WHAT HAVE WE DONE TO PROPHECY?

The witness that Jesus gave is the same as the spirit of prophecy. Rev. 19:10

I read something disturbing recently about the Churches of Christ in an unlikely place. The Bibliotheca Sacra is a time-honored journal published by Dallas Theological Seminary. It has a unique feature in that it runs reviews of articles that appear in other journals. In its Jan-March issue for 1979 it reviewed an article by David R. Reagan, preaching minister to the Central Church of Christ in Irving, near Dallas, which appeared originally in Word and Work, longtime respected journal of the premillennial persuasion among Churches of Christ. I read the article when it first appeared in the Louisville publication, but it was the review of it that especially interested me—and disturbed me.

Entitled “My Pilgrimage Toward a Premillennial Viewpoint,” David Reagan tells how he became premillennial through independent study. He began his study by outlining the Book of Revelation, only to discover later that his outline was premillennial. He describes postmillennialism as humanistic and amillennialism as a spiritualization of Scripture that actually denies what the Bible says. Premillennialism is the most attractive theory in that it allows the Bible to mean what it says, though he has misgivings about some of the more speculative theories of this persuasion.

All this held such interest to the readers of BibSac that the Word and Work office in Louisville chose to put the article in pamphlet form so as to meet the demand for the article. David himself has likewise had responses from here and there, one being from the president of the Dallas seminary, who thought it remarkable that someone in the Churches of Christ, known for their rather rigid anti-premillennial posture, should become premillennial through private study. This would be of special interest to both the seminary and BibSac in that they are not only premillennial, but dispensational as well, an aspect of the doctrine that Reagan rejected in the article, and which the president defended in his letter.

All this is well enough. It is not this that disturbed me. We have had premills among us at least since the second century, including some of our own pioneers of the Stone-Campbell tradition. Who else but Moses E. Lard! And who could be more loyal than old Moses, whom Campbell chose to answer J. B. Jeter’s scathing attack, Campbellism Examined?

What disturbed me is something David Reagan said in the article that I did not especially notice until it was quoted in the review. When the reviewer gave it special notice, I was forced to face up to the raw truth of it. Here is part of what the review said:

“The Churches of Christ (of which this periodical is a voice) have historically held an amillennial eschatology, even though there is and has been a premillennial group within the fellowship. Reagan represents a departure from traditional Church of Christ theology, therefore, and the publication of his article in this magazine is surprising . . . The author confesses that he ‘received almost no teaching concerning God’s Prophetic Word when I was growing up in the church,’ a fact that is not surprising in amillennial circles.”

It does not bother me for an “outsider” to note that our folk differ on the millennium, for who doesn’t? But when he can say—and tell the truth—that it is not surprising that we virtually ignore God’s prophetic word, putting us in the class with all others who ignore that precious part of Scripture, that bothers me. How it should quicken us when our bright young men, who are moving into the leadership of our churches, tell us in no uncertain terms that we failed to teach them the whole counsel of God. It is of course a serious indictment. It should cause us to ponder the question, what have we done to prophecy? If we have ignorantly ignored prophecy, that is bad; if we have wilfully ignored it, that is inexcusable.

When David Reagan was growing up in the Churches of Christ he says he received “almost no teaching” on prophecy. Our many readers who have grown up in those same churches will, I suspect, confirm that verdict. It may even be worse than that, for we have almost cultivated an indifference, if not antagonism, to anything prophetic. I recall one of our ministers waving aside the Book of Revelation as an impossible exercise, as something no one can really make sense of, except perhaps in spots and patches. This is a common view among us. Consequently Revelation is virtually ignored. If it should suddenly disappear from the Bible, our folk would make it just fine, for we pay it no mind anyhow. Acts we know and Paul’s epistles we know, but who is Revelation?

And what do we know about Isaiah or Jeremiah or Ezekiel or Zechariah or Daniel? Where among us are these books ever seriously, searchingly studied? Are they even read in our assemblies? Can our most respected teachers give a connected description of what is in these books, their themes, their great messages? Are we neglecting those who were hailed “my servants, the prophets.” And what does the Bible mean when it assures us that “The witness that Jesus gave is the same as the spirit of prophecy.”

