The Bible contains many different types of literature from the historical narrative of Genesis through to the Apocalyptic book of Revelation (Apocalypse is just the Greek word for Revelation changed into English letters).

Obviously different types of literature must be read in different ways. Historical narrative must be taken literally as it is intended as a factual account of real events. Prophecy and the Apocalyptic need more consideration:

Prophecy is ‘forthtelling’ the Word of God. This includes ‘foretelling’, but is not exclusively to do with the future. Prophecy must be taken literally too, unless it is made obvious that figurative speech is being used.

But what about the Apocalyptic? The Apocalyptic genre is couched in visions are an accepted part of our spiritual experience, but it is not the same as prophecy. Whilst prophecy is men speaking as God moves them, with visions a picture is painted using vivid imagery. This can’t be taken literally. Even those who maintain that the book of Revelation must be literally interpreted will at some point begin to interpret images. For example the mention of the beast in Revelation is invariably connected with real people – it is obvious from the context that it is not a literal beast but a representation of the character of the person being described.

We should not, therefore take the book of Revelation as prophecy, but as revelation in vision and read it accordingly.