The Prophetic Faith of Our Fathers, vol. 1
V. Josephus Rehearses Prophetic Interpretation Principles
Josephus, noted Jewish priest and historian, was contemporary with the latter period of the apostles. 17 His writings, reiterating the standard Jewish interpretation of the four empires of prophecy, the Persian ram and the Grecian he-goat, and the year-times of Nebuchadnezzar’s derangement, were contemporary with the apostles, but probably before the writing of the Apocalypse by John. His writings may therefore be regarded as a link binding Hebrew and Christian interpretation in that transition hour from the Jewish to the Christian church. Concerning the standing of the prophecy of Daniel, and Jewish relationship to it, Josephus says: PFF1 197.3
“His (Daniel’s) memory lives on eternally. For the books which he wrote and left behind are still read by us even now, and we are convinced by them that Daniel spoke with God, for he was not only wont to prophesy future things, as did the other prophets, but he also fixed the time at which these would come to pass.” 18 PFF1 198.1
1. THE FOUR EMPIRES OF Daniel 2
After rehearsing Daniel’s account of the metallic image of chapter 2, Josephus gives this remarkably clear exposition in paraphrase: PFF1 198.2
“The head of gold represents you [Nebuchadnezzar] and the Babylonian kings who were before you. The two hands and shoulders signify that your empire will be brought to an end by two kings. But their empire will be destroyed by another king from the west, clad in bronze, and this power will be ended by still another, like iron, that will have dominion for ever through its iron nature,’ which, he said, is harder than that of gold or silver or bronze.” 19 PFF1 198.3
Note further Josephus’ handling of this symbolism. He elsewhere specifies the “two kings” who were to overthrow the Babylonian Empire as “Cyrus, king of Persia, and Darius, king of Media.” 20 Although he does not name the power from the west which overthrew the Medo-Persian Empire, it is clear that, as the Loeb translator here remarks, “Josephus’ addition `from the west’ indicates that, like the rabbis, he identified the third kingdom with the empire of Alexander.” 21 He is still less explicit on the iron kingdom, but the fact that it is stronger than the three preceding, and is said to end the third empire, points directly to Rome. Josephus’ very reticence on the iron kingdom, and the stone, implies that he is treading on ground where he wishes to avoid offense. The translator’s footnotes continue: PFF1 198.4
“Josephus has omitted the scriptural detail about the division of the fourth kingdom and its composition of iron and clay, probably because, like the rabbis, he identified it with Rome and did not wish to offend Roman readers.” 22 PFF1 199.1
In Josephus’ day not only had the Jews been accustomed to seeing the Romans named in the Septuagint version of Daniel, as we have seen in the preceding chapter, but they had seen Rome’s strength grow until it far surpassed the Macedonian power. To them it must have been an inescapable identification. Next they looked for the Messianic kingdom; indeed, the first century of our era witnessed a peak in Messianic expectation. PFF1 199.2
2. THE FUTURE STONE KINGDOM
Josephus was writing to justify Judaism to the Romans, who were ruling the world and brooked no rivals. A prediction of the overthrow of Rome would therefore have ruined the book. The translator notes this reason for reticence about the stone kingdom: PFF1 199.3
“Josephus’ evasiveness about the meaning of the stone which destroyed the kingdom of iron (vs. 44 f.) is due to the fact that the Jewish interpretation of it current in his day took it as a symbol of the Messiah or Messianic kingdom which would make an end of the Roman empire.” 23 PFF1 199.4
Note Josephus’ significantly reticent statement: PFF1 199.5
“And Daniel also revealed to the king the meaning of the stone, but I have not thought it proper to relate this, since I am expected to write of what is past and done and not of what is to be; if, however, there is anyone who has so keen a desire for exact information that he will not stop short of inquiring more closely but wishes to learn about the hidden things that are to come, let him take the trouble to read the Book of Daniel, which he will find among the sacred writings.” 24 PFF1 199.6
3. INTERPRETS “SEVEN TIMES” AS YEARS
Josephus’ next contribution to interpretation is his discussion of the “seven times.” In rehearsing the history of Nebuchadnezzar’s abasement, recorded in Daniel 4, Josephus followed the LXX rendering of “seven years” for the “seven times“: PFF1 199.7
“A little while afterward the king again had another vision in his sleep, which was that he would fall from power and make his home with beasts and, after living in this way in the wilderness for seven years, would again recover his royal power.” 25 PFF1 200.1
“Daniel alone interpreted it, and as he foretold to him so it came to pass. For the king spent the forementioned period of time in the wilderness, none venturing to seize the government during these seven years, and, after praying to God that he might recover his kingdom, he was again restored to it. But let no one reproach me for recording in my work each of these events as I have found them in the ancient books.” 26 PFF1 200.2
