Jewish Commentaries on Daniel's Seventy Weeks

Dr. Couch, what do the Jewish commentaries say about Daniel's Seventy-Weeks in Daniel 9:24-on?

ANSWER: As you know I have all of the Jewish Soncino commentaries on the OT. I'm the only guy who has them that I know of. Generally, I appreciate what they say but often they try to get rid of messianic statements, but not always.

How sick do you want to get? On this Daniel 9 passage the Rabbis go nuts in order to rid the passage of leading to the coming of Christ, however, in a weak moment, they say: "On 'everlasting righteousness' in v. 24, they say "Commentators interpret this as an allusion to the Messianic era."

But then they go on and go crazy. On v. 26 they write (after the threescore ...") This brings the period down to the Maccabean age. According to another calculation, its terminus is the destruction of the Second Temple."

And on "an anointed one," they write "Some authorities see a reference to king Agrippa who lived at the time when the Second Temple was destroyed. Others think of Onias III who was High Priest until deposed by Antiochus Epiphanes in 175 BC; he was assassinated four years later."

On "war" in v. 26 they say "The final war against Gog and Magog which will herald the coming of the Messiah (Ezek. 38-on), or the war of Antiochus against the saints."

On "firm covenant" in v. 27 they write "If the prince is Antiochus, the allusion will be to the co-operation he obtained from the apostate hellenizers among the Jews; if to Vespasian, ..."

On "wing of detestable things" in v. 27 they say "This is one of the most baffling passages in the book. The Jewish commentators take wing as a figure of speech signifying an elevated position and render: 'upon an elevated position among detestable things, an image which causes appallment ."

On v. 25 on "to restore and to build Jerusalem" they write "The Hebrew verb is commonly used of bringing back captivities, hence it probably refers here not to the city but its exiled inhabitants." (But the passage just mentioned Jerusalem!!!!)

On "one anointed" they say "Probably Cyrus is intended, but explained by others as Zerubbabel or Jeshua the son of Jozadak, the first High Priest after the return from captivity."

In other words, the Rabbis on Daniel are all over the place. For the most part they try to escape a messianic reading. THEIR INTERPRETATIONS MAKE NO SENSE!

Thanks for asking,
Dr. Mal Couch (3/11)

Luke: Jew or Gentile?

Dr. Couch, was Luke a Jew or a Gentile?

ANSWER: Harrison in his excellent volume on the introduction to the NT books says that without a doubt he was a Gentile. Though he gives circumstantial evidence, the evidence seems clearly to point that way, though we may not be able to be overly dogmatic on the issue.

After he had made a list of "circumcised" fellow workers, Paul in Colossians 4:14 includes Luke who seems to be in that same list. Luke, the author of Acts, says in 1:19 that the Jews mentioned the "field of blood" near Jerusalem "in their own language." Luke seems to have been free of persecution that was put upon Christian Jews. He must have been seen in a different light by the Gentile antagonists of the gospel. This would possibly show that Luke was a Gentile. Luke is so Hellenistic in his language and thought forms that more than likely he was a Greek.

Thanks for asking.
Dr. Mal Couch
#294

Audience of Romans 7-11

Dr. Couch, is Paul writing to the Jews in Romans 7:1-11:12, and therefore, should the passage be read exclusively to the Jews?

ANSWER: No, not at all. He speaks about the Jews in this section in the third person, "they." He is addressing Gentile believers. He says in 11:13, "I am speaking to you who are Gentiles, inasmuch then as I am an apostle of Gentiles, I magnify my ministry." And in 10:1 he says "My prayer to God for THEM (the Jews) is for their salvation."

He uses the illustration of God's election with the Jews but he also says "Who are you, O MAN, WHO answers back to God ..." (9:20). Election is personal and includes both Jews and Gentiles. Paul writes "Just as He chose (elected, "called out") us in Him before the foundation of the world that we should be holy and blameless before Him. In love He predestined us as sons through Jesus Christ to Himself, according to the kind intention of His will" (Eph. 1:4-5).

Thanks for asking.
—Dr. Mal Couch (2/11)

Views on the Tribulation

Dr. Couch, what are some of the views about the seven year tribulation?

ANSWER: There are a bunch of wrong views and then there is the right view, as taught by the orthodox Jews and Christ. And that is, the Messiah comes at the end of the tribulation to establish His earthly one thousand year kingdom Davidic rule on earth. The others are all wrong!

