Jewish Biblical Interpretation

2002-06-18

This article will discuss the different types of Jewish interpretation that existed at the time of Jesus in the first century. Among the types are literal interpretation, allegory, typology, and eschatological interpretation or pesher.

The Methods as Used in Extra-Biblical Sources

Interpretive methods throughout the first century A.D. were utilized in extra-biblical resources. Jesus and His disciples also used these methods. Naturally, there are good ways and bad ways of implementing these methods. Nevertheless, these methods will be seen in Jesus and His apostle’s exhortation and exegesis from the Old Testament texts.

Literal interpretation could be seen in many of the first century documents. The Prayer of Manasses was an alleged prayer from the Israelite king that brought horrifying idolatry to the land (2 Kings 21:1-18; 23:26; 24:3; 2 Chronicles 33:1-20). This prayer is a repentance of his crimes (Manasses 9-12), praising God for His goodness and grace (7-8). There are not many supposed hidden or suggestive meanings to look for in this text, so this is an example of literal interpretation.

Philo, an Alexandrian Jew, made use of the allegory. In De Migratione Abrahami, he impresses upon the reader the importance of the literal meaning, yet also the things that they symbolize. For example, the Sabbath was “meant to teach the power of the Unoriginate and the non-action of created beings” (Barrett 253). Of course he is trying to stress the keeping of the Sabbath as a commandment, but this spiritual concept he extracts from the commandment does not seem pertinent to the context the law was written in.

Typology is another interpretative method that is utilized by first century Jewish writers. In a targum of Genesis 49, when talking about Judah, the author attributes the description of Judah to the King Messiah. Jacob, for the most part seems to be talking about Judah himself, though kings will come from him until ‘Shiloh’ comes. The editor of the targum takes the liberty to fill in who Judah might typify, namely, King Messiah.

Pesher, or interpretation in an eschatological sense, is a method utilized often by the Essenes of Qumran. The commentary of Habakkuk “transforms the prophet’s message into a description of the life and faith of the Dead Sea community and their leader” (Scott 132). The text is quoted, followed by an interpretation of what this might mean. The interpretation is given in an eschatological sense, pertinent to the Essenes’ lives at Qumran.

The diverse types of hermeneutics also extend into the New Testament as well, since the Christians of the time did not live in a vacuum, separated from the first century world.

The Methods as Used by Jesus Christ

Jesus’ exhortation of the law deals with various methods of interpretation, but by His supernatural power as God, He knows the true purpose of the law that He might explain it to His followers. Many examples will articulate this argument. It is important that in the context of the time Jesus walked the earth, He was setting into motion the beginning of the new covenant that would also usher in the ministry of the Holy Spirit (cf. Jeremiah 31:33; Ezekiel 11:19). It is also written in Matthew 5:17ff that Jesus came to fulfill the law. The way Jesus exegetes the law is not just to explain the physical requirements of the law, but also its spiritual requirements, which governs the thinking and the condition of the hearts of all people. With these things in mind, one will be able to see how Jesus appropriately applies different hermeneutical principles to the passages that come from the Old Testament.

In Matthew 5 on the Sermon on the Mount, Jesus exhorts that right living under the law also requires more than what each jot and tittle say. When talking about murder, divorce, etc., Jesus says to the people, “Ye have heard that it was said by them of old time...” In this instance, Jesus explains how this applies to their lives today. This is what allegory often does (Scott 132). He then goes into detail on the spiritual implications that are there behind the law. By the end of chapter 5, Jesus stresses that one must be perfect as God is (Matthew 5:48), which is a literal correlation to what is said in the law (Deuteronomy 18:13). The ‘allegory’ is warranted.

Returning to Matthew 5:17ff, Jesus declares Himself to be the fulfillment of the law. Belief in Him (and His sacrifice at Calvary that will come later), as it is known, frees one from the continual sacrifices for sin required in the Law (Hebrews 10:18, 26). This is what is important to know, that the law is a type of Christ, where Christ fulfills the law in His perfect righteous living. In Matthew 12, Jesus confronts the Pharisees when they were rebuking His disciples. When the disciples were eating, they were accused of violating the Sabbath. The gleaning of fields was legal, naturally, and the Pharisees knew this (Leviticus 19:9-10). The problem was that they did this on the Sabbath (Exodus 20:8-11). Jesus, however, brings up David eating the showbread of the house of God (1 Samuel 21), which is also unlawful, but breaks a greater Old Testament concept that God desires mercy and not sacrifice (Matthew 12:7; cf. Hosea 6:6).

