I. Introduction

There are many issues that face the interpreter as he approaches the book of Revelation. Is my exegesis theologically biased? What type of hermeneutic do I employ when dealing with prophetic passages? Should I apply the grammatical-historical approach consistently throughout all of Scripture? Am I bringing an interpretation to the text? Am I exhausting the interpretive process, or am I merely guessing? Some of these issues are fundamental, while others are peripheral. All are important, but the peripheral issues stem from the fundamental issues. The most fundamental difference between Amillennialism and Premillennialism is a theological bias. The result of this theological bias surfaces another fundamental difference: hermeneutical methodology. All the other issues are employed within or are peripheral to these two core issues. The thrust of this paper will deal with these two core issues while dealing with the peripheral issues when they surface.
II. Defining Terms

A. Amillennialism

First, however, we must define the terms Amillennialism and Premillennialism. In Latin, the prefix a- is a negation of the following root word. The root word –mille means 1,000. The suffix -annus means years. Thus, the word a-mille-nnial means literally “no-1,000 years”. This is poor terminology because Amillennialist’s do not necessarily believe that there will not be a Millennium. What they teach is that there will not be a Millennium on present earth when Christ will sit on David’s throne and rule over all the nations. To deal with those passages they teach that Christ is reigning now through the hearts of believer’s on earth or by the saints now in heaven. John Walvoord sums up well what Amillennialism teaches.