Literal or Symbolic? The Law of Interpretation for End-Time Prophecy
Introduction: The Law of Normal Reading
When approaching prophetic Scripture, particularly the events surrounding The Lord’s Return, readers must establish consistent rules of interpretation to avoid speculation or eisegesis (reading one’s own ideas into the text). The primary interpretive error is to assume prophecy is symbolic when a literal reading would make sense, thereby spiritualizing away specific promises to Israel and the future nature of Christ’s physical reign.
This interpretive framework is a crucial Prophetic Hotspot, establishing the Law of Normal Reading as the foundation for interpreting Daniel, Ezekiel, and Revelation, confirming the literal certainty of the events preceding The Lord’s Return.
The Foundational Principle: The Literal-Grammatical-Historical Method
The principle guiding interpretation is to treat the Bible as one would treat any other form of historical or literary communication.
The Law of Common Language
The primary rule of prophetic interpretation is to adopt a literal approach unless the text itself signals a symbol, a figure of speech, or an explicit warning of non-literal meaning.
| Rule | Description | KJV Example |
| Normal Reading | Scripture is interpreted literally (plain sense) unless a literal reading is utterly impossible or violates a known truth of Scripture. | Christ literally died, literally rose, and literally ascended (Acts 1:9-11). |
| Identify Figures | If a literal reading is impossible, look for the figurative intent. The Bible often interprets its own symbols. | Revelation 1:20: “The seven stars are the angels of the seven churches: and the seven candlesticks which thou sawest are the seven churches.” (KJV) |
| Fulfillment Precedent | If past prophecy was fulfilled literally, future prophecy should also be expected to be fulfilled literally. | Prophecies of Christ’s birth in Bethlehem (Micah 5:2) and death by crucifixion (Psalm 22) were all fulfilled literally. |
| Distinguish Genre | Recognize when the text shifts into poetry (like Psalms) or apocalyptic writing (like Revelation), but even apocalyptic literature contains literal events. | Revelation 19:11-16 is apocalyptic language, but it describes a literal, physical return of Christ on a white horse, as foretold by Zechariah 14:4. |
Export to Sheets
Prophetic Hotspot: Literal vs. Symbolic Application
The single most critical application of this Law is the interpretation of the covenants and the nature of the Kingdom.
- Literal Earthly Promises: God made unconditional, literal, land-based promises to Abraham and David regarding Israel’s future dominion (Genesis 15; 2 Samuel 7). The consistent, literal principle demands that these promises must be fulfilled in a literal, future, earthly Kingdom, which is the Millennium.
- The Error of Spiritualization: The tendency to interpret the Millennium symbolically (as the Church Age) is known as spiritualization. This violates the Law of Normal Reading by denying the literal, physical reign promised in texts like Isaiah 2, Ezekiel 40-48, and Revelation 20. It denies the need for The Lord’s Return to establish a physical throne in Jerusalem.
- The Literal Return: The texts describing The Lord’s Return (Zechariah 14:4 standing on the Mount of Olives, Revelation 1:7 “every eye shall see him”) are so specific, geographic, and visible that applying a symbolic interpretation would violate the plainest sense of the inspired text.
The Return Question: Are You Spiritualizing the King’s Throne?
The nature of the King’s return is defined by the promises He made. If the promises of judgment and reign are merely symbolic, then the hope of a physical, eternal body and a physical New Earth is also undermined.
If the rule of prophetic interpretation demands a literal understanding of the King’s promises, are we ensuring that our reading of the Scriptures respects the physical, historical nature of God’s covenants—that Christ will literally return to a literal Mount of Olives to establish a literal reign in fulfillment of specific promises—or are we inadvertently spiritualizing away the glorious, physical reality of The Lord’s Return?