In recent years, many congregations within our Churches of Christ fellowship have explored incorporating elements of Passover into our church practice. Usually this looks like a Wednesday night special event where the Passover seder is used to point to Christ. This can have value of course, and while these efforts often aim to deepen our understanding of Scripture's rich typology, we must carefully examine whether our theological framework remains consistent when we adopt such practices. In other words, due to the majority belief in amillennialism I have a bone to pick.
The Hermeneutical Question at the Heart of Our Inconsistency
The core issue facing our Churches of Christ congregations who celebrate Passover while rejecting Israel's ongoing redemptive role stems from our approach to biblical interpretation. While we have long championed a commitment to Scripture, we must ask ourselves: Are we consistently applying a literary-grammatical-historical hermeneutic to all biblical texts?
This hermeneutic—which interprets Scripture according to its literary genre, grammatical structure, and historical context—when applied consistently, leads inexorably toward a dispensational understanding of Israel and redemptive history. When we read biblical promises to Israel in their plain, normal sense, as their original audiences would have understood them, we must acknowledge God's continuing program for national Israel alongside His work through the church.
The Inherent Connection Between Passover and Israel
Passover fundamentally commemorates God's deliverance of the physical nation of Israel from Egyptian bondage. It is inseparably linked to the Jewish people, their history, and God's covenant promises to them. When our congregations celebrate Passover but reject modern Israel's significance in God's ongoing plan, we essentially appropriate Jewish traditions while denying the very people to whom these traditions belong.
A consistent literary-grammatical-historical reading of Romans 11:29 reveals that "God's gifts and calling are irrevocable." The celebration of Passover while divorcing it from its Jewish context and future fulfillment represents a hermeneutical inconsistency that cannot be sustained if we truly honor Scripture's intended meaning.
The Problem with Inconsistent Hermeneutics
Within our Churches of Christ heritage, we have historically embraced an amillennial view that spiritualizes many promises to Israel. However, this approach requires us to shift our hermeneutical principles when moving from historical narratives to prophetic literature. If we read the Exodus account literally—acknowledging God's deliverance of a physical nation from physical bondage—hermeneutical consistency demands we apply the same approach to prophecies about Israel's future.
God's covenant with Abraham included specific land promises (Genesis 15:18-21) with explicit geographical boundaries. The literary-grammatical-historical meaning of these texts points to literal land promises to Abraham's physical descendants. If we celebrate Passover—which commemorates the initial fulfillment of God's promise to bring Abraham's descendants out of foreign bondage and toward the Promised Land—while denying Israel's future in that same land, we employ inconsistent interpretive methods.
Romans 9-11: Demanding Hermeneutical Consistency
Romans 9-11 presents the clearest New Testament teaching on Israel's future. In Romans 11:1, Paul asks, "Has God rejected His people?" and emphatically answers, "By no means!" When Paul discusses Israel throughout these chapters, the literary-grammatical-historical context makes clear he refers to ethnic Israel, not the church.
The distinction between Israel and the church becomes evident when Paul speaks of his "kinsmen according to the flesh" (Romans 9:3) and specifies that they are "Israelites, to whom belongs the adoption, the glory, the covenants..." (Romans 9:4). A consistent hermeneutic recognizes that when Paul declares "all Israel will be saved" (Romans 11:26), he means exactly what his original audience would have understood—the future salvation of national Israel.
Prophetic Literature and Its Plain Meaning
The establishment of modern Israel in 1948 and Jerusalem's reunification in 1967 align remarkably with the literal meaning of numerous biblical prophecies. Ezekiel 36-37 depicts a physical regathering of Israel to their land in unbelief, followed by a spiritual regeneration. When interpreted according to the same literary-grammatical-historical principles we apply to biblical history, these prophecies point to events we're witnessing in our lifetime.
Zechariah 12-14 predicts a time when "Jerusalem will be trampled by Gentiles until the times of the Gentiles are fulfilled" (Luke 21:24) and when God will "pour out on the house of David and the inhabitants of Jerusalem a spirit of grace and pleas for mercy, so that, when they look on me, on him whom they have pierced, they shall mourn for him" (Zechariah 12:10). These prophecies, read plainly, indicate a future for national Israel in which they recognize their Messiah.
Passover's Complete Fulfillment
Jesus Himself connected Passover to a future fulfillment when He said, "I will not drink again of this fruit of the vine until that day when I drink it new with you in my Father's kingdom" (Matthew 26:29). A literary-grammatical-historical reading of this statement points toward a concrete, future fulfillment in a restored kingdom.
The historical practice of Passover included the declaration, "Next year in Jerusalem!" This eschatological hope, rooted in the same prophetic texts that speak of Israel's future restoration, reveals the inherent connection between Passover and Israel's redemptive future.
A Call for Hermeneutical Integrity in Churches of Christ
As a fellowship that has historically emphasized a "Bible only" approach, we must be willing to follow Scripture's plain meaning wherever it leads, even when it challenges our traditional interpretations. When we apply a consistent literary-grammatical-historical hermeneutic to all Scripture, including prophetic literature, we are led naturally toward a dispensational understanding that recognizes God's distinct yet complementary programs for Israel and the church.
This does not diminish the church's significance but rather magnifies God's faithfulness to all His covenant promises. A dispensational understanding simply recognizes that God works through different administrations or arrangements across redemptive history while maintaining His unchanging character and purposes.
Conclusion
For Churches of Christ congregations that observe Passover while denying Israel's ongoing redemptive significance, there exists a fundamental hermeneutical inconsistency that undermines our claim to honor Scripture's authority. True fidelity to Scripture requires us to apply the same literary-grammatical-historical principles to all biblical texts, including those that speak of Israel's future.
When we approach Passover, we should do so with a full recognition of its historical significance for Israel, its present spiritual application for Christians, and its future fulfillment when national Israel recognizes her Messiah. Only then can we claim a consistent hermeneutic that truly honors Scripture's intended meaning.
The biblical narrative, when read according to consistent interpretive principles, reveals God's distinct programs for Israel and the church within one cohesive redemptive plan. As Churches of Christ congregations committed to biblical authority, we must be willing to follow Scripture's plain meaning even when it leads us to reconsider cherished theological traditions. Only then will our celebration of Passover reflect a truly consistent approach to biblical interpretation that honors the God who declares, "I the LORD do not change" (Malachi 3:6).
