Source: Peter Schäfer, “Two Gods in Heaven: Jewish Concepts of God in Antiquity”, Princeton University Press.
This podcast explores the limited role of the "Son of Man" concept from Daniel 7 within Rabbinic Judaism, particularly in contrast to its significance in Second Temple Judaism and the New Testament. The author analyzes a passage from the Mekhilta, a Palestinian midrash, where God appears as a young war hero and an old man full of mercy, arguing that this reflects different divine manifestations, not necessarily the "Son of Man" figure. While acknowledging that the Daniel 7:9 reference to the "Ancient of Days" is a strong proof text for the old God, the author refutes the interpretation that this passage implicitly refers to the Son of Man, suggesting that such readings are an attempt to find a connection to later Babylonian Jewish and mystical traditions influenced by established Christianity.
Rabbinic Judaism and its Literature: This period is defined as extending from the destruction of the Second Temple in 70 CE to the beginning of the Arab conquest in the first half of the seventh century. It was a time of significant change, marked by the loss of Jewish sovereignty and the Temple. This led to a fundamental shift from a Temple-based religious practice to one centered on the Torah and the written word. Consequently, the rabbis replaced the priests as the main authorities guiding a life pleasing to God. The literature that shaped this era is primarily from Palestinian and Babylonian Judaism and includes key texts like the Mishnah and Tosefta, which codified legal norms, the Midrashim, which are extensive commentaries on biblical books, and the Palestinian and Babylonian Talmuds, serving as comprehensive collections of scholarship from the major Jewish centers of late antiquity. These literary works are fundamental to understanding the Judaism of this period.
Early Jewish Mysticism (Hekhalot Literature): Emerging within the Rabbinic period and extending into the early Middle Ages, this body of literature, known as Hekhalot literature, represents early Jewish mysticism. It originated in Palestine and reached its peak in Babylonia. The source indicates it will treat this literature on equal terms with classical rabbinic literature, suggesting its importance for the overall understanding of the period's religious and intellectual landscape. This type of literature is later noted to have apocalyptically colored passages, although these are described as late and fitting into a post-Talmudic revival of apocalypticism rather than a continuous line from earlier apocalyptic traditions.
The Role of the Son of Man in Jewish Literature: The concept of the Son of Man, particularly as found in the biblical book of Daniel chapter 7, held a prominent position in Jewish literature during the Second Temple period and is also significant in the New Testament. However, the source highlights that the Son of Man plays only a minor role in the rabbinic literature produced during the first half of the first millennium CE. This contrast in the figure's importance across different periods and bodies of literature is a key observation discussed in the text.
The Mekhilta Midrash on Exodus 20:2 as a Unique Example: The source focuses on a specific passage within the Mekhilta, a relatively early Palestinian midrash from the second half of the third century CE, as potentially the only rabbinic passage where some scholars identify a tradition related to Daniel's Son of Man, specifically in the context of a "young God." This midrash is an exegesis of Exodus 20:2, "I am the Lord your God, who brought you out of the land of Egypt." Its potential connection to the Son of Man tradition, however, is presented as a point of scholarly debate rather than accepted fact.
Different Manifestations of God in the Mekhilta: The core subject of the analysis of the Mekhilta passage is the depiction of God's different manifestations or appearances to Israel. The midrash suggests that God appeared differently at various significant moments in their history. Specifically, God appeared as a "mighty hero" (implied young, deduced from context) engaged in battle at the Sea of Reeds during the Exodus (substantiated by Exodus 15:3, "The Lord is a man of war"). In contrast, at Mount Sinai, when giving the Torah, God appeared as an "old man" full of mercy (substantiated by Exodus 24:10 and Daniel 7:9). This concept of God showing himself in varied forms, yet remaining one, is central to the midrash's message.
