an analogy or type used in Scripture can be both literally and symbolically trueThis is what I've been thinking lately. Some of the speakers I've been listening to recently - good guys who are extremely helpful - seem to too easily dismiss the literalness of some bits of the Bible that have obviously very important symbolic meaning. Sometimes I'm sure they're right. And there is an opposite error of not seeing the wood for the trees. But sometimes it's OK to see both.
P.S. This quote is from a very interesting article and discussion about creationism here, which I'll need to read more fully, but I'm not specifically quoting it in reference to that topic - just in general.