How to Study Biblical Prophecy Revelation 7:4-10

How to Study Biblical Prophecy Bible prophecy is not given so we make a calendar – it’s given to mold our character.”

The study of prophecy can be confusing, controversial, and daunting. How does one determine the meaning of a prophetic text? Why do conclusions vary so drastically? How do we know which conclusion is valid, accurate, and true to biblical teaching? The answer to these questions is largely dependent on ones method of interpretation, hermeneutics, or lenses

What “lenses” are you using?

Basic things to remember Take your time – reach conclusions slowly Keep the big picture in mind – don’t get lost in the details Be comfortable with not knowing – there are some questions to which we don’t have answers – and that is okay

Daniel didn’t understand it all. Daniel 12:8-9 And I heard, but I understood not: then said I, O my Lord, what shall be the end of these things? (9) And he said, Go thy way, Daniel: for the words are closed up and sealed till the time of the end.

The apostles didn’t have all their questions answered either. Acts 1:6-7 When they therefore were come together, they asked of him, saying, Lord, wilt thou at this time restore again the kingdom to Israel? (7) And he said unto them, It is not for you to know the times or the seasons, which the Father hath put in his own power.

The method of interpretation one uses is the “lens” through which biblical prophecy is understood The method of interpretation you use will largely determine the conclusions that you draw. This issue (hermeneutics) is so important to our understanding of prophecy that Pentecost begins his book Things to Come by devoting the first 64 pages and 4 chapters on this topic alone.

The method of interpretation one uses is the “lens” through which biblical prophecy is understood Pentecost states in his opening paragraph of the book,“No question facing the student of Eschatology is more important than the question of the method to be employed in the interpretation of the prophetic Scriptures. The adoption of different methods of interpretation has produced the variant eschatological positions and accounts for the divergent views within a system that confront the student of prophecy. The basic differences between the premillennial and amillennial schools and between the pretribulation and posttribulation rapturists are hermeneutical, arising from the adoption of divergent and irreconcilable methods of interpretation.” (p. 1)

The method of interpretation one uses is the “lens” through which biblical prophecy is understood Robert Lightner agrees in his book Last Days Handbook, “Though they all embrace its inspiration and authority, evangelicals who defend a particular view of events to come do not all understand Scripture in the same way. They understand it differently because they use different methods of interpreting some of the unfulfilled prophecies of Scripture. This is the most basic reason for the differences over pre-, a-, and postmillennialism.” (p. 139)

The method of interpretation one uses is the “lens” through which biblical prophecy is understood Later, he says, “When it comes to the understanding of prophecy or events to come, the most important question is: How is it to be interpreted? What does this prophetic Scripture mean?” (p. 142)

The method of interpretation one uses is the “lens” through which biblical prophecy is understood Oswald T. Allis, an ammillennialist, stated in a book entitled Prophecy and the Church, “Old Testament prophecies if literally interpreted cannot be regarded as having been yet fulfilled or as being capable of fulfillment in the present age. It is consequently assumed by premillennialists that they will be so fulfilled during the Millennium when Satan will be bound and the saints will reign with Christ.” (p. 238)

The method of interpretation one uses is the “lens” through which biblical prophecy is understood Another amillennialist writer, William E. Cox, wrote clearly, “One very basic conflict between different millennial groups is their hermeneutics – the manner in which they interpret the Bible, In fact, this difference is what divides equally conservative men into different camps with reference to the Millennium. This fact is acknowledged frequently by all millennial school of thought.” (Amillennialsm Today, p. 13)

The method of interpretation one uses is the “lens” through which biblical prophecy is understood The postmillennial theologian, Loraine Boettner, agrees when he says, “That believing Christians through the ages using the same Bible and acknowledging it to be authoritative, have arrived at quite different conclusions appears to be due to different methods of interpretation.” (The Millennium, p. 82)

The method of interpretation one uses is the “lens” through which biblical prophecy is understood Charles Ryrie explains, “Unquestionably, different millennial views result from different hermeneutics, that is, different interpretive principles. Premillennialists use literal or normal interpretation in all areas of biblical truth while amillennialists employ a nonliteral or spiritual principle in the area of eschatology. All conservatives, whatever their eschatological persuasions, use literal or normal interpretation everywhere except eschatology.” (Basic Theology, p. 446)

There are two basic interpretive “lenses” which distinguish between the prophetic positions The Allegorical Method (spiritualizing) Milton S. Terry states, “…it will be noticed at once that its habit is to disregard the common signification of words and give wing to all manner of fanciful speculation. It does not draw out the legitimate meaning of an author’s language, but foists into it whatever the whim or fancy of an interpreter may desire. As a system, therefore, it puts itself beyond all well-defined principles and laws.” (Biblical Hermeneutics, p. 224)

There are two basic interpretive “lenses” which distinguish between the prophetic positions The Allegorical Method (spiritualizing) Bernard Ramm states, “…to state that the principal meaning of the Bible is a second-sense meaning, and that the principal method of interpreting is “spiritualizing,” is to open the door to almost uncontrolled speculation and imagination. For this reason we have insisted that the control in interpretation is the literal method.” (Protestant Biblical Interpretation, p. 65)

There are two basic interpretive “lenses” which distinguish between the prophetic positions The Allegorical Method (spiritualizing) Pentecost is very clear and direct, “Thus, the great dangers inherent in this system are that it takes away the authority of Scripture, leaves us without any basis on which interpretations may be tested, reduces Scripture to what seems reasonable to the interpreter, and, as a result, makes true interpretation of Scripture impossible.” (Things to Come, p. 6).

There are two basic interpretive “lenses” which distinguish between the prophetic positions The Allegorical Method (spiritualizing) The Grammatical-Historical Method (literal) Floyd E. Hamilton, an amillennialist in The Basis of the Millennial Faith: “Now we must frankly admit that a literal interpretation of the Old Testament prophecies gives us just such a picture of an earthly reign of the Messiah as the premillennialist pictures.”

There are two basic interpretive “lenses” which distinguish between the prophetic positions The Allegorical Method (spiritualizing) The Grammatical-Historical Method (literal) Loraine Boettner in The Meaning of the Millennium:“It is generally agreed that if the prophecies are taken literally, they do foretell a restoration of the nation of Israel in the land of Palestine with the Jews having a prominent place in that kingdom and ruling over the other nations.”

There are two basic interpretive “lenses” which distinguish between the prophetic positions The Allegorical Method (spiritualizing) The Grammatical-Historical Method (literal) William Masselink: “If all prophecy must be interpreted in a literal way, the Chiliastic [Futuristic Premillennial] views are correct; but if it can be proved that these prophecies have a spiritual meaning, then Chiliasm must be rejected.”

Only one interpretation method (and resulting conclusion) can be true and valid