Because Jesus is not a wooden door, the text is not literal. So, its a contradiction to say that literalism allows metaphors. Its like saying that programming a robot allows free will.
I guess its time to define what that means
Literal interpretation of scripture means taking it at face-value. We cross-reference verses and compare them.
A prime example of a literal interpretation is this:
In Zechariah 14 we read:
Zec 14:17 And it shall be, that whoso will not come up of all the families of the earth unto Jerusalem to worship the King, the LORD of hosts, even upon them shall be no rain.
Literal interpretation of this is the PLAIN MEANING of the text, those who dont come to Jerusalem to worship the King, will not receive no rain. These are the people from the NATIONS that attacked Jerusalem, and Jesus is reigning from Jerusalem (Earlier verses..)
A spiritual interpretation you can find by looking up the commentary of that verse by John Gill (and others from that era) who INSERT all kinds of odd things to the text that arent in there, here are a few weird quotes:
"
must be understood of times preceding the spiritual reign of Christ; for the rain of the Gospel will be upon all the earth in the latter day glory" <- What? rain of the gospel? This is spiritual interpretation at play, text says nothing about that, but the guy just adds it in there, literally INVENTING the word there. I could add "Banana rain" in my bible commentary, and it would be just as much a spiritual interpretation.
"of all the families of the earth unto Jerusalem, to worship the King, the Lord of hosts:
all of the antichristian party, that refuse to worship the Lord with his true church, according to his revealed will:"
"
even upon them shall be no rain; not literally, but spiritually; and is to be understood either of the love and favour of God, comparable to rain in its original, it being owing to the will of God, and not to the merits of men, and therefore is distinguishing and sovereign; in its objects, persons very undeserving; in the manner of its communication, it tarries not for the will and works of men, and comes in great abundance; and in its effects, it softens, cools, refreshes, and makes fruitful; and not to have this is to be hated of God: or of the blessings of divine grace; these are from above like rain, depend on the will of God, are free gifts, and given in abundance, and make fruitful; the contrary to these is cursing: or of the Gospel, which is of God and from heaven, falls according to divine direction, and softens, refreshes, and revives; and not to have this is the sorest of judgments"
^ There we see a long explanation of a simple verse.
Here is Adam Clarke's equally WEIRD interpretation and MADE UP interpretation:
"
Those who do not worship God shall not have his blessing; and those who do not attend Divine ordinances cannot have the graces and blessings which God usually dispenses by them. On such slothful, idle Christians, there shall be no rain!"
^Again.... The text says NOTHING of the sort. He is just imagining things, doesn't know what it means. Cant deal with the Scriptures.
All of these commentators do this thing all over the OT, its like they just cant handle it. Every CLEAR verse about Jerusalem or Israel is translated as "gospel church" in their minds. It can even mention specific locations in Israel, and its still about "gospel church" in the minds of these men.