circles of Jewish mystics, the idea of two Gods in heaven had become established, which is why it was so harshly opposed by the rabbis of the Babylonian Talmud."
10. R. Travers Hereford, Christianity in Talmud and Midrash, (1903; exp. ed., Jersey City, NJ: Ktav, 2006); Alan F. Segal, Two Powers in Heaven: Early Rabbinic Reports about Christianity and Gnosticism (Leiden: Brill, 1977).
14. Menahem Kister, “The Manifestations of God in the Midrashic Literature in Light of Christian Texts,” Tarbiz 81 (2012–13): 103–42 (Hebr.); idem, “Metatron, God, and the ‘Two Powers’: The Dynamics of Tradition, Exegesis, and Polemic,” Tarbiz 82 (2013–14): 43–88 (Hebr.).
15. Originally his 1973 inaugural lecture at the University of Tübingen, this has been published in numerous versions in German and English, most recently as “Der Sohn Gottes,” in Martin Hengel, Studien zur Christologie. Kleine Schriften IV (Tübingen: Mohr Siebeck, 2006), 74–145. See also Martin Hengel, The Son of God: The Origin of Christology and the History of Jewish Hellenistic Religion, trans. John Bowden (1976; repr., Eugene, OR: Wipf and Stock, 2007). Although closely focused on the Messiah, nevertheless helpful for our topic is John J. Collins, The Scepter and the Star: The Messiahs of the Dead Sea Scrolls and Other Ancient Literature (New York: Doubleday, 1995). The second edition appeared with a new subtitle and a completely new chapter 6 on the heavenly throne; see John J. Collins, The Scepter and the Star: Messianism in Light of the Dead Sea Scrolls, 2nd ed. (Grand Rapids, MI: Eerdmans, 2010).