Whiston, the classic translator of Josephus, adds this cogent footnote concerning the years for “times,” the prophetic character of parallel expressions, and the extension of the seventy weeks into the time of the Romans: PFF1 200.3
“Since Josephus here explains the seven prophetic times which were to pass over Nebuchadnezzar (Daniel 4:16) to be seven years, we thence learn how he most probably must have understood those other parallel phrase, of ‘a time, times, and a half’ (Antiq. b. vii, ch. xxv) of so many prophetic years also, though he withal lets us know, by his hint at the interpretation of the seventy weeks, as belonging to the fourth monarchy, and the destruction of Jerusalem by the Romans in the days of Josephus (ch. 2, sec. 7), that he did not think those years to be bare years, but rather days for years; by which reckoning, and by which alone, could seventy weeks, or four hundred and ninety days, reach to the age of Josephus.” 27 PFF1 200.4
4. PERSIAN RAM, GRECIAN GOAT, AND FIRST KING
After several chapters of Babylonian history, Josephus tells of the handwriting on the wall and gives Daniel’s familiar interpretation. 28 Then he rehearses the vision which portrays the next stage after the historical transition to Persia—that of the Persian ram and the Grecian he-goat, and the Grecian great horn, or “first king,” thus: PFF1 200.5
“The ram, he declares, signified the kingdoms of the Medes and Persians, and the horns those who were to reign, the last horn signifying the last king, for this king would surpass all the others in wealth and glory. The goat, he said, indicated that there would be a certain king of the Greeks who would encounter the Persian king twice in battle and defeat him and take over all his empire. The great horn in the forehead of the goat indicated the first king, and the growing out of the four horns after the first horn fell out, and their facing each of the four quarters of the earth denoted the successors of the first king after his death, and the division of the kingdom among them and that these, who were neither his sons nor his relatives, would rule the world for many years.” 29 PFF1 201.1
5. LITTLE HORN OF Daniel 8 BELIEVED TO BE ANTIOCHUS
The oppressive Little Horn of Daniel 8, who was to “make war on the Jewish nation, ... spoil the temple and prevent the sacrifices from being offered” for three years, Josephus considered to be Antiochus Epiphanes. 30 PFF1 201.2
6. ROME NAMED AS FULFILLING PROPHECY
But Josephus goes beyond the Septuagint and now mentions Rome, following the time of Antiochus, as the power which was to desolate the land of Judea, just as Jaddua before him is said to have acknowledged Alexander’s as the third world power of prophecy. It is significant that, writing a few years after the destruction of Jerusalem by the Romans, Josephus points to that as a fulfillment of prophecy. PFF1 201.3
“In the same manner Daniel also wrote about the empire of the Romans and that Jerusalem would be taken by them and the temple laid waste. All these things, as God revealed them to him, he left behind in his writings, so that those who read them and observe how they have come to pass must wonder at Daniel’s having been so honoured by God.” 31 PFF1 201.4
7. WOES UPON JERUSALEM PREDICTED
The destruction of Jerusalem and the woes upon the Jews were believed by Josephus to have been indicated by the prophets, for he declares: PFF1 201.5
“Who knows not the records of the ancient prophets and that oracle which threatens this poor city and is even now coming true? For they foretold that it would then be taken whensoever one should begin to slaughter his own countrymen. And is not the city, aye and the whole temple, filled with your corpses? God it is then, God Himself, who with the Romans is bringing the fire to purge His temple and exterminating a city so laden with pollutions.’ 32 PFF1 201.6
And Josephus closes his acknowledgment of prophecy’s pivotal place in these words: PFF1 202.1
“It therefore seems to me, in view of the things foretold by Daniel, that they are very far from holding a true opinion who declare that God takes no thought for human affairs. For if it were the case that the world goes on by some automatism, we should not have seen all these things happen in accordance with his prophecy.” 33 PFF1 202.2
Josephus’ comment on the cessation of the “continual sacrifice,” under Titus, should be noted in passing: PFF1 202.3
“Titus now ordered the troops that were with him to raze the foundations of Antonia and to prepare an easy ascent for the whole army. Then, having learnt that on that day—it was the seventeenth of Panemus—the so-called continual sacrifice had for lack of men ceased to be offered to God and that the people were in consequence terribly despondent, he put Josephus forward with instructions to repeat to John the same message as before, namely `that if he was obsessed by a criminal passion for battle, he was at liberty to come out with as many as he chose and fight, without involving the city and the sanctuary in his own ruin; but that he should no longer pollute the Holy Place nor sin against God.’” 34 PFF1 202.4