Amillennial vs Premillennial

Should we interpret the Bible literally or allegorically? The various end-times views claim to be based on the answer to this: in other words, if you use literal interpretation you will end up with premillennialism, but if you use allegorical interpretation you will end up with amillennialism. Actually, the reverse is true.

A literal interpretation leads to amillennialism, the view I embrace. But usually amillennialists think they must derive this view from allegorical interpretation.

Premillennialists claim to use literal interpretation. But only by assuming the book of Revelation to be a strictly chronological play-by-play account of events yet-future will you come to this conclusion. But in doing so, you must assume the many detailed descriptions of events are extreme exaggerations and embrace many images as symbolic having some arbitrary meaning, in other words, using allegory.


Critics of amillennialism are quick to claim it's based on an allegoricalmethod of interpretation, as if that's a bad thing. But the New Testament writers themselves interpreted end-time Old Testament passages allegorically;this provides the basis of the standard view of amillennialism.

I should mention that my unique version of amillennialism is strictly literal;I interpret everything in the Bible in a strictly literal manner.


Premillennialists often emphasize their interpretation is strictly literal,but in reality, it is not as literal as they would have us believe.

The literal approach used by premillennialists is applied in an inconsistent and arbitrary manner. Thus, they are literal when it suits them; and figurative, symbolic, or allegorical when it suits them. If they were to apply a consistent literal interpretation to the end-time passages it would lead to some very weird results.

   End Time Prophecy Leads to Rome | The Kingdom of Israel