Precisely When?
Prophecy in the Bible very often has a near- term and a long- term, or dual-aspect, outworking. Near term would have resonated with people at the time the prophecy was given. Long term would be fulfilled later – and some fulfilments remain as yet in our collective future, even today. Some of the prophecies of Jesus’ birth are clear examples. Virtually all prophecy seems to incorporate this duality in outworking.
Jewish people refer to the Hebrew Scriptures (“Old Testament”) as the Tanakh, a word based on the first letter of each of the three types of literature which comprise it – the Torah (“the Law”), the Nevi’im (“the prophets”), and the Ketuvim (“the writings”). It is in the Tanakh that we find most prophetic utterance as God communicates with His chosen people. The New Testament also contains a significant amount of prophecy, the substantial majority of which expands on passages from the Tanakh, such as those in Ezekiel, Jeremiah, Zechariah, Daniel and Isaiah.It is estimated that the book of Revelation has around 300 references or allusions to the Tanakh prophets, so attempting to understand this without having the necessary essential background could be, well, challenging! (This may explain why it is not uncommon to hear sermons on Revelation which include the first few chapters on the historical New Testament churches, but which then jump directly to the end of the book, describing Jesus’ glorious and future reign.)
The Messiah Himself Jesus considered the Tanakh of supreme importance. When asked by His disciples about the timing and circumstances of His return and the end of the present age, Yeshua referred them to the prophecies written in the Book of Daniel – “let the reader understand” (Matthew 24:15). The passage in question concerns the “abomination that causes desolation”, and describes the desecration of the Jewish temple in Jerusalem. The disciples would immediately have recalled an event from their relatively recent history, when the powerful foreign ruler Antiochus Epiphanes had slaughtered a pig on the temple altar and erected a statue of Zeus in the Holy of Holieswith his own face on it. Furthermore, they would have recognised these events (as indeed have most theologians), as a fulfilment of Daniel’s prophecy. Yet now they hear Yeshua telling them that something similar will happen again in the future, and it will be one of the most significant indicators of His imminent return.
Whilst Yeshua’s disciples would have certainly evidently have ‘got the point’, believers are inclined to divide into different warring factions when it comes to interpreting His message. Why might that be, and what principles can we suggest for approaching Scripture in ways which will help us navigate the confusion arising from numerous competing theologians and prophecy “experts”?
Preconceptions
Our starting point, we would suggest, is to consider with what preconceptions we might subconsciously or even consciously approach Scripture. After all, things do look very different when wearing literal sun glasses, or indeed proverbial “rose-tinted” glasses. And therein lies our first challenge. Should we interpret the Bible in general, and prophecy in particular, in a literal or a spiritual sense? In principle the answer to this question should be straight-forward, after all, it is estimated that around 300 Tanakh prophecies were literally fulfilled by the Lord at His first coming, and that over 80% of Bible prophecy as a whole has likewise already demonstrably happened in recorded history. No-one would argue that Biblical prophecy concerning the destruction of Jerusalem and the respective exiles of the tribes of Israel and then Judah should be interpreted “spiritually”. Why then should we therefore suddenly change our interpretative paradigm?
The simple reason that many do just that, is that the New Testament itself uses the literal and historical events of the Tanakh to give us rich insights into the life and ministry of Yeshua, as well as providing vital spiritual lessons for believers. The reality of “types” and “shadows” of Jesus throughout the Tanakh gives real encouragement as to the dependability of Scripture and God’s over-arching salvation plan. For example, Messiah’s atoning death is best understood by reference to the Passover, whilst the Exodus of the Jewish people from Egypt, their struggles in the wilderness, and eventual inheritance of the Promised Land, all have a great deal to teach Yeshua’s followers of every generation (1 Corinthians 10:1-13). So, why then should believers not also have licence to do the same with apply the same principle to prophecy, as many presume to do? So, why then should believers not also apply the same principle to prophecy, as many presume to do? Whilst this may seem logical and therefore reasonable, we should sound a note of caution – neither Jesus nor the New Testament writers seem to have taken this approach.
