What is the foundational support for interpreting prophecies as having dual fulfillments?

Question

There are a handful of prophecies that Christians consider as having "dual fulfillments" - one at the time, and one in the future. Matthew 24, Isaiah 7:14, etc. are examples.

Where did this method of interpretation originate, and more importantly upon what foundation / first-principles does it rest? One could say, let's give it three interpretations, or let's say it was a failed prophecy, or let's say the original prophecy was fulfilled - but in a different way, etc. but instead Christians choose to utilize this Dual Fulfillment method on many prophecies.

The explanation I've come across typically goes something like: "the first prophecy did not fully come about, so we'll see it fully happen sometime in the future." But, that's an obvious False Dilemma, as there are many other ways to explain the first prophecy not being "fully fulfilled". Would appreciate someone with more expertise chiming in.

Answer 1

The only exegetical license for dual prophecies is the Bible text itself. Let me illustrate:

Here are a few prophecies that have a dual fulfillment:

1. Matt 24:3 - While Jesus was sitting on the Mount of Olives, the disciples came to Him privately. “Tell us,” they said, “when will (a) these things happen, and (b) what will be the sign of Your coming and of the end of the age?” Thus, Jesus combined the destruction of Jerusalem with the end of the world when He would return. This includes the “abomination of desolation”.
2. Isa 7:14 - Therefore the Lord Himself will give you a sign: Behold, the virgin will be with child and will give birth to a son, and will call Him Immanuel. This was a prophecy about Isaiah's wife but was also applied to Mary and Jesus as per Matt 1:23.
3. Joel 2:28-32 is an example of a prophecy that was fulfilled at Pentecost in Acts 2 but which appears to be capable of eschatological fulfillment again in the period before Jesus returns
4. Hos 10:8 is about the wicked asking to be destroyed by rocks and mountains is a prophecy about the destruction of Jerusalem; but it also receives a dual application by Rev 6:15-17 at the end of time when Jesus returns.
5. The prophecy about Gog and Magog in Eze 38 concerns the punishment meted out to these pagan nations in OT times. However, it is given a second impetus in Rev 20:8 in the time after the 1000 years.
6. Mal 4:5 predicts the arrival of Elijah the prophet before the “Day of the Lord” and the NT claims fulfilment in places like Matt 11:13, 14, 17:11-14, Mark 9:12, 13, Luke 1:17 as John the Baptist. However, the “great and terrible day of the Lord” (Mal 4:5) clearly also has eschatological fulfilment and confirmed by the indirect allusions to Elijah in the book of Revelation.
7. Ps 22 is about the loneliness and isolation of David as were many of his psalms. However, it has been correctly understood by many, including Jesus Himself, as Messianic, as conformed by Matt 27:43, 46, Mark 15:34. Many Jewish interpreters also understood this Psalm as messianic.

Note that in all of these cases (this is not an exhaustive list), the second application can only be claimed where such is explicit in the Bible text itself and NOT simply due to the over-active imagination of the exegete.

Answer 2

This is a common technique in Jewish literature. Hebrew writing frequently makes a "dual prophecy" - that is, the prophet states something that will have a temporal fulfilment and a spiritual fulfilment, or an application in his day and an application at one (or both) comings of the Messiah. This is particularly common in Isaiah, where there are dozens of examples (see Ludlow Isaiah - Prophet, Seer, and Poet p. 54).

One of the great conundrums of Isaiah's Messianic prophecies is squaring his description of a great conqueror (e.g. Isaiah 40) with his description of a suffering servant (e.g. Isaiah 53), yet Isaiah had no difficulty describing the Messiah's coming in both contexts.

Early Christians struggled with this concept, especially given the prevailing expectation that the Messiah would provide immediate liberation from Rome. When Isaiah's prophecies are read in light of the Jewish "dual prophecy" technique, a plausible alternative presents itself: Isaiah's Messianic prophecies were not entirely fulfilled by the first coming of the Messiah (this interpretation, of course, is written from the perspective of someone who sees Jesus of Nazareth as the Messiah, which I do).

Answer 3

The foundation may be found in Scripture:

¹⁰ “For as the rain and the snow come down from heaven and do not return there but water the earth, making it bring forth and sprout, giving seed to the sower and bread to the eater, ¹¹ so shall my word be that goes out from my mouth; it shall not return to me empty, but it shall accomplish that which I purpose, and shall succeed in the thing for which I sent it. (Isaiah 55 ESV)

The word goes from God and will accomplish its purpose.

Isaiah gives two examples from the natural world to illustrate how this happens:

• Rain and snow which water the earth
• Seed for the sower and bread to the eater

Both examples include a two-fold process; one which happens before the other. Rain waters the earth immediately; snow must melt. Seed is sown before it can be harvested and made into bread.

