Pt3 Defending God, Biblical Monotheism, and Jewish Distinctiveness: Twelve Dialogues Between Sages and Challengers in the Talmud (Sanhedrin 38b-39a)

Dialogues #8-12; Appendix - table summarizing the twelve debates: Challenger; Rabbinic Sage; Biblical Verse; Heretical Interpretation; Rabbinic Interpretation

This is the third and final part of a three-part series. Part 1 is here, Part 2 is here, the outline can be found at Part 1.

Dialogue #8 - Roman Emperor vs. R' Tanḥum: Proposes unification of Jews and Romans into one people; Sentenced to Death by Wild Beasts; and Miraculous Deliverance

The Talmud tells of an encounter between a Roman emperor and R' Tanḥum (רבי תנחום): 

The emperor proposes that everyone unite as one people.¹

R' Tanḥum responds that this can happen if everyone circumcises themselves, as the Jews cannot reverse their circumcision. 

The emperor acknowledges the clever response but warns that anyone who wins a debate with the king is punished by being thrown to an enclosure of wild animals.²

R' Tanḥum is thrown in, but the animals do not harm him, as he is miraculously protected. A heretic then claims the animals were simply not hungry, so he is thrown in instead—and the animals eat him.³

אמר ליה קיסר לר' תנחום: תא ליהוו כולן לעמא חד 

אמר: 

לחיי! 

אנן דמהלינן, לא מצינן מיהוי כוותייכו 

אתון מהליתו, והוו כוותן 

א"ל: 

מימר שפיר קאמרת, 

מיהו, כל דזכי למלכא, לשדיוה לביבר 

שדיוה לביבר, ולא אכלוה 

א"ל ההוא מינא: האי דלא אכלוה, משום דלא כפין הוא 

שדיוה ליה לדידיה, ואכלוה

The Gemara relates: The emperor said to R' Tanḥum: Come, let us all be one people.

R' Tanḥum said:

Very well.

But we, who are circumcised, cannot become uncircumcised as you are;

you all circumcise yourselves and become like us.

The emperor said to R' Tanḥum:

In terms of the logic of your statement, you are saying well,

but anyone who bests the king in a debate is thrown to the enclosure [labeivar] of wild animals.

They threw him to the enclosure but the animals did not eat him, as God protected him.

A certain heretic said to the emperor: This incident, that they did not eat him, happened because they are not hungry.

They then threw the heretic into the enclosure and the animals ate him.

Dialogue #9 - Roman Emperor vs. Rabban Gamliel: There must be many deities, since the divine dwells wherever there is a quorum ten Jewish men

The Roman emperor rhetorically asks how many “Shekhina”s (Divine Presences) there are, since the Shekhina is said to dwell wherever there are ten Jewish men (i.e. a minyan, the quorum of ten Jewish adults required for certain religious obligations). 

Rabban Gamliel responds with a physical demonstration: Rabban Gamliel struck his servant⁴ with a ladle (אפתקא) and rhetorically asked why he allowed the sun to enter the emperor's house. 

The emperor responded that the sun shines on the whole world and cannot be stopped. 

Rabban Gamliel explained that if the sun, just one of many⁵ of God’s servants, shines universally, then certainly God’s Shekhina (Divine Presence) can rest upon the entire world as well.

א"ל כופר לר"ג: 

אמריתו: כל בי עשרה שכינתא שריא 

כמה שכינתא איכא?! 

קרייה לשמעיה, מחא ביה באפתקא 

א"ל: אמאי על שמשא בביתיה דכופר?! 

א"ל: שמשא אכולי עלמא ניחא 

ומה שמשא, 

דחד מן אלף אלפי רבוא שמשי דקמי קודשא בריך הוא 

ניחא לכולי עלמא 

שכינתא דקב"ה, על אחת כמה וכמה!

The emperor said to Rabban Gamliel: 

You say that the Divine Presence dwells in any place where there are ten adult male Jews. 

He asked, sarcastically: How many Divine Presences are there?!

Rabban Gamliel summoned the servant of the emperor and hit him on his neck [be’appatka]. 

Rabban Gamliel said to him: Why did you allow the sun to enter the house of the emperor?!

The emperor said to him: The sun rests upon all the world; no one can prevent it from shining. 

Rabban Gamliel said to him: And if the sun, 

which is one of ten thousand attendants that are before the Holy One, Blessed be He, rests upon all the world, 

the Divine Presence of the Holy One, Blessed be He, all the more so rests upon the world.

Dialogue #10 - Heretic vs. R' Abbahu: Ezekiel 4:4-6 - “Lie on your left side…Lie on your right side” - God is joking by making Ezekiel lie on different sides

A heretic confronted R' Abbahu, asserting that God was a jokester (גחכן) by commanding the biblical prophet Ezekiel to lie first on his left side, then on his right (Ezekiel 4:4,6).