Reading the OT and the Gospels, one can see that the tribulation is an event that will fall upon the world and upon the nation of Israel. The church is never mentioned as going through this horrible period of worldwide wrath. Let's look at some of the views:

Postmillennial Tribulation: The church goes through the tribulation at the end the millennium. The church is the millennium or the kingdom. Walvoord notes: "It is a characteristic of postmillennialism that it does not attempt a literal interpretation of the Tribulation." And, he notes: "As illustrated in the writings of Charles Hodge, the postmil view considers the Tribulation a final stage of trouble for the church just preceding the grand climax of the triumph of the gospel, which is the kingdom."

Amillennial interpretation of the Tribulation. This view does not differ essentially from the postmil view, though it has a different theological context. The present age is regarded as the predicted millennium. The tribulation is said to precede the millennium. The tribulation is already past. Berkhof holds to a future tribulation, placing the fulfillment of Scripture dealing with the tribulation after the millennium.

Premillennial view of the tribulation. This is the correct view and it is consistent with literal interpretation. It is what the OT teaches and the Gospels also. This is what the orthodox Jews have taught throughout the last two thousand years. This is what dispensationalists realized the Bible was teaching when they saw the errors of amillennialism. This is so easy to defend it is not funny!

I have found through the years, however, that there are just a bunch of naysayers who want to deny the most truthful of views. They want to deny premillennialism and the pretribulational rapture of the church. Why? They just want to, though they really cannot defend their view! They hold to what I call the smorgasbord approach to doctrine! They come into the restaurant and see all the good food on the table, but over in the corner is a slop bucket. They gravitate to it rather than the roast beef and salad. They always go toward that which is not right, or is downright dumb! It seems to be automatic in their gene pool! I cannot figure it out!

Satan sees a weakness in the church. He brainwashes many teachers to gravitate to error. They are inspired by him, though they are not indwelt by him.

—Dr. Mal Couch (2/11)

Audience of 1 Peter

Dr. Couch, to whom is the book of 1 Peter written? Some say it is written to the Gentiles though the first verse says "to the alien scattered." ANSWER:  The book is clearly written to the Jewish "diaspora," that is the Greek of the word "scattered." The word "alien" means "the strangers." This is how the Jews were described who were driven out of Israel. In the case of verse 1, it is speaking about the Jewish believers who were part of the diaspora. The word diaspora is two words: dia=through, thoroughly, and spora=seed. "To scatter the seed" is the way it described the scattered Jews.    2:12 also proves that Peter is writing to the scattered believing Jews. The verse reads: "Keep your behavior excellent among the Gentiles," proving that Peter's audience is not Gentile but Jewish. The answer to your question is really simple. I don't know how anyone came up with the idea that the audience was Gentiles!    Thanks for asking.    Dr. Mal Couch (8/10)

Spiritual Kingdom

Dr. Couch, Paul says that God has delivered us out of this present evil age because of what Christ did on the cross (Gal. 1:4)? Does this mean that we could currently be living in this way? And, are we living in a spiritual kingdom now? ANSWER:  "To deliver" is an Aorist Middle Subjunctive in the Greek. The Greek Lexicon says it could read: He "Himself might take [us] away out of a place, that is, out of this evil age." "He Himself might remove, deliver us out of this evil age." Paul is speaking about the influence of this evil age on us now, today. This is happening "according to the will of our God and Father."    I wrote in my Galatians commentary with Dr. John Witmer, "There is a past benefit with Christ's death. He took the judgment that was placed on all humanity. He also died that believers might be presently liberated from the power and clutch [the influence] of sin. But eternal salvation also awaits believers after death." The Greek word used here for "age" is "aion." Each period of history is a specific age that we are walking through in time.    We know we are not now in the physical and literal messianic earthly kingdom. The church is not that Jewish, Davidic kingdom over which Christ will someday rule for one thousand years. Paul says that we are on our way to that kingdom. Though the Jews are the key earthly people, the church will be there co-ruling with the Lord and enjoying His worldwide reign. Therefore Paul writes that "He delivered us from the domain of darkness, and transferred us to the kingdom of His beloved Son" (Col. 1:13). "Delivered" is an Aorist Tense of "ruomai" which should be translated "to cause us to escape, to be rescue, to be delivered." This again carries the idea of "to be influenced by." We still see the workings of "the domain of darkness" all around us! And yet we are headed for His earthly kingdom that has not yet arrived.    In my commentary series on Colossians, Gromacki points out that this "transfer" is like taking people from one country to another. In terms of influence we have been transferred from the kingdom of Satan to the kingdom of Christ, that is, its influence on us, as to where we are headed—someday into Christ's earthly domain! Thanks for asking, Dr. Mal Couch  (6-10)

