UNDERSTANDING PROPHECY: A Biblical-Theological Approach,
Alan S. Bandy & Benjamin L. Merkle, Kregel Academic, Grand Rapids MI,
2015
The aim of this book is to give the reader a framework of
how to interpret any passage in the context of the Bible (p.9). The book is unique
because the authors have different views of prophecy. Brandy is a historic
premillennialist and Merkle is an amillennialist, however both seem to be
writing from a covenant theology view. The emphasis seems to uplift areas they
have in common and downplay the differences. They also write from a
biblical-theological approach, as the title states.
The book is divided into three sections:
Chapters 1-3, deal with the general subject of prophecy and
the biblical-theological approach. They clearly uphold inspiration pointing out
that “Prophecy is the vehicle for divine revelation” (p. 17). They clearly
bring out that the term eschatology is “slippery” term referring to different
aspects of the term which can be all-encompassing theologically. They give good
keys to understanding prophecy, including the progressive nature of prophecy,
thematic, Christocentric, and to be seen from a Biblical-theological
perspective. Their general view is to downplay the popular culture caught up in
the idea that prophecy is mainly predictive of the future (although they do not
deny it, they certainly downplay it), looking more at historical context and
its relevance to the original readers. They clearly hold that most prophecy is
not predictive in nature, rather centers upon aspects of repentance, social
justice, and theological understanding in the historical context of the
prophet. Prophecy is primarily forth-telling, and only a small part is
fore-telling. They hold that the messages of the prophets are encapsulated in
three points:
- The
covenant has been broken, therefore repent!
- If you
refuse to repent, then judgment.
- Yet,
there is hope beyond the judgment for a glorious, future restoration.
These points are well taken. They go on to deal with the
forms of prophecy (poetry, pose, apocalyptic, and the challenge of symbolism
(which is an attack on the dispensational method). It gives the reader their
idea of what biblical theology is, and how it deals with prophecy. To their
credit they declare the important presupposition of biblical theology, which
all can appreciate:
·
The Bible is God’s Word.
·
God’s Word has a unified message.
·
The unified message of God’s Word centers on
Jesus.
·
Jesus’ death, resurrection, and ascension are
the climax of redemption history.
Chapters 4-6 focus on Old Testament prophecy. In these
chapters they center up the types of Old Testament prophecy: unconditional,
conditional, and fulfilled prophecy. They take time to discuss restoration
prophecies (Chapter 5). They admit that many passages point to the restoration
of Israel,
however, they are overly cautious of literal fulfillment of these prophecies.
They seem to be more than willing that those should be interpreted mainly
symbolically. The reasons in the nature of biblical religion, the unique genre
of biblical prophecy, symbolic manner in which the New Testament interprets Old
Testament prophecies, and the role of Jesus’ death and resurrection in
salvation history. They seem to be saying that these descriptions are fulfilled
in some type of code—“The meaning is not expressed in the actual language, but
through the actual language of the prophecies” (page 123). The last area they
center upon is the Messianic Prophecies that center upon the three offices of
Christ—priest, prophet, and king.
Chapters 7-10 deal with the New Testament prophecies. This
section is divided into three areas: the coming of Messiah in the gospels and
Acts; the epistles, and the book of Revelation. In this section they deal with
major prophecy areas in the New Testament. I was especially interested in their
comments on the Olivet Discourse. I was somewhat unsatisfied in their
treatment; much was oversimplification on the views, especially the futurist
view. Although I found their view, “Already-Not Yet” was somewhat interesting, and
brought in some good points. Their comments about “left behind” are noteworthy.
In the epistles they center upon the last days. They reject
a pretribulational rapture, and the doctrine of the any moment return of
Christ. They clearly hold that at least four events must happen before the
return of Christ—the gospel preached to the whole world; the conversion of all Israel; the
great tribulation; and the coming of Antichrist. They fail to see any
differences between the gospels, epistles, and Revelation; common among
Covenant theologians.
On Revelation they readily amid that it is one of the most
difficult books of the Bible to interpret (p. 224). They take the view that the
key of understanding symbolism and spend much of the chapter of this. In the
areas of book they consistently chose the figurative or symbolic
interpretation. This is true of their overall approach to prophecy saying in
their conclusion: “We must resist becoming obsessed with knowing the details of
the future because it takes us beyond Scripture into the realm of speculation”
(p. 242).
This work on prophecy centers upon common elements between
the two authors. The only place that shows disagreement is the two appendixes,
and they are very limited: Future conversion of Israel
with Bandy seeing it a mass conversion of ethnic Israel in the future. Merkle on the
other hand sees it as referring to the Ethnic elect remnant through all
history. The other hand is the meaning of the Millennium; which Bandy holds a
historical premillennialist and Merkle holding to the amillennialist view.
Otherwise, in the major portion of the book one would be hard press to see any
difference between the two. There are more differences between historical
premillennialist and amillennialist than what are given in the book. Part of
the reason for this is both are coming from a Covenant theological view. They
downplay literal interpretation of prophecy and the futurist views, and magnify
the non-literal view. Do not get me wrong, there are areas in the book that all
will agree with, but to me it was lacking and not a satisfying treatment of the
subject. They seem to have sacrificed their distinctiveness on the altar of
unity.
I received this book free
from Kregel Publications for the purpose of reviewing it. I was not required to
write a positive review. The opinions I have expressed are my own. I am
disclosing this in accordance with the Federal Trade Commission's 16 CFR, Part
255.
