Leonard Verduin writing about the Cross

I posted a little while back commenting on Leonard Verduin’s treatment of the case of Michael Servetus in whose death John Calvin seems to have played some kind of significant part.

Well, I’m still reading that book. My incessant bad habit is starting books before I’ve finished. This begins to multiply itself several times over and…well, I’m sure you get the picture. So this morning I put aside Jesus and the Eyewitnesses by Richard Bauckham, The Resurrection of the Son of God by N.T Wright, and an easier-going Sci-fi tome, as I realised that I really am so close to the end of Verduin’s book now that if I just concentrate, I might actually be able to finish it…

My reading habits aside, I wanted to share this beautiful paragraph. Verduin writes fantastically throughout the book. But you get these little moments where the depth of understanding that he has acquired and which so often feels close at hand suddenly surfaces and transports you from the largely historical framework in which he has been working, to something more profound.

So Verduin then, speaking of the Cross:

‘In authentic Christianity the Cross is God’s most emphatic no to man’s yes, His most emphatic yes to man’s no. A clear example is to be found in Galatians 6:12, where St. Paul pits a religion of human achievement and merit (of which circumcision was the symbol among the people whom the Apostle was opposing) against a religion of grace. He brings the issue into sharpest focus by saying “They constrain you to be circumcised; only lest they should suffer persecution for the cross of Christ.” The Cross is a sweeping declaration of man’s inability to save himself from his predicament; this is bad news for every man who has not as yet capitulated to the speech from the beyond; hence it entails persecution against those who have so capitulated. When one experiences the hostility which the Gospel of grace is certain to encounter as it collides with unhumbled man, then one experiences the Cross. This is the one and only meaning Cross-bearing has in the New Testament writings. To bear the Cross is to experience the dislike which confirmed unbelief is wont to heap upon the Christ and upon those that have aligned themselves with Him.’

Beautifully said. The Cross really does stand at the Crux of human experience.

Verduin’s cause in general, though, is to address what he terms ‘sacralism’ in the Reformation movement, ie. the vision of Church and State in harmony, and all that comes with it. Thus opening the following paragraph:

“It goes without saying that when Christianity is thrust into the sacral pattern Cross-breaing becomes obsolete, there being not further occasion or opportunity for it.” He rather wryly and deftly explains what the Cross then became to the Reformed Church. “It was…transvaluated… It became an object that henceforth occupied a prominent place in the Church’s furniture.”

In other words, where the idea that church and state are somehow in harmony remains even in the back of the mind, the Cross stands only as a symbol of what Christ did in achieving salvation. While I of course rejoice in this fundamental message of the Cross, in the New Testament, and in the vision of those Verduin chiefly writes about in his book, the Anabaptists, those who went against the grain of the Reformation, the Cross remains something which we too will have to bear, though not for the sins of the world.

This topic is not without controversy I’m sure, but I’m happy to suffer controversy for the Cross of Christ!

The testimony of Jesus is the spirit of prophecy (Rev 19:10)

Revelation 19:10 Then I fell at his feet to worship him. But he *said to me, “Do not do that; I am a fellow servant of yours and your brethren who hold the testimony of Jesus; worship God. For the testimony of Jesus is the spirit of prophecy.” (NASB)

This verse is one that I have heard quoted a few times and interpreted in different, interesting ways, but none of the interpretations I have heard have quite convinced me. The part of the verse I am really referring to is the very last bit: “For the testimony of Jesus is the spirit of prophecy.” It’s an unusual wording to get our heads around. One interpretation used by (I have to say) one of my favourite authors/speakers/leaders, and upon which he based an entire (and otherwise extremely good!) book, makes the ‘is’ in the middle into a kind of equals sign, so: “For the testimony of Jesus = the spirit of prophecy.” His interpretation then applies to testimony in general, and how sharing a testimony can act as a kind of prophetic word so that what was shared in the testimony has the potential to happen for someone else too.

I would not debate the certain possibility that spiritually, this could indeed happen. As I said, I think the book and the man that wrote it is wonderful, but I have to say I don’t quite think that’s what this verse is getting at.

What could it be then? “For the testimony of Jesus is the spirit of prophecy.” What is the guy talking about? For a start, John has just tried to worship this kind of angelic being who is talking to him – whether he supposed it was Jesus or not, I don’t know. All we know is that the being then says he is actually a fellow servant with John and with those who hold the testimony of Jesus. So here the testimony is first mentioned in this context. Within the wider context of Revelation and indeed the New Testament the word seems to me to hold quite a strong courtroom connotation which is sometimes lost in modern usage (to ‘witness to Jesus’ these days is to tell your neighbour about Him over coffee, or something; not wrong, but just not the full idea contained in the Greek word or the New Testament usage thereof). The judicial usage suggests that these brethren have a truthful testimony which they can share in heaven’s court (and maybe doing so on earth makes it heard in heaven anyway) which leads to a verdict rendered in favour of the saints and against the accuser (see especially Revelation 12:10-11). This, I think, is a bit more of what it means when it speaks of the ‘testimony of Jesus’.

So why is this ‘testimony of Jesus’ the ‘spirit of prophecy’? What does this phrase now mean?

To me, at least in this verse, another word I can think of for spirit is ‘essence’. Not that it’s a suitable alternative to the Greek word, it merely helps lead us towards what I think this verse is saying. The Greek word itself is ‘pneuma’, which can simply mean ‘breath’ or ‘wind’ as well as ‘spirit’. So we could say that the life-force of prophecy, its very breath, is this: to testify, bear witness to, Jesus.

This I think begins to fit the context rather well – always a good sign when interpreting a verse. There’s been a lot of prophetic stuff going on! John’s been blown away with some of these incredible revelations. And so when at this point this fellow has been instructing him in writing down these true words of God and John thinks it appropriate to worship this being, he tells John not to do so but to worship God. And then in saying this phrase “For the testimony of Jesus is the spirit of prophecy,” I would think that the emphasis would have been heard on ‘testimony of Jesus’, in other words, what ultimately all this prophecy is leading to, is a revelation, understanding and knowledge of Jesus through witness to Him, because ultimately that is what true prophecy is about.

Because that is what true prophecy is about, is it not? I don’t have a lot of time for prophetic words that go nowhere near Jesus and don’t make me want to worship Him more. And in fact very often such prophetic words might often come from people who would rather you worship them. But the spirit of true prophecy, the essence of what it is to really prophesy, is to bear witness to Jesus. “For the testimony of Jesus is the spirit of prophecy.” Or perhaps a helpful retranslation in summary would be: “For the spirit of prophecy is to bear witness to Jesus!”

I hope this makes sense. I just thought it might be worth sharing as a helpful lead into thinking about this verse!