Great Prophecies of the Bible, by Ralph Woodrow

“Great Prophecies,” written by Ralph Woodrow of the Ralph Woodrow Evangelistic Association, looks at four critical end-times topics from a viewpoint that is little discussed today, but which was the dominant viewpoint prior to the explosion of futurism in the early 1800s. This view is called “historicism,” or sometimes “the fulfilled prophecy” interpretation, and takes the position that many of the key prophecies, such as the rise of the Antichrist, the Great Tribulation, and Daniel’s 70^th Week, have already been fulfilled.

Over the years, I have done some research on the “fulfilled prophecy” position, but I was left with more questions than answers. Woodrow, however, has done an outstanding job of both explaining the position — marrying together scripture and historical fact — and anticipating readers’ questions or rebuttals and responding to them in the text. Almost as soon as you say to yourself, “Yes, but what about…,” he anticipates the question and responds to it a few sentences later.  You may not always agree with his answers, but they are always well-reasoned, which is a welcome relief from much of the skin-deep scholarship we read today.

Many in the evangelical community take for granted that the horrific events described in biblical prophecy are yet to come. In large part, this is due to our ignorance of church history. I have to admit, I, too, have fallen into this category. It is easy to read these prophecies and say, “But these have not yet happened — we await a future fulfillment,” but when I read Josephus’ account of the siege and destruction of Jerusalem, as quoted in “Great Prophecies,” for example, I cannot help but see the point of view that the reason the Great Tribulation is unique — that “there shall be none like it” —  is perhaps not due to the number of deaths alone, but also the quality or type of suffering.

Many evangelical Christians may also not be aware that the idea of futurism — that the Book of Revelation, including the rise the Antichrist, is yet future — is also fairly recent. Its origins are attributed to Francisco Ribera (1537-1591) who, after the Catholic Church was fundamentally threatened by the post-Reformation teaching that the Roman Papacy was the Antichrist, wrote a 500-page paper introducing the idea that the Antichrist would not be a succession of individuals found in the seat of the papacy, but rather a literal and singular person who would find his authority during a three-and-one-half-year period at the end of time. This view, intended to deflect the growing belief that the papacy was the fulfillment of the Antichrist prophecies, eventually took widespread hold in the 20^th century.

The “fulfilled prophecy” view does not suggest that the Second Coming is also fulfilled, but it does separate the 70^th Week, the Great Tribulation, the rise of the Antichrist, and other prophecies commonly accepted as future from the Second Coming. In this view, the Second Coming is the only prophecy yet to be fulfilled — thus fulfilling the prophecies that “no man knows the hour or the day” and that Jesus will return “as a thief.”

While there are many elements to the fulfilled prophecy view that I struggle with, particularly certain imprecision in the fulfillment of Matthew 24 and Revelation, I acknowledge that this is a powerful presentation of an alternative view.  I do wish that Woodrow had covered Revelation, and the fulfilled prophecy’s position on these prophecies, but he did not.

Still, as Woodrow has written, “Right or wrong…should we not at least inquire why these men [such as Wyclif, Huss, Luther, Calvin, Knox, Zwingli, Tyndale, Foxe, Newton, and Wesley] felt this way?” I agree. As true students of scripture, with open and humble hearts before the Lord — teachable — I believe that, when arguments are well presented, biblical, and historical, they should be considered. If we reject historicism in favor of futurism, let us do so with full knowledge of the scholarship and history behind this position.

Therefore, even if one walks away disagreeing, at the very least, this book deserves a serious read.