How to mis-interpret prophecy

One of the most well-known examples of a non-literal reading appears in Acts 15 when the apostle James quotes

Amos 9:11–12:“In that day, “I will restore David’s fallen shelter— I will repair its broken walls and restore its ruins— and will rebuild it as it used to be, so that they may possess the remnant of Edom and all the nations that bear my name,”
declares the LORD, who will do these things.

Acts 15:16-18“After this, I will return and rebuild David’s fallen tent. Its ruins I will rebuild, and I will restore it, that the rest of mankind may seek the Lord, even all the Gentiles who bear my name, says the Lord, who does these things known from long ago.

In the Amos prophecy, God promises to one day “raise up the booth of David and repair its breaches, and raise up its ruins, and rebuild it.”

Hearing the language of repair and rebuilding, we might think of a physical structure. “Booth” (sukkah) is a word used for tents at the Feast of Booths (Lev 23:34). Reading literally, we might think that the tabernacle, still used in David’s day and brought into the temple after it was built by Solomon, might be the focus of the prophecy.

Many interpret Amos 9 in this way, believing the passage describes the rebuilding of the temple in Jerusalem in the end times.  The “possession” of Edom and the nations who are destined to call the LORD their God would seem to fit that context.

But Luke, the writer of Acts, doesn’t interpret the passage that way. He doesn’t take it “plainly” or literally. In Acts 15, he describes the fledgling church gathering in Jerusalem to hear that Paul and Barnabas had taken the gospel to Gentiles, who had embraced it.

Peter and James came to their defense. To prove the momentous event had been prophesied in the Old Testament, James quoted Amos 9:11–12. James (and the writer, Luke) understood the language of building and repairing to refer to a person—the resurrected Jesus, the son of David. 

They also don’t refer to “the remnant of Edom” but instead “the remnant of mankind.” 

James and Luke used the Septuagint (Greek translation of the Old Testament) The Hebrew version of the prophecy had “Edom” (Hebrew ʾedom) but the Septuagint reads “mankind” (reading Hebrew as ʾadam).

The words share the same consonants but are otherwise entirely different.

The switch to “mankind” fits the occasion of this meeting as well as the ministry of Paul and Barnabas. The Gentiles—all the nations of mankind, not just Israel—are now accepting the gospel. But that is not how the passage read in Hebrew.

The interpretation by James and Luke is not a literal one, but an abstract or “spiritual” one, based on a different reading from a translation.

Did James and Luke misread the Bible, then? Not necessarily. The “remnant of Edom” could be considered an abstract reference to “non-elect” people: Remember that the Edomites were descendants of Esau (Gen 36:1), who surrendered his birthright (Gen 25). Therefore, the non-literal translation of “mankind” in the Septuagint version of Amos 9:11 is within the realm of accurate meaning.

Comparing these passages illustrates important lessons: Interpreting biblical prophecy cannot be distilled to a simple maxim, and everything cannot be taken literally. The New Testament shows us otherwise.


Heiser, M. S. (2017). The Bible Unfiltered: Approaching Scripture on Its Own Terms (pp. 45–46). Bellingham, WA: Lexham Press.