If the examples are taken literally, the second would be similar yet different and perhaps better. Where rain waters the earth when and where it falls, melted snow flows into rivers to be used for irrigation. Similarly seed is sown yet later bread nourishes or sowing seed is work yet eating bread sustains life.

Conclusion
The "dual fulfillment" of prophecy is better understood as how the word of the LORD works. When it is given to a prophet about something which is future, then there will be that which from a human perspective is seen as a dual prophecy.

The authenticity of one who speaks for YHVH also reflects a two-fold nature:

• A false prophet will speak things which do not happen (Deuteronomy 18:22)
• A prophet who states what will happen but uses the "fulfillment" to authenticate a message to lead people to worship gods other than YHVH. (Deuteronomy 13:1-5)

The second issue likely speaks to prophets who might better be termed "seers." That is, they can see one thing which is future, yet as it is not from YHVH there is no second event. On the other hand, the first fulfillment from one who truly speaks for YHVH will have the message authenticated as coming from YHVH by the first fulfillment. Thus, YHVH gives the people a first sign as evidence they have been given the authentic word of YHVH.

One who speaks for YHVH will not only have the authenticating first event, the content of the message will also be authentic as YHVH's. The content could also be authenticated by examining what YHVH has done and said in the past. So the prophet who correctly predicts something but uses that to lead people into violating YHVH's previous commands, could immediately be seen as a false prophet despite the accuracy of their prediction.

Answer 4

The idea of "double fulfillment" of prophecies in hermeneutics is not attributed to a specific person or time. It has been a part of biblical interpretation for centuries, and some exegetes believed in the double fulfillment of prophecies. The concept allows for both an initial and future fulfillment of a prophecy, or both a literal and symbolic meaning. The concept of multiple layers of sense and fulfilment go back to the ancient Israel.

Wikipedia on the Jewish theory of exegesis, acronym Pardes:

Pardes (פרד"ס) is a Kabbalistic theory of Biblical exegesis first advanced by Moses de León.1 The term, sometimes also rendered PaRDeS, is an acronym formed from the initials of the following four approaches:

• Peshat (פְּשָׁט‎) – "surface" ("straight") or the literal (direct) meaning.
• Remez (רֶמֶז‎) – "hints" or the deep (allegoric: hidden or symbolic) meaning beyond just the literal sense. In the version of the New Zohar, Re'iah.
• Derash (דְּרַשׁ‎) – from Hebrew darash: "inquire" ("seek") – the comparative (midrashic) meaning, as given through similar occurrences.
• Sod (סוֹד‎) (pronounced with a long O as in 'lore') – "secret" ("mystery") or the esoteric/mystical meaning, as given through inspiration or revelation.

Also see answers here. The reason why traditional Christians would reject the idea of multiple fulfillments of scripture (other than the Messianic prophecies) is because they would interpret the NT usage of the OT "prophecies" as divinely given new meaning, and fail to accept the actual author's intentions and personal interpretation or allusion to certain passages for their evangelistic purpose, something which was completely normal among the Jews. The Talmud is full of such interpretations, along with the allegorical interpretations by Paul, and the examples like the high priest unknowingly prophesying in John 11:51. As high priest that year, Caiaphas prophesied that Jesus would die for the nation, although he did not say this on his own. I see no difference and problem with interpreting or rather alluding to the scripture in light of current great events. If someone interprets the next re-election of the King Trump in the USA as his resurrection, the third day; it is perfectly legitimate.

This kind of personal meaning or exposition (midrash) ascribed to scripture would be unacceptable to Christians, as they hold an objective and closed view of prophecies & hermeneutics.

Jann Stievermann writes in Prophecy, Piety, and the Problem of Historicity Interpreting the Hebrew Scriptures in Cotton Mather's 'Biblia Americana:

The Puritan settlers of New England had brought this theological tradition to the New World. Among Mather's immediate forebears and contemporaries the apocalyptically inflected, historical consciousness of post-reformation Protestantism had come into full bloom. As Mather's fellow New England pastor Nicholas Noyes (1647~1717) of Salem expressed chis view: “If we consider what cognation there is between History and Prophesy, it will not seem strange. For Prophesie is History antedated; and History is Postdated Prophesie: the same thing is told in both.” An important factor which contributed to this simultaneous Sacralisation of history and historicization of the scriptural prophecies in the second half of the seventeenth century was the new literalist-factualist approach to the Bible in the context of the scientific revolution. Especially among members of the Royal Society there was, as Harrison and others have shown, a tendency to conceive of the prophesied latter-day events in naturalistic categories and to develop theories on how they might play out within the framework of a Newtonian universe.