The Prophetic Faith of Our Fathers, vol. 2

I. Factors Influencing Jewish Interpretation of Prophecy

In order to grasp the significance of Jewish exposition, it will be necessary first to survey the situation in Jewry in the early centuries regarding the Scriptures, the influence of Greek philosophy, and the relationship between the Jews and the Christians. It will also be imperative to define and understand certain terms that will constantly be employed or encountered—the Talmud, with its Mishnah and Gemara, the Halachah, the Haggadah, the Targum, the Midrash, and others. To these we now turn for the setting. Then we shall survey thirty remarkable Jewish interpreters of prophecy, spanning the Christian Era, and later summarized and charted on page 194. These men, and the principles they hold and the applications they make, have a material bearing on our quest. PFF2 184.2

1. DISASTROUS EFFECTS OF ALEXANDRIAN ALLEGORICAL SCHOOL

Prior to the Christian Era, two widely divergent schools of religious thought developed among the Jews. One embraced Palestine and Babylonia, zealously interpreting the sacred books according to the methods of the Talmud and its related writings. The other school—and a virile one-centered in Alexandria, bent on absorbing the very lifeblood of Greek philosophy. ¹ This latter school sought to blend and harmonize the traditions of Hebraism with Greek philosophy, softening and explaining away the differences by allegorical treatment. This reached its peak in Philo (B.C.E. 20-53 C.E.). ² His burden was to show that, by applying the allegorical system of interpretation to the Scriptures, their simple and obvious meaning really embodied everything that was wise and exalted in Greek philosophy. PFF2 185.1

It was a struggle between Literalism and Allegorism, as Philo regarded the literal to be a concession to the weak and ignorant. To him, Scripture was “not so much a text for criticism as a pretext for theory.” Instead of elucidating the literal sense, he transformed it into a philosophic symbol. ³ A complete perversion of Scripture resulted, as he developed out of Moses a vivid semblance to Greek philosophy. The works of Philo, it should be added, contain no direct reference to the prophecies—no Messiah, no restoration of the Jewish state, no interpretation of prophecy. Living through the lifetime of Jesus, he does not even mention His name.) PFF2 185.2

It was this allegorizing feature of Philo’s work, however that was laid hold of with avidity by one large group in the early Christian church—particularly by Origen of Alexandria—and with the same disastrous effects. Some resisted these excesses of fanciful allegory; nevertheless, a deep and abiding impress was left. The influence upon Irenaeus, Tertullian, Origen, Cyprian, Lactantius, Jerome, and Augustine was profound. ⁴ The unity of language brought about by the conquests of the Greeks and the political unity effected through the coming of the Roman Empire only accentuated this form of interpretation. ⁵ The Jerusalem Jews sought in vain to stem the advance of Hellenistic influence as Alexandria became the focal point of penetrating influence. PFF2 185.3

2. JEWISH-CHRISTIAN CONTROVERSIES OF EARLY CENTURIES

The early centuries of the Christian Era were filled with bitter controversy between the Jews and the Christians. Both groups anticipated a millennium, but the church fathers connected it with the second advent of Christ. The church fathers sought to Christianize the Old Testament, and the rabbis opposed it. Because of this, the Jews came to dislike the Septuagint, for the Christians used it in their Messianic controversies with them. ⁶ During the first five centuries, belief in a coming millennium was widespread, and prophecy was constantly employed by Christians to prove the Messianic character of Jesus, along with emphasis upon His second advent. ⁷ PFF2 186.1

As noted, with the church fathers it was the second advent of Christ that was stressed, whereas with the Jews it was just the advent of the Messiah that was anticipated. The Christian interpretation of Messianic prophecies led to opposition on the part of some Jews, who denied that the prophecies were decipherable, and others-such as the elder Hillel (Hillel I), ⁸ whose lifespan extended briefly into the first century, and the Tanna Rabbi Nathan in the second-even denied the Messianic character of any prophecy. This conflict persisted into the Middle Ages. But the majority sought the prophecies of Daniel with pathetic eagerness, to ascertain the time of the Messiah’s coming. PFF2 186.2

3. PROGRESSION OF EVENTS ACCENTUATES MESSIANIC HOPE

Many events accentuated the Messianic hope through the centuries—the early struggle with Rome (66-70 C.E.), the destruction of the temple (70 C.E.), the Bar Kochba uprising (132-135), the fall of the Roman Empire (476), the rise of Islam(7th century), the Crusades (1096 onward), the coming of the Tartars, the religious wars of the sixteenth and seventeenth centuries, ⁹ as well as the Inquisition and the Protestant Reformation. Each in its time intensified the Messianic hope and stimulated time speculations. The promise of the Messiah was the one hope of Israel in its often desperate circumstances. It was only natural that the Jews should have turned to the prophecies of Daniel. The golden age of Jewish prophetic interpretation is usually placed between 900 and 1500 C.E., beginning with Saadia Gaon, ¹⁰ and continuing to Don Isaac Abravanel—and spreading over Babylonia, Palestine, Egypt, Spain, France, Germany, and Italy. ¹¹ Some of these writers were addicted to allegory and Gematria; others stood stiffly against tradition. Some followed the fanciful Midrash, and some sought out the obvious sense, or the literal meaning, of each individual prophecy. But with all these differences there was remarkable unity on certain principles of prophetic interpretation. PFF2 187.1

4. EXPOSITION CENTERS ON FOUR POWERS AND YEAR-DAY PRINCIPLE

Two primary phases in Jewish prophetic interpretation will be noted: (1) The recognition of the symbols of Romeas the fourth of the four world powers of prophecy; and (2) the application of the year-day principle to the time prophecies of Daniel. Some stress only one or the other, but nearly half of the thirty expositors blend the time and symbol aspects, ¹² as will be noted on the accompanying chronological table (on page 194), summarizing name, date, place, and interpretation. First, the standard ancient writings of the Jews will be noted, and then their leading scholars through the centuries. PFF2 187.2