These things are typical of what Jesus argues with the Jewish leaders. Jesus argues with them about the requirement of the Mishna as mentioned in Matthew 15:2, about proper washing of hands. Jesus also refutes the usages of certain practices that distinguished the Jewish people, i.e., the Sabbath (Matthew 12) and dietary restrictions (cf. Matthew 15:11-12). In Matthew chapters 6 and 23, Jesus condemns the outward religiosity of the Jewish leaders. Jesus brings out the Spiritual requirements of the law and forces the religious leaders to reconsider their motives for ‘following’ the law.

In light of Luke 24:44-47, one can see an eschatological fulfillment in Jesus from the entire Old Testament. This fulfillment he speaks of is in verses 46-47, which is the entire gospel message. Likewise, Jesus then opens the understanding of His disciples. Their ability to interpret the Scriptures was given to them by God, which is contrary to the first century Jewish writers that wrote and knew nothing of Jesus.

The Methods as Used by the Disciples

In Acts 1:15-2:42, Peter will apply this God-given wisdom in making an important decision and in a sermon. Throughout the passage, one can see that Peter uses all methods formerly discussed to explain the message of the gospel. Different methods were used at different times, but the main concept is that Peter was ordained by God to use this wisdom and apply it the way God wanted it to be applied.

In Acts 1:20, Luke quotes two different Psalms that Peter uses as his line of reasoning of selecting a twelfth disciple. The first is quoted from 69:25. This passage has nothing to do with Judas Iscariot in its original context, but with the enemies of David. David desires that God’s wrath would be upon them, and that his enemies might be no more. Judas, an enemy of God, surely no longer held his place with the disciples, since by that time he was dead. Psalm 109:8 is in a similar context, that someone who was an enemy of David would be replaced, that another might take his office. Once again, Peter uses this Biblical wisdom that the enemy of God that was in the disciples’ group needed to be removed and replaced. This would be an allegory, since it was completely removed from its original historical context, but yet timeless wisdom from the Scriptures was still applied in the situation so that Matthias would be chosen and appointed by God.

In Acts 2:17-21, Peter quotes Joel 2:28-32, which in its original context is talking about the last days. Leaving discussions of dispensations and advents aside, it is good to mention that half of that prophecy became fulfilled that day. The Holy Spirit had come, yet the wonders in the heavens were yet to come. Peter quoted this passage to give meaning to the miraculous speaking of foreign languages that the Jewish men had heard. This would be an eschatological interpretation, since these things could not be explained until this event actually happened.

In Acts 2:25-28, Peter quotes Psalm 16. David is not talking about Jesus in this passage, but himself. He recognizes that when he relies on God, he will not be moved, and his life will be protected even in great difficulty. Even in verse 10, he is talking about himself; from the parallelism used here in this psalm, ‘Your holy one’ also refers to David. However, David is a type of Christ, and since that Jesus was the firstborn from the dead to be resurrected, this passage typifies Jesus.

In Acts 2:34-35, Peter then quotes Psalm 110, which is a literal interpretation. In Psalm 110, as David wrote, he is writing about a Lord that is superior to him even as king, yet he distinguishes Him from God. This explains Jesus’ resurrection and exaltation, and His absence while He is at the right hand of the Father.

The best hermeneutic is given by God (Luke 24:45). Interpretations can sometimes be inaccurate, as in eschatological interpretation given in the targum for Isaiah chapters 9 and 53, adding words and changing pronouns to fit their eschatological stance. The Biblical authors, however, use these different interpretations throughout the New Testament. These were seen in Peter’s sermon to the Jewish people gathered in Jerusalem. These interpretations could be better considered genres, for the method of interpretation was from God when these things were spoken. For when we interpret particular passages of the Bible, there is one interpretation, yet often many applications.

Bibliography

Barrett, C. K., ed. The New Testament Background: Writings from Ancient Greece and the Roman Empire That Illuminate Christian Origins, Revised Edition. San Francisco: Harper-Collins, 1987.

Scott, J. Julius Jr. Jewish Backgrounds of the New Testament. Grand Rapids: Baker, 2001.