On the face of it, it therefore seems remarkable that there is apparently a theological consensus that Messiah’s prediction concerning a future desolation of the temple should in fact be understood literally, yet when it comes to Revelation, opinion is divided. In order to make sense of this, readers should be aware that a great many teachers believe that literal Bible prophecy came to an end with the destruction of Jerusalem in AD 70, and thereafter any as yet unfulfilled prophecy should be interpreted “spiritually”. This perspective of Replacement Theology is, we would argue, a distorting and misleading lens through which to view Scripture. It fails to take into account the fact that whilst some of the details Yeshua gave us in the Olivet Discourse have historically taken place, others are yet future. Similarly, prophetic passages such as Zechariah’s description of a Jewish controlled Jerusalem being a huge flash point for international conflict are surely inexplicable unless interpreted as literal and closely linked to the circumstances of the Lord’s Second Coming!(The last few pages of chapter 4 are worth reviewing for readers unconvinced on this matter.)
The fact that Daniel’s prophecy appears to refer to at least three separate events (at the time of the Maccabees, the Roman invasion, and a yet future occasion) – all broadly similar in nature – surely illustrates the principle that many Biblical prophecies have dual or even multiple fulfilments. Various other examples could be cited. However, the important lesson is to realise that some of the heated arguments between “experts” about whether “this (event) is that (prophetic fulfilment)”, with those on opposing sides trying to prove each other wrong, may be entirely misplaced. There is room for both perspectives to be true, yet each being part of the a bigger picture. This matter highlights another pair of glasses which can distort our understanding of Scripture – approaching God’s Word through the lens of the Greek or Western mindset.
Jewish or Greek?
A Biblically authentic Jewish approach to Scripture differs in many ways from how Western believers typically engage with the Bible. Although we do not have space to explore this theme in detail here, we do commend authors Steve Maltz and Jacob Prasch in particular for those who are willing to allow the Lord to challenge unhelpful preconceptions. Suffice it to draw a simple contrast to make the point. The Western mindset is to approach Scripture as an intellectual puzzle, in which a particular passage can only ever be interpreted in one “correct” way. The “Hebraic” approach is that the Word of God should lead us to worship the Lord in “spirit and in truth” in a way which increasingly transforms us into His likeness, and that Scripture presents many shades of meaning, both literal and spiritual, but complementing each other.Understanding the reality of multiple prophetic fulfilments is therefore easier, we would suggest, for those who seek to embrace the Hebraic mindset. However, we caution against assuming that all Jewish methods ofinterpreting Scripture are valid or helpful. We discount mysticism, such as the Kabbala, for example.
Most Jews also part company with believers, of course, concerning the person of Messiah Yeshua. Here too, understanding the principle of dual or multiple fulfilment of prophecy could help to break down these barriers. A classic example is Isaiah’s prophecy concerning the Virgin Birth with its fulfilment at our Lord’s first coming, but this also had a more immediate historical fulfilment concerning another righteous man born to a young woman – the Hebrew term “alma” being applicable to both events. Regarding this division between Jew and Gentile, Paul writes passionately about Messiah tearing down the “wall of hostility” through His death (Ephesians 2:14), and a future time of national repentance towards Yeshua (Romans 11:25-26). The question for believers (one we addressed in the book “Ruth – a Prophetic Parable”), is what part we might yet play in helping God’s ancient covenant people on this journey of realisation. Will we be around during the Great Tribulation to point them, and others, towards Messiah, or will we have already departed planet Earth? We mention this simply to reiterate that Dispensationalism is another lens through which to view Scripture, and readers should be aware of this fact, regardless of their position on it.
As a final reflection on the matter of Scripture having multiple shades of meaning, let us bear in mind that Bible prophecy also contains vivid imagery and rich symbolism. Beasts and mountains often represent empires or kingdoms, seas refer to peoples or chaos, and so on. If there is one lesson for us to learn in all these things, it must surely be to approach the Word of God with great humility.
<<<<>>>>
Simon Pease is author of the recent book “Ruth – A Prophetic Parable” Sub-titled “How does the story of Ruth relate to YOU today?” He teaches on the unity of Scripture and contributes to the UK magazine Sword.
https://christian-publications-int.com/Ruth_A_Prophetic_Parable.html
Recent Comments