[daniel1212]

You have obviously no understanding of what is meant by the term “literal interpretation” in light of interpreting scripture. The term is used for those who interpret the words literally unless it is obvious and other passages back up a non literal meaning. You are proving over and over again that you are ill equipted to debate the meaning of scripture.

You mean unlike as seen for 50 years in sanctioned Catholic Bible commentary, which relegates stories like Jonah and the fish, Balaam and the donkey to be fables, the conquests of Joshua to be folk tales, and questions whether Jesus Christ was actually involved in some conversations which the gospel records, and thinks that most of which Jesus is recorded as saying was probably theological elaboration by the writers, and who likewise simply placed the Lord Jesus on a hill in giving the sermon on the Mount etc.

[CynicalBear]

They need the allagory for their interpretations to seem (in their mind) to work.