Elders Praying for the Sick

Dr. Couch, should the elders be called in at all times to pray for the sick, as mentioned in James 5:13-16? ANSWER: Prayer for the sick can be offered by anyone and at all times. There is no restriction on praying. But this passage is very Jewish and has specifically a Jewish audience in mind. Nevertheless, it is a valid passage, though it is not required in order for one to get well. There are several things to note in the passage: First, the one who is sick calls for the elders. The anointing with oil is ceremonial. The oil itself does nothing. It is simply signifying that the sick person is to be especially attended to in his illness. The work "sick" is the Greek word "asthenia" which also carries the idea of "weakness." Any weakness can be presented to the Lord, not just sickness. It is the prayer of faith (v. 15) that restores this one. The "ceremony," if you will, of the elders coming and anointing, is not what raises up this person. It is possible that this entire section is about more than simply one being ill. James adds, "If he has committed sins, they will be forgiven him" (v. 15b). So the gathering of the elders could be specifically be about sin that is also in the life of the one calling for such help. James then presents a larger principle in verse 16, and that is confession of sins that could be the cause of the failing of the believer. And, James makes prayer interactive. We are to be praying for one another, so that we may be healed (v. 16b). Then the apostle sets forth another principle, and that is, "The effective prayer of a righteous man can accomplish much" (v. 16c). That the praying here is especially Jewish is found in James' illustration of the intercession of Elijah in verses 17-18. He "prayed earnestly" and God honored his requests. Verse 19 seems to be capping off James' argument, even about prayer. He writes" "If any among you strays from the truth, and one turns him back, let him know that he who turns a sinner from the error of his way will save his soul from death, and will cover a multitude of sins." This is not about the loss of salvation for the believer but it is about a temporal judgment that may fall upon one who has been flirting with sin. The book of James is strong medicine, coming from the Jewish respect for the Law. There is no monkey business in this book. James hits many issues head-on throughout the chapters. Thanks for asking. Dr. Mal Couch (Feb., 10)

Intermediate Period or Kingdom of Heaven?

Dr. Couch, some say that Matthew 13, and the parables of the kingdom, is about the intermediate period between Christ's ascension until the rapture of the church. But I understand you and some other well-thinking Bible scholars point out that Matthew 13 is really about the Kingdom of Heaven and not about anything going on now in the church age. Is this right? ANSWER:  I have argued for years that if we keep our hermeneutics straight, we will not say these parables are having anything to do with the true church age. I am right, and those who take another view "have the right to be wrong!" Matthew 13 is about the kingdom of heaven, not about the church age. So says also the great Dr. William Pettingill who taught years ago at Moody Bible Institute, where I also taught after leaving graduate school.    On Matthew 13 Dr. Pettingill wrote: "It ought to be noted here that the Church is not in view in all this, nor is the Church Dispensation the 'Age' so often referred to. It is the Jewish Age, which has been interrupted by the parenthetical Church Dispensation. The Jewish Age is not yet finished, nor will it be until the Church is removed from the earth."    Matthew 13 is telling us about the preview of things to come in setting up the kingdom period, that is, the Millennial Age, "the kingdom of heaven." Matthew 13 is about a false spiritual period that unfortunately is sometimes labeled "Christian." Sometimes the present days are labeled "Christian civilization, Christian institutions, Christian countries, Christian governments, or simply Christendom."    But actually, Matthew 13 is pointing toward the coming kingdom of heaven, and that is what this chapter is mainly about!    Thanks for asking.    Dr. Mal Couch (Jan., 10)

Holocaust and Pogrom

Dr. Couch, what do the words holocaust and pogrom mean? 

 

    ANSWER:  Holocaust comes from the word “holo” which means “complete, whole, entire.” In the Middle English, and in Latin, the word is “holocaustrum.” The Septuagint Greek uses the word “holokauston” meaning to burn up completely and wholly. This Greek word is used in Exodus 10:25; 29:25. It refers to the burnt offerings on the altar. This word comes into current usage and refers to what happened to the Jews during World War II. Many thousands, if not millions, were consumed by the fires of Nazi hatred. And by the way, we now have evidence that the main reason for World War II was to get rid of European Jewry. The Germans were paranoid about the Jews. From start to finish, in the rise of Hitler, the purpose was to rid the world of Israel. This was top priority with Hitler and many, many Germans. 

    Pogrom is a Yiddish and a Russian word that described the persecution of the Jews in Russia around 1880-85. It speaks of the organized massacre of the Jews during that period, but also, of any other time in which there is a distinct effort to destroy and eliminate God’s chosen people. 

    The word comes from the Russian word “pogramit;” the word “gromit” means to destroy, devastate, and that comes from the idea of “thunder.” 

    These two words are applied only to what happened to the Jewish people. They are graphic and descriptive words that conjure up a terrible picture of destruction and satanic hatred. 

   Thanks for asking.

   Dr. Mal Couch