It appears as if there is some confusion about the term literal. What some call literal is really literalistic. This latter term is what happens when we try to flatten out a passage and demand that it be understood only in one sense, which would mean there is no difference between poetic, narrative, symbolic, etc.
Understanding a text as literalmeans that we interpret a text within the genre that it was written. So, we dont impose on poetic texts a literalistic sense (God has to have feathers), nor do we take symbolic imagery as absolutes in a literalistic sense (the chain binding Satan has to be iron).
People do not interpret our situation in a rigid literalistic manner. My wife is a rose does not mean that she is red, is about three feet high, and has thorns sticking out from her. Rather, by such a phrase I want to take some of the characteristics of a rose to illustrate a specific point about my wife (beauty, etc.). Yet when approaching the Bible people forget all about that, and demand everything be literalistic. Leads to very poor understanding, and worse, teaching about what the Bible does teach.
Interestingly I find that those who demand literalistic interpretation of Revelation usually want to demand non-literalistic interpretation of the Gospels or the Epistles.
Thus, when I teach hermeneutics (in seminary and in the congregation) I spend most of the time looking at various genre and have people begin to interpret the according to that genre. Obviously there is much more to this hermeneutical process, but at least they know that interpreting narrative involves something not found in poetic sections, etc.
Rich, can you tell me what word I should be using to explain what I mean?
What I mean is this. John describes exactly what he sees, like drawing a detailed picture of what he sees.
And what he sees is actually what things look like.
Now, MoreCoffee is asking if the Lamb actually has 7 eyes?
Yet we know that the Lamb is Jesus Christ while elsewhere in Revelation he looks like a Man.
The context says a lot.
You are a Pastor and you wear robes, stoles, each color means something and so forth.
What they do there, they do the same thing.
But they do not "wear" things, they become what their role is at that time.
During the Service, before the attack at the Rev 4,5 we saw many things.
Even on Earth, angels looked like men while rescuing Lot and so forth.
So what word should I use when I say that things are exactly as John describes them?
(I know we had similar discussion years back, and yes, I believe that the chains the Satan was bound with for 1000 years are literal chains, that look like chains, but not necessarily made of the earthly material).
Thanks,
In Christ,
Ed