Two Powers in Heaven

[John2]

As I was reading Boyarin's The Jewish Gospels the other day I noticed that he refers to the "two powers in heaven" tradition in Rabbinic Judaism, which is something I've never investigated before (or even heard of except from Stephan Huller on this forum). As Boyarin puts it:

Throughout the Gospel, whenever Jesus claims [authority] to perform that which appears to be the prerogative of the divinity, it is that very [authority] of the Son of Man that is being claimed, which is to say, a scriptural authority based on a very close reading of Daniel 7. We see now why the later Rabbis, in naming this very ancient religious view a heresy, refer to it as "two powers in heaven."

https://books.google.com/books?id=Rd48n ... al&f=false

I have to leave the library and intend to start looking into this subject when I'm at work later, but I thought I'd go ahead and start the thread now.

[Secret Alias]

Jesus is the second power, his Father the first. Yahweh and Ehyeh Asher Ehyeh. The armed youth (Ex 15.3) and the ancient of days (Dan 7:9). The fire man seen on Sinai and the voice heard above him. Justin knows the truth but he is silenced. So was everyone else. Why? Because of Caesar and monarchianism. 'But,' they say 'what about the Shema? Isn't the Lord our God one? שְׁמַע יִשְׂרָאֵל יְהוָה אֱלֹהֵינוּ יְהוָה אֶחָֽד. Remember the Jews have always said the Shema - as an effort to 'will' unity in the heavens. In other words, that through prayer Yahweh is strengthened as the focal point of the 'all' (much like Valentinian and Christian heretical thought).

[Secret Alias]

Only with the understanding that 'Father' and 'Son' (a term not exactly attested in the Jewish Writings or writers as we know them but acknowledged by Celsus and his Jewish source) come from Judaism does the stupid idea that Christianity was a 'Gentile religion' and the gospel writers 'Gentiles' go away. Christianity is Jewish but Jewish two power tradition.

[Giuseppe]

What is precisely the difference between your view and the following one by dr. Heiser?

http://twopowersinheaven.com/

[Secret Alias]

The question is how does Yahweh crucified make any sense? Why, if Jesus = Yahweh, does Jesus appear so passive and meek during his 'visit'? Clearly Irenaeus tries to deny the 'youth' part of the argument by making Jesus almost 50 years old. That's the reason why this is added to John. Now the argument that Jesus was 30 and a youth and his Father old is destroyed. There aren't two powers there's just one God, one man who is a master etc. But what's with the disappearance of any trace of a martial character to Yahweh? The answer likely has something to do with him planning to appear crucified in Jerusalem at his Passion. I figure he was repenting for all his 'mistakes.' But beyond that it's anyone's guess.

[Secret Alias]

Who the fuck is Dr Heiser?

[Giuseppe]

He seems a scholar with apparently your same ideas but from much time (therefore I expect you know him):
http://twopowersinheaven.com/?page_id=4

[Giuseppe]

He argues for the concept of two powers in heaven (or two Yahwehs, or binitarianism) in the OT. This may sound ridiculous if you aren’t familiar with the idea, but his arguments ought to be considered. In a way they’ve been mind-blowing for me!

What he is trying to show is that the OT and ancient Jews before the second century held a dual flavour to Yahweh. OT texts speak of Yahweh in heaven whilst Yahweh is on earth, and so on. Heiser argues then that these “divine beings” in inter-testamental literature, rather than representing a Jewish belief in multiple gods, are actually (sometimes odd) attempts to identify the visible Yahweh!

Better than me trying to articulate Heiser’s view, I’d recommend watching/listening to his lectures on the Jewish Trinity. These predate How Jesus Became God and don’t reference Ehrman; they just happen to be on the same topic.

So what difference does any of this make? Ehrman actually acknowledges this Two Powers view (p67-69) is in ancient Judaism, but if Heiser is right then all this evidence actually works against his argument. Far from the OT and ancient Judaism presenting a pyramid of divine beings, these texts actually reveal a proto-Trinitarianism! So if Heiser is right, we shouldn’t reject Ehrman’s arguments, just read them through a different lens! Instead of these beings arguing against orthodox Christology, Heiser would argue that they establish it!

http://mydigitalseminary.com/another-ta ... el-heiser/

[lsayre]

As far as I can tell Dr. Heiser is a fundamentalist Christian who firmly believes in the matter of two powers in heaven. Rather unique. He does speaking engagements which cover this at fundamentalist churches, among other things. There should be YouTube videos of him.

In an email I mentioned him to Robert M. Price once (perhaps a year and a half ago) in regard to the two powers in heaven matter, and he had never heard of Dr. Heiser either. Instead, in his internet radio broadcast reply to me he referred me to Stephan Huller (aka, Secret Alias) for more on this matter, plus he suggested that I read Alan Segal's book.

[Giuseppe]

Maybe it is because this fact (that the Secret's view may be a gift to modern Christians in some way) that I am curious about what precisely, beyond all the things about Marcion, would make Secret's view a more heretical view than others. Is his view to be classified among those who say that the earliest Jesus is YHWH, basically?