This is probably part of what the angel, serving in the role of a prophet in Rev. 19, is saying to the apostle, explaining that the witness of Jesus was in them both alike, in the angel as a prophet and in John as an apostle, and so John should not be bowing down to the angel. This places the role of the prophet alongside that of an apostle, and it shows that the witness of Jesus is in prophecy as well as in the apostolic writings. 1 Pet. 1:10-12 holds prophecy in reverence, noting that “their prophecies were about the grace which was to come to you.” He says further that the Spirit of Christ was in the prophets and that they foretold not only the sufferings of Christ but also “the glories that would come after them,” that is, after the sufferings.

We are aware of the prophetic predictions of Christ’s sufferings, but what attention have we given to the prophecies about the glories following Jesus’ passion? The apostle Peter says the prophets searched diligently about “the grace which was to come to you.” Surely we should make more of their diligent efforts than we have.

Since the New Testament makes so much of prophetic teaching, we should persuade ourselves that, with prayerful commitment, we can understand prophecy and teach it to our people. We tend to be turned off by references to wheels, wings, and plumb-lines, but if the Spirit of Christ was in these servants and if they spoke of the grace that is for us, we must not allow ourselves to be mislead into neglecting what at first appears obscure and difficult, but which in the end bring us great joy.

We might test ourselves by a few references. Take Zech. 14 where it is said that a day is coming in which the Lord will gather all nations to war against Jerusalem. “On that day his feet will stand on the Mount of Olives,” the prophet says as he describes an end-time battle and the ultimate new order in Jerusalem. If this is Messianic, as is usually conceded, what does it refer to? While Jesus’ crucifixion is referred to earlier in the prophecy (Zech. 12:10) according to In. 19:37, “They will look on the one whom they have pierced,” this reference to his standing on the Mount of Olives can hardly refer to anything that has already taken place. This is because the setting is a war involving many nations, and a renewal of Jerusalem is to follow. Moreover, “the Mount of Olives will be split in half from east to west, forming a huge gorge.” Clearly no such thing has yet transpired. To “spiritualize” this in some such way as to make these facts other than what is rather plainly stated is to render the Scriptures meaningless.

For our people to be uncertain as to what all this may mean is excusable, but to ignore such passages, treating them as if they were not even in the Scriptures, is to be unfaithful to the prophetic word.

Take some of the promises in Isaiah, who is called “the great evangelical prophet.” He anticipates a time when “the knowledge of the Lord shall cover the earth as the waters cover the sea,” and if one carefully reads Isa. 11 where that appears she will see that the prophet is describing such a reign of peace and victory for God’s kingdom as the world has not yet known. Is this not an important part of God’s word to us? What are we doing with it?

I was in a gathering of Church of Christ ministers in Dallas sometime back in which Romans 9-11 was under consideration, and even that was rare, for those chapters have not meant much to us, perhaps because they are largely prophetic. I was amazed at the irresponsibility with which these chapters were treated. The prophecy in 11:26, “And so all Israel shall be saved,” was made to refer to the occasional conversion of a Jew (to the Church of Christ of course!), which is to negate the apostle’s argument in these chapters, as well as to ignore plain English. Paul even tells the reader when all Israel will be saved—“when the fulness of the Gentiles be come in.” I remembered my days at Harvard when the impious A.D. Nock, who could not have cared less about any millennial theory, was asked if he understood that Paul looked to the conversion of the Jews in these chapters. Apparently so, apparently so, he bellowed out in his brusque way. I would agree that it is apparent, at least that!

But when a people has its mind made up as to certain prophetic themes—such as God having a plan for the Jews as a people or nation—then its method has to be eisegesis and not exegesis, which is to read into the text one’s preconceived notion rather than to read out of the text what is already there. But this can be a painful ordeal for one who otherwise insists that we should take the Bible for what it says and allow the Scriptures to interpret themselves. So it is better simply to ignore a large portion of Scripture. Perhaps it is better to ignore Scripture than to twist it.

We can and must improve ourselves in reference to “the scriptures of the prophets” (Rom. 16:26). We must read them more as we pray for guidance of the Spirit. We must teach them more, not dogmatically of course, but openly and freely, allowing the Scriptures to lead us where they will, ignoring all fear of labels and brands. And read them more in our assemblies. One book of prophecy holds out a distinct blessing to the one who reads it publicly and to those who will hear it in reverence and obedience (Rev. 1:3).—the Editor