The Debate Surrounding the Interpretation of Exodus 24:10: A significant point of contention discussed is how the midrash uses Exodus 24:10 ("And they saw the God of Israel... under his feet there (was something) like the work of sapphire brick...") as a proof text for God appearing as an old man full of mercy. The source explains an interpretation (drawing on Targum Pseudo-Jonathan) where the "sapphire brick" was a literal brick containing the remains of an Israelite fetus from slave labor, serving as a footstool for God's throne, a constant reminder of servitude. God's use of a footstool was interpreted as a sign of age, and the brick's disappearance after redemption showed mercy. This interpretation faced harsh criticism, with arguments that footstools aren't exclusive to the aged, or alternative readings of the verse (like "white sapphire" for white hair, or the verse describing changes in the divine throne itself before and after redemption).
Interpretation of Daniel 7:9 as a Proof Text for the Old God: Following the problematic nature of Exodus 24:10 as proof, the Mekhilta passage also cites Daniel 7:9 ("I watched until thrones were set in place [and an Ancient of Days took his seat]"). This verse is considered a "watertight" proof text for God appearing as old, as it explicitly uses the term "Ancient of Days" and describes features associated with age, like white hair. The source discusses the debate over how much of the Daniel passage is intended by the midrash, particularly whether the continuation in Daniel 7:10 ("A river of fire...") and subsequent verses describing judgment are relevant. The argument is made that these later verses describing a non-merciful judgment are likely why the midrash doesn't quote them fully, supporting the idea that Daniel 7:9 is solely used to prove God's appearance as an old man.
Daniel Boyarin's Interpretation: A Hidden Son of Man Midrash: Daniel Boyarin's interpretation is presented as a major alternative reading of the Mekhilta passage. He argues that the midrash, by quoting Daniel 7:9 and referring to the continuation in 7:10 ("etc."), is implicitly referencing Daniel 7:13 ("one like a human being," the Son of Man). According to Boyarin, the Mekhilta is not merely using Daniel 7:9 to prove God's age but is subtly engaging with the older dichotomy found in Daniel 7 between the Ancient of Days (old God) and the Son of Man (young God). He sees this as a hidden midrash addressing the theological debate about "two powers" or two divine figures in heaven, a delicate subject for the rabbis to discuss openly. The source critiques this view as potentially overblown and not clearly intended by the text.
The Pesiqta Rabbati Parallel and its Significance: The source introduces a midrash from Pesiqta Rabbati (on Deuteronomy 5:4) as a significant parallel to the Mekhilta passage. This parallel also describes God appearing in multiple guises or with many faces, including as a young man (for war, citing Exod. 15:3) and an old man (for giving Torah). Crucially, the Pesiqta version uses Job 12:12 ("With aged men is wisdom...") as a proof text for God's appearance as an old man, which is described as "directly plausible" unlike Exodus 24:10. It also cites Daniel 7:9 but conspicuously omits the continuation from Daniel 7:10. The source argues that this omission in Pesiqta undermines Boyarin's theory that the Mekhilta passage necessarily implies a hidden Son of Man midrash, suggesting instead that Daniel 7:9 was readily used in rabbinic texts simply as proof for God appearing as old, without a hidden agenda concerning a young divine figure.
Debate on Binitarian Ideas, Context, and Apocalypticism: The midrashim, particularly the Pesiqta version featuring Rabbi Hiyya bar Abba, are explicitly placed within the context of refuting binitarian ideas (the notion of "two Gods"). These ideas were often associated with Christianity ("God-Father and God-Son"). The rabbinic response, as illustrated, was that God is one, even though he can manifest in different guises. Another refutation addresses the linguistic argument that the Hebrew name Elohim is plural, countered by pointing to the singular form of the verb used with YHWH (the Lord) in texts like Deuteronomy 5:4. The source also discusses a broader debate about the origins of binitarian-like traditions in Jewish texts, contrasting the source's view (that intensification in Babylonian Judaism was partly a response to established Christianity there, linked to different political contexts in the Sasanian vs. Roman empires) with Boyarin's argument for a continuous tradition from early Jewish apocalypticism through the Mekhilta to the Babylonian Talmud and Hekhalot literature. The source expresses skepticism about the evidence for this continuous apocalyptic link in classical rabbinic Judaism.