[Seven_0]

”When the Scripture means something to be symbolic instead of literal, 90% of the time it comes right out and tells you—and then goes ahead and gives you the interpretation right then and there! The other 10% of the time, we simply let the Bible tell us what it means by checking every other appearance of that symbol throughout the Scriptures.”

I’m having trouble with this paragraph. It’s my sense that most, perhaps all, things in scripture are symbolic even if they are literal, and it is the exception, rather that the rule, for scripture to explain them. Perhaps I am missing something here, but the percentages seem reversed to me.

[Buggman]

I'm about to go to bed, and I may not get a chance to do an in-depth answer tomorrow or the next day, but could you give me an example of some of the prophecies you're thinking of so we can discuss them? Thanks.

[xzins]

I think what is meant is that most of the time the stories, events, and teachings transmitted in the bible are to be taken at face value. David killed Goliath....straight-forward story with the who/what/when/where/why/how.

There are other times when similes, metaphors, allegories, allusions, parables, and other figures of speech are used. Most of the time it is evident from the context that a figure is being used. Seldom is a figure used that isn't above board in the context, however, it does happen. In these instances these are known to be symbolic because they are used as symbols at one or two other telling scriptures, and a symbolic weight is attached to their use that must then always at a minimum be investigated.