The question we examine in this lesson is whether the premillennial interpretation of the Bible is literal as claimed.

In our previous lesson, we listed four characteristics of the premillennial view of the Bible. I called these four ideas...

We discussed the first three, and now, in this lesson, we look at the fourth which concerns the premillenial view that Bible prophecies should be taken literally.

How Premillennialists Interpret Bible Prophecy

One of the things that this lesson will bring out, is that although premillennialists claim to interpret Bible prophecy literally, and genuinely think they do, in fact they don't. This is surprising to many people because it’s often taken for granted that premillennialism uses a literal approach to the scriptures whilst others use an allegorical or 'spiritualising' approach. Not so, as we shall see.

What the Premillenialists claim

Again Hal Lindsey’s comment is representative, and Jesse F. Silver makes an interesting claim:

"The real issue between amillennial and premillennial viewpoints is whether prophecy should be interpreted literally or allegorically... all prophecy about past events has been fulfilled literally ... more than 300 prophecies regarding Christ’s first coming, all of which were literally fulfilled..."
Hal Lindsey 'The Late Great Planet Earth', chapter 13.

"Every prophecy pointing to the first advent of Christ was literally fulfilled to the letter in every detail".
Jesse F. Silver in "The Lord’s Return"

If these writers are correct in this assertion, then there is a very good case for expecting all prophecy about the second coming to likewise be fulfilled literally. The premise, however, is wrong.

Problems in these assertions

Let’s examine the basic idea itself, that every prophecy pointing to the first coming of Christ was literally fulfilled. This proposition won't pass the test.

The first problem is that the premise has a catch, because it does not really have in view every prophecy pointing to the first coming of Christ. Many prophecies that figuratively point to the first coming of Christ have been excluded because the writers believe them to refer to Christ’s second coming, not his first. It’s like my claiming that all the apples in a box are green after I've stolen all the red ones. The apples in the box might all now be green, but not all the apples are in the box that ought to be there.

The second problem is that nobody, not even one who makes the claim, really believes that all prophecy is literally fulfilled.

Premillennialists claim to take prophecy literally but they don't. If they did, their theories would be far different from what they are.

Examples of non-literal prophecies of Christ’s first coming

Genesis 3:15 is the first Old Testament prophecy about Jesus. The serpent was told, "He shall bruise your head and you shall bruise his heel."

This is correctly recognised by premillennialists as a reference to the crucifixion (or possibly incorrectly as battles at the time of the millennium) not to a literal contest between Jesus and a snake in which the snake bites Jesus on his literal heel.

Malachi 4:5 is the last Old Testament Prophecy about Jesus. It says, "Behold I will send you Elijah the prophet before the great and terrible day of the Lord comes."

Now Jesus said that Elijah had come (Mtt 11:14 Mrk 9:13). Jesus referred to John the Baptizer who was the herald of Jesus Christ. As most premillennialists correctly understand, the prophecy did not refer literally to Elijah as the herald of Christ. but figuratively to his antitype John the Baptizer.

Many other examples could be given, but these are enough to show that although everything prophesied about Jesus came true it did not all come literally true. Even though premillennialists claim that it did, they cannot keep consistently to that claim when interpreting prophecies like these.

This is true not only of prophecies about Jesus’s first coming, but of other prophecies about him, as the following examples show.

Examples of prophecies that nobody takes literally

Isaiah 11:4 says, "He will strike the earth with the rod of his mouth, and with the breath of his lips he will slay the wicked."

Prophecy is full of symbols like that, which premillennialists do not take literally. Nobody thinks this means literally what it says. Who would imagine that Jesus will be smoking some kind of giant cigar? Whenever Jesus fulfills this prophecy, he will not have a literal rod of any kind in his mouth, will he? And do we imagine that his breath is literally poisonous or fiery like a dragon’s? Of course we don't. Everybody understands such language to be figurative.

Ezekiel 37:24, Hosea 3:5. "And my servant David will be king over them, and they will all have one shepherd... The sons of Israel will return and seek the Lord their God and David their king".

If premillennialists really took prophecy literally, they would believe David, not Jesus, will be their king in the Millennium.

We all understand that the fulfillment of those prophecies is not literal to the letter. It is generally recognised that the name "David" here does not literally mean king David himself. The name stands figuratively for David’s descendant Jesus Christ of whom David was the ancestral type.

Prophetic code is not literal.

We all read "David" in the above passages as prophetic code for Jesus the Messiah. That kind of code is a natural part of prophecy. If prophecy were thoroughly literal, there would be no such thing as prophetic code would there?

