Thought you might find this interesting.
This text is from Pirush ayn-tet, a Yiddish commentary included in the Miqraot Gedolot volume on Daniel (note that your recent blog entry which used my image, showing multiple Jewish commentators saying the "son of man" like figure is the Messiah was from the same volume).
In this portion, the text is discussing Daniel 7:27. The second line is significant, as, when commenting on the portion of that verse which reads "malkooteh malkoot `alam" (his kingdom will be an eternal kingdom), this Yiddish commentary declares "das hershung fon Mashiach vet zain eybig hershung" (i.e. the rule of the Messiah is an eternal rule).
Now, here's the question we should ask: it's one thing to say verse 14 is referring to the Messiah, but how does one slip the Messiah into verse 27? The answer is at the very heart of what all these commentators and polemicists, who assert that the "son of man" of Daniel 7 merely represents Israel, miss about the mindset of these Jewish commentators. To get to that answer, we might also ask the question which the aforementioned commentators and polemicists wish to ask: if verse 14 (in the vision) says the "son of man" figure will possess an eternal kingdom and verses 18 and 27 (in the elucidation) state that the holy ones will inherit the kingdom eternally, isn't it obvious that this means the "son of man" (in the vision) represents the holy ones (in the elucidation)?
To reply to the latter question, first note that in Jewish thought, the Messianic age will see a time when pious Jews rule and the Messiah is above them. In other words, there will be a hierarchy of rulership or authority, with the Messiah at the top, and believers underneath him (e.g. in his court). This idea is also found in Christian thought (cf. Matthew 19:28 and Luke 22:30 which would lead some of our friends who are fans of critical scholarship to propose this is as early as the hypothetical "Q-source").
So, then, if it is possible for the Messiah and the believers underneath him to both inherit the kingdom eternally, then a statement that the servants/saints will be given the kingdom need not contradict the belief that the Messiah will possess the kingdom. This text from the Yiddish portion of Miqraot Gedolot shows the extent to wish Jewish commentators saw Daniel 7 as referring to a future in which both the Messiah and believers under him will be in authority, and this is verses like 18 or 27 never caused the various Jewish commentators to back off their claim that verse 13 is referring to the Messiah. Once this is understood, the weakness of the argument that the "son of man" is simply referring to Israel becomes apparent.
In this portion, the text is discussing Daniel 7:27. The second line is significant, as, when commenting on the portion of that verse which reads "malkooteh malkoot `alam" (his kingdom will be an eternal kingdom), this Yiddish commentary declares "das hershung fon Mashiach vet zain eybig hershung" (i.e. the rule of the Messiah is an eternal rule).
Now, here's the question we should ask: it's one thing to say verse 14 is referring to the Messiah, but how does one slip the Messiah into verse 27? The answer is at the very heart of what all these commentators and polemicists, who assert that the "son of man" of Daniel 7 merely represents Israel, miss about the mindset of these Jewish commentators. To get to that answer, we might also ask the question which the aforementioned commentators and polemicists wish to ask: if verse 14 (in the vision) says the "son of man" figure will possess an eternal kingdom and verses 18 and 27 (in the elucidation) state that the holy ones will inherit the kingdom eternally, isn't it obvious that this means the "son of man" (in the vision) represents the holy ones (in the elucidation)?
To reply to the latter question, first note that in Jewish thought, the Messianic age will see a time when pious Jews rule and the Messiah is above them. In other words, there will be a hierarchy of rulership or authority, with the Messiah at the top, and believers underneath him (e.g. in his court). This idea is also found in Christian thought (cf. Matthew 19:28 and Luke 22:30 which would lead some of our friends who are fans of critical scholarship to propose this is as early as the hypothetical "Q-source").
So, then, if it is possible for the Messiah and the believers underneath him to both inherit the kingdom eternally, then a statement that the servants/saints will be given the kingdom need not contradict the belief that the Messiah will possess the kingdom. This text from the Yiddish portion of Miqraot Gedolot shows the extent to wish Jewish commentators saw Daniel 7 as referring to a future in which both the Messiah and believers under him will be in authority, and this is verses like 18 or 27 never caused the various Jewish commentators to back off their claim that verse 13 is referring to the Messiah. Once this is understood, the weakness of the argument that the "son of man" is simply referring to Israel becomes apparent.
Derek what we see here is not contradiction but instead an affirmation for christian principle of The Body of Christ who will rule all creations with Christ as the head.
ReplyDeleteYour statement [first note that in Jewish thought, the Messianic age will see a time when pious Jews rule and the Messiah is above them. In other words, there will be a hierarchy of rulership or authority, with the Messiah at the top, and believers underneath him (e.g. in his court). ]
I don't want to get expository, so i'll just quote a few Bible passages:
Ephesians 1:22-23, And God placed all things under HIS FEET and appointed Him to be Head over everything FOR THE CHURCH WHICH IS HIS BODY, the fullness of him who fills everything in every way.
Notice the phrases "ALL THINGS UNDER HIS FEET " and "The Church is HIS BODY ."
If all things are placed under Messiah' feet which is the smallest member of HIS BODY , then consequently all universe will be ruled by believers even the smallest one !
With premise the Church/Body of Christ is also identified as spiritual Israelite then Judaic interpretation of Daniel 7 is perfectly compatible with New Testament concept especially in Pauline Epistles
------------------------------------------
As for the question of polemicists that you mentioned [ To get to that answer, we might also ask the question which the aforementioned commentators and polemicists wish to ask: if verse 14 (in the vision) says the "son of man" figure will possess an eternal kingdom and verses 18 and 27 (in the elucidation) state that the holy ones will inherit the kingdom eternally, isn't it obvious that this means the "son of man" (in the vision) REPRESENTS the holy ones (in the elucidation)?]
Actually The Messiah DOES represent HIS BODY to be seated in heavenlies and rule all creations
Ephesians 2:6-7, "And God raised us up with Christ and seated us with him in the heavenly realms IN(THROUGH) Christ Jesus, in order that in the coming ages he might show the incomparable riches of his grace, expressed in his kindness to us in Christ Jesus
For that case it's no contradictory even in viewing Christ the Son of Man as representative of His Body.
Furthermore in Judgment Day we as His Body will fully positioned as judge/ruler
1Cor 6:3; Do you not know that we will judge angels? How much more the things of this life !
Book of Colossians is also full of describing Body of Christ concept.
-------------------------------
With all these hard evidences both from Judaic and Christians perspectives, it's quite funny to see how tenacious muslims are in suppressing their intelligence in order to deny the obvious facts.
Couldn't agree more Carlos
ReplyDelete