Two reasons: first the seeing wasn't literal, and second you have made an interpretation that contradicts the clear and explicit words of the Bible. If anyone is allowed to read stuff into the actual words, how can you claim any authority for the original words at all. Here's a clue: does everyone agree with you?
Two reasons: first the seeing wasn't literal, and second you have made an interpretation that contradicts the clear and explicit words of the Bible. If anyone is allowed to read stuff into the actual words, how can you claim any authority for the original words at all. Here's a clue: does everyone agree with you?
Not everyone agrees with my stance that the 2nd Amendment gives me personally the right to carry an "assault weapon" either. Does that mean that the 2nd Amendment is less than clear on the subject or that we must agree with an "allegorical" interpretation?
And no, I take the narrative quite literally. I believe that the Adversary took my Lord to the top of a tall mountain. I believe that he showed Him all the world's kingdoms. I do not believe that this requires a flat earth. If I, a mortal creature, have the technology to take you to the top of any given mountain and show you all the world's kingdoms (and I do--all I need is a television and a receiver of some kind), then I have no problem with a fallen angel having the means to accomplish the same. None of this requires a symbolic or allegorical interpretation, or even very much imagination.