The Gift of Prophecy

Chapter 12 — Dreams and Visions in American Religious History

Michael W. Campbell

One of the most controversial issues in Christian history is the perpetuity of spiritual gifts, most notably, the gift of prophecy. ¹ As already noted in the previous chapter, by the time of the Protestant Reformation both “Luther and Zwingli rejected . . . the claim of all radical visionaries to fresh revelation. Christ’s prophetic office had put an end to free prophecy.” ² In essence, Protestants transformed the prophetic office into the pastoral preaching of the Word. GOP 235.1

In the centuries afterward, especially within an American religious context where Protestants migrated to the New World, prophetic claims had the potential either to augment or expand the borders of the scriptural canon, especially the Bible. ³ While most Christian thinkers agreed that spiritual gifts (charismata) were given by the Holy Spirit to edify the Christian community, the real debate centered on the nature and authority of extra biblical revelation. Despite the initial hesitancy of Reformers such as Luther and Zwingli, during the Evangelical awakenings many individuals claimed to receive divine guidance through dreams and visions. GOP 235.2

By the time Ellen Harmon (later White) received her first vision in December 1844, there was a rich culture of visions within the American religious marketplace. According to one historian there was an estimated 50 prophets among Millerite Adventists, with as many as 200 seers across America during the 1840s. ⁴ In order for us to understand this rich cultural context of dreams and visions, it is necessary to examine the development of ideas that led to such an environment. GOP 235.3

At the heart of the debate was the definition of canon. Some advocated for a “closed” canon (cessationism) versus an “open” canon (noncessationism). The very topic suggests a contradiction in terms. It is quite natural for some to view an “open” canon with suspicion because it has a tendency to provide sanction for new ideas. This convenient “loophole” could be maliciously exploited for various individuals to promote themselves. ⁵ While it is not possible within the constraints of this paper to survey all American visionaries, this paper seeks to better understand the historical context that allowed for such an openness to dreams and visions, as well as the incredible diversity and creativity among antebellum American prophets. GOP 236.1