At that moment, a student asked R' Abbahu about the reason for the biblical command of the Sabbatical Year (שביעתא). 

R' Abbahu responded that he would offer an answer that address both inquiries with a single response: 

R' Abbahu explained that God commanded the Jewish people to sow for six years and rest the land in the seventh to recognize His ownership of the land. However, they failed to observe this command, leading to their exile. 

Comparing God to a human king who punishes a rebellious (סרחה) province (מדינה) with varying degrees of severity:

1. A cruel king (אכזרי) kills everyone.

2. A compassionate king (רחמן) kills half.

3. An especially compassionate king⁶ only punishes the leaders⁷ with torture (יסורין).⁸

R' Abbahu noted that, out of mercy, God chose to afflict Ezekiel instead of the people. 

א"ל ההוא מינא לרבי אבהו: 

אלהיכם גחכן הוא 

דקאמר ליה ליחזקאל (יחזקאל ד, ד): 

"שכב על צדך השמאלי" 

וכתיב (יחזקאל ד, ו): 

"ושכבת על צדך הימני" 

אתא ההוא תלמידא, א"ל: מ"ט דשביעתא?

א"ל:

השתא אמינא לכו מילתא דשויא לתרוייהו

אמר הקב"ה לישראל: 

זרעו שש 

והשמיטו שבע 

כדי שתדעו שהארץ שלי היא 

והן לא עשו כן, 

אלא חטאו, וגלו 

מנהגו של עולם מלך בשר ודם, שסרחה עליו מדינה 

1. אם אכזרי הוא -- הורג את כולן 

2. אם רחמן הוא -- הורג חצים 

3. אם רחמן מלא רחמים הוא -- מייסר הגדולים שבהן ביסורין 

אף כך, הקב"ה מייסר את יחזקאל, כדי למרק עונותיהם של ישראל

A certain heretic said to R' Abbahu:

Your God is a jester,

as He said to Ezekiel the prophet:

“Lie on your left side” (Ezekiel 4:4),

and it is also written:

“Lie on your right side” (Ezekiel 4:6); God had Ezekiel turn from side to side, apparently for comic effect.

In the meantime, a certain student came before R' Abbahu and said to him: What is the reason for the mitzva of the Sabbatical Year?

R' Abbahu said to them:

Now I will tell you something that is fit for the two of you.

R' Abbahu continued: The Holy One, Blessed be He, said to the Jewish people: 

Sow for six years, 

and withhold sowing during the seventh year, 

so that that you will know that the land is Mine. 

But the Jewish people did not do so; 

rather, they sinned and were consequently exiled. 

The manner of the world is that in the case of a flesh-and-blood king whose province sinned against him, 

1. if he is cruel, he kills them all; 

2. if he is compassionate, he kills only half of them; 

3. and if he is compassionate and is full of compassion, he afflicts the leaders among them with suffering. 

R' Abbahu continues: So too in this case, the Holy One, Blessed be He, afflicts Ezekiel in order to cleanse the sins of the Jewish people. God instructed him to lie down and suffer the same number of days as the number of years that the Jewish people did not observe the halakhot of the Sabbatical Year.

Dialogue #11 - Heretic vs. R' Abbahu: Exodus 25:2 - “Take for Me an offering [teruma]” - God must be a priest to accept offerings, so He needed ritual immersion after burying Moses

A heretic (Christian?) challenged R' Abbahu by claiming that God, being likened to a priest (based on the command to collect teruma, which is given to priests), would need ritual immersion (baptism?) after burying Moses. 

The heretic (sarcastically?) asked in which ritual bath God could have immersed (compare baptism), as God’s vastness would prevent immersion in water, quoting the verse in Isaiah (in the section “Here Is Your God! (40:9–31)”): “Who has measured the waters in the hollow of His hand?” (Isaiah 40:12).

R' Abbahu responded that God immersed in fire (נורא), citing Isaiah 66:15 (about the final divine intervention) “For, behold, the Lord will come in fire” (Isaiah 66:15).⁹

When the heretic questioned if immersion in fire could purify, R' Abbahu argued that fire is, in fact, the primary form of immersion for purification, referencing Numbers 31:23, which indicates (in the context of the ritual purification of the spoils of the war with Midian) that fire purifies more thoroughly than water.¹⁰

א"ל ההוא מינא לרבי אבהו: 

אלהיכם כהן הוא 

דכתיב (שמות כה, ב): "ויקחו לי תרומה" 

כי קבריה למשה, במאי טביל? 

וכי תימא במיא, 

והכתיב (ישעיהו מ, יב): 

"מי מדד בשעלו מים"

א"ל: 

בנורא טביל 

דכתיב (ישעיהו סו, טו): "כי הנה ה' באש יבא" 

ומי סלקא טבילותא בנורא? 