Spiritual and 'literal'

We often hear the criticism that the Bible’s prophecies are "allegorised" or "spiritualised". However those who make this criticism do the same themselves if it suits them. Therefore the question is not 'literal' versus 'figurative' as a general principle, as if one is always right and the other always wrong. Rather, it is a matter of deciding which prophecies are correctly taken 'literally', which ought to be taken 'figuratively', and which should be seen as both.

NOTE Unfortunately the meaning of the words "literal" and "figurative" become blurred at this point in our lesson. There is no reason to regard a heavenly and spiritual reality as figurative whilst an earthly reality is literal. If anything, the heavenly is literal, whilst the earthly is figurative, since the earthly is a symbol of the spiritual.

The heavenly tabernacle, for instance, is more literal as the antitype than was the earthly tabernacle which was a figure or shadow of the heavenly (Heb 8:1-2, 9:8-10, 10:1). A spiritual kingdom is more real and true and literal than any earthly kingdom can be.

It is inaccurate and confusing to use the term 'figurative' for things heavenly and spiritual and the term 'literal' for things material and earthly. Premillennialists however tend to use these terms in that way, so I will need to use the terms accommodatively in some instances. To avoid my discomfort and your confusion as much as possible, I have put the terms 'literal' and 'figurative' in single quotes when I use the terms as premillennialists use them.

Examples of prophecies both spiritual and 'literal'

In some cases, a prophecy may have both a 'literal' and a 'figurative' fulfillment, in which case the 'literal' fulfillment may be only a partial satisfaction of the prophecy, and be intended itself as a physical type or symbol of something in the more distant future, something heavenly and eternal.

Hebrews 11:13-16 and 12:22-23 shows that the land promise given to Abraham embodied not just a promise of a physical land, but "a better country that is a heavenly one". In other words the land occupied by the Israelites, though real enough in itself, was merely a shadow of good things to come, namely a heavenly and eternal home.

Acts 2:30-36. Peter refers to 2nd Samuel 7:12-14. God tells David, "I will raise up your descendant after you, and establish the throne of his kingdom for ever."

Peter applied this promise to Christ’s resurrection and ascension after his first coming. Peter even claims that David himself "being a prophet looked ahead and spoke of the resurrection of Christ". This was not applied 'literally' to a material throne in a future millennium on earth, but to the resurrection and ascension of Christ into heaven.

We recognise, however, that Solomon also fulfilled this prophecy to a certain extent. As David’s son he sat on David’s literal earthly throne. However Solomon by no means satisfies the prophecy and oath which God made to David. We see Solomon and his throne as a type of Christ and his heavenly throne. Christ fulfills the prophecy in a spiritual, heavenly, eternal, and perfect way. It is not fair to call this "spiritualising away" the prophecy, because Christ and his throne are arguably more real than Solomon and his throne.

Take special note Premillennialists interpret prophecy with as much "this means that" as anybody else. But they come up with a materialistic or earthly result rather than a spiritual or heavenly. So it’s not a question so much that they interpret the prophecies 'literally' as that they make them figurative of a material kingdom here on earth rather than a spiritual kingdom of heaven.

How the New Testament Interprets Prophecy

Throughout the New Testament, prophecies from the Old Testament are frequently and extensively interpreted. These inspired interpretations demonstrate how Old Testament prophecy ought to be handled. You will observe that the method used is not one of consistently 'literal' interpretation. You'll find examples on almost every opening of your New Testament, including those already given in this lesson. We'll look at just two more.

Examples of prophecies interpreted by the New Testament

Acts 4:26 quotes Psalm 2:2. "Why are the nations in an uproar and the people devising vain things? The kings of the earth took their stand, and the rulers gathered together against the Lord and his Annointed." This was not applied 'literally' to some future war against Jerusalem but to the persecution of Jesus and his church in the first century.

Heb 7:17-28. The writer to the Hebrews refers to Psalm 110:10 where David speaks of the oath God made about Christ. "The Lord has sworn and will not change his mind, Thou art a priest forever according to the order of Melchizedek." The Hebrew writer does not interpret this as 'literal' prophecy of an earthly priesthood. He in fact makes the point, "If he were on earth he would not be a priest at all" because he is of the wrong tribe (Heb 8:4, Heb 7:13-14). You only have to read Hebrews 7 to see how the Hebrew writer "spiritualises" this prophecy, but he certainly doesn't spiritualise it away.

Let’s close this lesson with the same observation with which we closed our previous lesson:

So that we may apply Old Testament prophecies correctly we should do two things...

Scripture Chain

Home | Topics | List | Next