Beware of Interpreting Bible Prophecies Too Literally Free Reprint Article

NotifySnack

Christian Articles for All of your Publishing Needs!

LIKE US

Translate this Page Here

Word Count: 1923

Send Article To Friend

Print/Use Article

Contact Max Aplin

Beware of Interpreting Bible Prophecies Too Literally

by Max Aplin
1/13/2025 / Prophecy

When we read any passage in the Bible, it is very important that we interpret it in the right way.

Most of Scripture is meant to be interpreted literally, which means that the words should be taken in their most plain sense.

So, for example, when we read that Jesus fed 5000 men, plus women and children, with five loaves of bread and two fish (Matt 14:15-21), this should be taken literally. Matthew is telling us that Jesus actually fed these people with only this amount of food to start with.

However, there are also many biblical passages that should not be interpreted literally.

So, for example, when David says that God is his rock (e.g., Psalm 18:2), this should not be taken literally. David doesn’t mean that God is actually made of rock. Rather, this is what is known as a metaphor, by which David means that God has rock-like qualities, even though He is not literally made of rock.

If a Bible passage is meant to be understood literally, then failing to take it literally is obviously going to lead to wrong conclusions about what it is saying. Similarly, if a text is meant to be understood non-literally, then failing to take it non-literally would be a big mistake.

It is very common for readers of the Bible to go wrong in each of these ways.

Biblical prophecies

One common way in which some Christians interpret the Bible literally when they shouldn’t is when interpreting prophecies. There are many who claim that biblical prophecies should always be interpreted literally unless the context clearly indicates that there should be a non-literal interpretation.

However, this approach doesn’t do justice to what we find in the Bible itself. The following examples make this clear.

Isaiah 40:3-4

In Isaiah 40:3-4 Isaiah prophesies:

‘3 A voice cries: “In the wilderness prepare the way of the LORD; make straight in the desert a highway for our God. 4 Every valley shall be lifted up, and every mountain and hill be made low; the uneven ground shall become level, and the rough places a plain.”’

(Scripture readings in this article are from the English Standard Version.)

The second half of v. 3 and v. 4 prophesy the construction of a straight, flattened out highway, and there is no indication in the context that this verse should not be interpreted literally.

However, Luke 3:2-6 tells us that this prophecy was fulfilled in the ministry of John the Baptist. So the construction of a highway is a metaphor of preparation, because John prepared the way for Jesus.

It is true that John ministered in the literal wilderness (e.g., Luke 3:2). So the reference in v. 3 to the wilderness should be interpreted literally.

However, the rest of v. 3 and v. 4 contains an example of a biblical prophecy that should not be interpreted literally, even though there is no indication in the context that there should be a non-literal interpretation.

Ezekiel 37:24

In Ezekiel 37:24 we read:

‘My servant David shall be king over them, and they shall all have one shepherd.’

This verse refers to David being king at a time that is future from the time of prophesying, and there is no indication in the context that this prophecy should not be interpreted literally.

However, Ezekiel spoke these words hundreds of years after king David died, so it makes no sense to think that this prophecy is referring to the literal king David.

In fact, ‘David’ here refers figuratively to Jesus, who is the royal son of David (e.g., Luke 18:38).

This is another example, then, of a biblical prophecy that should not be interpreted literally, even though there is no indication in the context that there should be a non-literal interpretation.

Amos 9:11

In Amos 9:11 God says:

‘In that day I will raise up the booth of David that is fallen and repair its breaches, and raise up its ruins and rebuild it as in the days of old...’

This verse prophesies the raising up, repairing and rebuilding of the booth, or shelter, of David, and there is no indication in the context that the prophecy should not be interpreted literally.

This prophecy is quoted by James in Acts 15:16. James understands the raising up, repairing and rebuilding of the booth of David to be fulfilled in the ministry of Christ, probably both His earthly and heavenly ministries. Nothing else makes sense in the context of Acts 15.

At first sight Amos 9:11 might have seemed to be prophesying the restoration of the Davidic monarchy in a succession of kings. However, this interpretation (which is in itself far from literal) would have been a misinterpretation. The real fulfillment was even less literal and actually concerned Jesus’ ministry.

Nor is it possible that there were two levels of fulfillment of this prophecy, with the first referring to a succession of kings. That wouldn’t fit with Jewish history, in which there was no restoration of the Davidic monarchy after the exile.

Amos 9:11 is therefore another example of a biblical prophecy that should not be interpreted literally, even though there is no indication in the context that there should be a non-literal interpretation.

Malachi 4:5-6

In Malachi 4:5-6 God says:

‘5 Behold, I will send you Elijah the prophet before the great and awesome day of the LORD comes. 6 And he will turn the hearts of fathers to their children and the hearts of children to their fathers, lest I come and strike the land with a decree of utter destruction.’

In this passage God says that He will send Elijah the prophet, and there is no indication in the context that this is not referring to the literal Elijah.

This prophecy was given hundreds of years after Elijah’s ministry that we read about in 1 and 2 Kings. So the prophecy has nothing to do with that ministry.

However, nor does the prophecy mean that God will send the literal Elijah to earth again. Matthew 17:11-13 tells us that John the Baptist is the Elijah that the Old Testament prophesied about, and Matthew has to be referring to the prophecy in Malachi 4:5-6.

Malachi 4:5-6 is another example, then, of a biblical prophecy that should not be interpreted literally, even though there is no indication in the context that there should be a non-literal interpretation.

Cautious in interpretation

The examples we have looked at show that some Bible prophecies that should not be interpreted literally have no indication in the context that they shouldn’t be interpreted literally. It is simply not the case that whenever there is a Bible prophecy that is supposed to be taken non-literally, the context will make this clear.

Therefore, when we come across a biblical prophecy, unless it is immediately obvious how to interpret it, we should be cautious and start by being open to the possibility of a non-literal interpretation. Any other approach doesn’t do justice to what we find in the Bible itself.

False expectations of a new temple

My main motivation for writing this article is to try to oppose some wrong ideas about the future that many Christians have.

There are many believers today who think that the Bible prophesies the existence of another literal temple in Jerusalem.

Those who think this are making a terrible mistake.

According to Scripture, the sacrificial system was right at the heart of how the Jerusalem temple was designed and what it was all about. Therefore, a future Jerusalem temple without sacrifices is a contradiction in terms.

However, we know that Jesus’ sacrifice on the cross has made all temple sacrifices obsolete (Heb 7:11-10:18).

What is more, the Bible describes both the individual Christian’s body, and Christians corporately, as God’s temple (1 Cor 3:16; 6:19; 2 Cor 6:16; Eph 2:21). The reason for this description is that under the New Covenant in Christ’s blood we are now God’s dwelling place instead of the Jerusalem temple.

It is therefore inconceivable that God wants there to be another literal temple in Jerusalem at some point in the future. Thinking that He does is a very serious error.

Those who claim that the Bible does prophesy the existence of another literal temple appeal to various passages as support for their view. The main ones are Ezekiel 40-47; Daniel 9:27; 11:31; 12:11; Matthew 24:15 and 2 Thessalonians 2:3-4.

However, none of these passages should be interpreted in this way. Some of them are referring to the literal Jerusalem temple that was destroyed in the first century AD. And some of them are referring to a non-literal temple. But there is no suggestion in these texts that it is God’s will for another temple to be built in Jerusalem.