א"ל: 

אדרבה, עיקר טבילותא בנורא הוא 

דכתיב (במדבר לא, כג): 

"וכל אשר לא יבא באש 

תעבירו במים"

A certain heretic said to R' Abbahu:

Your God is a priest, as it is written: “That they take for Me an offering [teruma]” (Exodus 25:2), and teruma is given to the priests.

He asked, sarcastically: When He buried Moses, in what ritual bath did He immerse? A priest who contracts impurity from a corpse must immerse in order to be able to partake of teruma.

And if you would say that He immersed in water,

but isn’t it written:

“Who has measured the waters in the hollow of His hand” (Isaiah 40:12), that all waters of the world fit in the palm of God, so He could not immerse in them.

R' Abbahu said to him:

He immersed in fire,

as it is written: “For, behold, the Lord will come in fire” (Isaiah 66:15).

The heretic said to him: But is immersion in fire effective?

R' Abbahu said to him:

On the contrary, the main form of immersion is in fire,

as it is written with regard to the removal of non-kosher substances absorbed in a vessel:

“And all that abides not the fire

you shall make to go through the water” (Numbers 31:23), indicating that fire purifies more than water does.

Dialogue #12 - Heretic vs. R' Avina: II Samuel 7:23 - “And who is like Your people, Israel, one nation in the earth” - Jews are in fact no greater than others, as “All nations before Him are as nothing” (Isaiah 40:17)

A non-Jewish heretic (Christian?) challenged R' Avina (רבי אבינא), questioning the Bible’s claim for the Jewish people's claim to greatness: “And who is like Your people (עמך), Israel, one nation (גוי) in the earth” (II Samuel 7:23); citing another biblical verse suggesting all nations (presumably including Israel) are insignificant before God: “All nations (הגוים) before Him are as nothing” (Isaiah 40:17)

R' Avina responded by quoting another biblical verse, where “one of yours” (i.e. Balaam, a non-Jewish prophet), “has testified about us” ¹¹ that Israel is unique and “shall not be reckoned among the nations (גוים)” (Numbers 23:9).¹²

אמר ליה ההוא מינא לרבי אבינא: 

כתיב (שמואל ב ז, כג): "מי כעמך כישראל, גוי אחד בארץ" 

מאי רבותייהו?! 

אתון נמי ערביתו בהדן 

דכתיב (ישעיהו מ, יז): "כל הגוים כאין נגדו" 

אמר ליה: 

מדידכו אסהידו עלן 

דכתיב (במדבר כג, ט): "ובגוים לא יתחשב"

A certain heretic said to R' Avina:

It is written: “And who is like Your people, Israel, one nation in the earth” (II Samuel 7:23).

The heretic asked: What is your greatness?!

You are also mixed together with us,

as it is written: “All nations before Him are as nothing; they are counted by Him less than nothing and vanity” (Isaiah 40:17). 

R' Avina said to him:

One of yours, the gentile prophet Balaam, has already testified for us,

as it is written: “It is a people that shall dwell alone, and shall not be reckoned among the nations” (Numbers 23:9), teaching that where the verse mentions “the nations,” the Jewish people are not included.

Appendix - table summarizing the twelve debates: Challenger; Rabbinic Sage; Biblical Verse; Heretical Interpretation; Rabbinic Interpretation

1. Compare my piece here, on the story in tractate Pesachim of the Roman who mentions their wish to commit genocide on Jews. Here, the focus is on the Romans' wish for Jews to assimilate into Roman culture; or, ostensibly, to “become one nation”.

2. ביבר - from Latin vivarium: “A place artificially arranged for keeping or raising living animals.”

Presumably, the intention here is to the form of execution made famous by Christian martyrs, damnatio ad bestias:

Damnatio ad bestias (Latin for "condemnation to beasts") was a form of Roman capital punishment where the condemned person was killed by wild animals, usually lions or other big cats.

This form of execution, which first appeared during the Roman Republic around the 2nd century BC, had been part of a wider class of blood sports called Bestiarii.

3. The story of R’ Tanḥum’s miraculous survival after being thrown to wild animals has several famous parallels:

Daniel in the Lion’s Den
In the Bible, Daniel is thrown into a den of lions by order of King Darius after he continues to pray to God despite a royal decree. Miraculously, the lions do not harm Daniel, as he is protected by an angel..

Androcles and the Lion
In this Greco-Roman tale, a runaway slave named Androcles pulls a thorn from a lion’s paw. Later, when captured and sentenced to face lions in the arena, he encounters the same lion he had helped, who spares him out of gratitude.

Roman Arena and Martyrdom Stories (Early Christian Martyrdom Accounts)
Many early Christian martyrs were sentenced to death by wild beasts in Roman arenas, in the course of the persecution of Christians in the Roman Empire: 

Christians who refused to recant by performing ceremonies to honour the gods were severely penalised. 

