The literal and the symbolic are not mutually exclusive. A statement, whether in the bible or in everyday life, can be both physical and symbolic. For example, if I say "John bought Mary a wedding ring", the ring symbolizes John's love and commitment to Mary. In this case, it is true that the literal meaning is more significant than the physical meaning, but that does not render the literal meaning false. Regardless of the symbolic significance, the ring is a tangible metal object.
For example, some Christians think that the Millennium will not be exactly 1,000 years, because 1,000 = 10 x 10 x 10, where 10 is the number for perfection. However, the symbolic significance of the 1,000 years does not disprove a literal 1,000 year reign.
Also, some Christians think that the new Jerusalem will not contain twelve foundations where "the first foundation was jasper, the second sapphire, the third chalcedony, the fourth emerald, the fifth sardonyx, the sixth carnelian, the seventh chrysolite, the eighth beryl, the ninth topaz, the tenth chrysoprase, the eleventh jacinth, and the twelfth amethyst" (Revelation 22:19b-20). They would point out that the foundation represents the twelve apostles, and explain how these precious stones symbolize the beauty and splendor of the new Jerusalem, thinking that the symbolic meaning renders the literal meaning impossible or unlikely.
Not so. Moses' tabernacle was a copy and shadow of what is in heaven, and was replete with symbolic meaning. Nevertheless, no Christian would deny that the tabernacle was physical and tangible.
When examining a passage that seems to contain both a literal meaning and a symbolic meaning, we need to find out the author's intent to see if one or both meanings are valid. If the Millennium will literally be 1,000 years, how would the apostle John state this in such a way that his audience would believe in a Millennium of 1,000 years instead of a Millennium of an unspecified number of years? How else could John have written it other than what he wrote to make his point more clear? If the twelve foundations of the new Jerusalem were indeed made of jasper, sapphire, chalcedony et cetera, how else could John have written it to make his point more clear?
6 months ago