Those who were Roman citizens were exiled or condemned to a swift death by beheading; slaves, foreign-born residents, and lower classes were liable to be put to death by wild beasts as a public spectacle. 

A variety of animals were used for those condemned to die in this way [...]

Norbert Brockman writes in the Encyclopedia of Sacred Places that public executions were held at the Colosseum during the period of empire, and that there is no real doubt that Christians were executed there. St. Ignatius was "sent to the beasts by Trajan in 107. Shortly after, 115 Christians were killed by archers. 

When the Christians refused to pray to the gods for the end of a plague in the latter part of the second century, Marcus Aurelius had thousands killed in the colosseum for blasphemy. 

Accounts often describe miraculous events, such as the beasts sparing certain individuals or unexpected acts of defiance, symbolizing faith’s power over physical threats. These stories were widely circulated to inspire and affirm the faith of early Christian communities. Perhaps the most famous of these stories is that of Thecla, a follower of Paul, is condemned to face wild animals in the arena for her Christian faith. According to the story, the beasts miraculously do not attack her, allowing her to survive.

4. The identity of the servant is ambiguous. Steinsaltz interprets it as referring to the emperor's servant, but it is more likely to mean Rabban Gamliel's servant, as the Aramaic noun שמעא (“attendant“) is typically used for servants of rabbis, while the servant or slave of the emperor is referred to as עבד.

However, it is possible that the Aramaic term שמעא is employed as a wordplay on the subsequent use of the Hebrew term שַׁמָּשׁ (“attendant”), which itself plays on the word שמש (sun).

5. חד מן אלף אלפי רבוא  - literally: “one of a thousand of thousands of myriad”.

6. רחמן מלא רחמים - literally: “compassionate full of compassion”.

7. גדולים שבהן - literally: “the greatest of them”.

8. This Talmudic analogy reflects a framework for understanding different responses to rebellion, framed in terms of varying degrees of harshness and compassion in leadership. Applying this to the context of the classical Roman Empire, which often dealt with rebellious provinces, helps illustrate the practical and moral considerations Roman emperors faced in maintaining control over their vast and diverse territories.

1. A Cruel King Kills Everyone
   This corresponds to extreme punitive measures taken by some Roman emperors or generals, who, when faced with rebellion, opted for total destruction as a deterrent. For example, the destruction of Carthage in 146 BCE by Rome or the annihilation of Jerusalem during the First Jewish–Roman War in 70 CE under Emperor Titus can serve as parallels. These acts aimed to completely suppress resistance and set an example, but they were incredibly harsh and often led to long-term resentment.

2. A Compassionate King Kills Half
   This represents a middle ground approach, where punishment is severe but not absolute. It could reflect actions such as the partial decimation of a population, taking many into slavery, or implementing harsh laws and taxes after a rebellion. Roman responses to revolts in Gaul or Britain sometimes involved punitive but non-exterminatory measures, ensuring the region could still be governed and economically productive.

3. An Especially Compassionate King Only Punishes the Leaders with Torture
   This represents a more targeted and "compassionate" form of retribution. Instead of punishing the entire province, the focus is on the leaders who incited the rebellion. This approach might align with actions like those of Emperor Augustus, who pardoned provinces while executing or publicly punishing the ringleaders of uprisings, thereby reinforcing imperial authority while maintaining goodwill among the broader population.

In Roman terms, this framework could also reflect the balance between the emperor’s need to project power and maintain order versus the need to foster loyalty and stability in the provinces. Excessive cruelty could backfire, leading to further rebellions or the erosion of imperial legitimacy, while measured or targeted punishment could reinforce Rome’s authority and maintain a semblance of justice.

Ultimately, this Talmudic analogy highlights the moral and political calculus of punishment within a hierarchical empire, offering insight into the varied strategies rulers might adopt to maintain control while balancing severity and compassion.

9. On heavenly equivalents to earthly substances being made of fire, see my extended note on the sugya of R’ Hiyya.

10. Compare the early Christian idea of Baptism by fire:

The phrase baptism by fire, baptism of fire or baptism with fire is a Christian theological concept originating from the words of John the Baptist in Matthew 3:11 […]

The term baptism with fire originated from the words of John the Baptist in Matthew 3:11 (and the parallel passage in Luke 3:16).:

"I indeed baptize you with water unto repentance: but he that cometh after me is mightier than I, whose shoes I am not worthy to bear: he shall baptize you with the Holy Ghost, and with fire"

11. עלן. Not “for us”, as Steinsaltz translates.

12. For an extensive discussion of the biblical Balaam and his curses, see my series, Part 2 here. The Talmud is expanding on the Mishnah’s list, which lists Balaam as one of the four biblical “commoners” (idiotes) with no afterlife, see my piece here.