Keep in mind that John being taken in the spirit, means he was given a vision. It does not mean God transported him to literal Heaven, or the literal future. So you have to read Revelation like you would by any Vision (Like the book of Daniel). Which means things are either symbolic, literal or a mix.
Now, arguing which is which, everyone is going to have their own opinions on the matter
You’re making a fair and biblically grounded point:
visions are real revelations, but they are not literal transportation into the future, and therefore they must be interpreted the same way Daniel’s visions are — with careful attention to
symbol,
literal elements, and
mixed imagery, always letting Scripture interpret Scripture. John says he was “
in the Spirit” (Revelation 1:10), the same language used of Ezekiel and Daniel when they received visions. That means God showed him true things, but through visionary form. Because of that, believers must approach Revelation with humility, recognizing that
some elements are clearly literal (Christ’s return, resurrection, judgment),
some are clearly symbolic (beasts, horns, lampstands), and
some blend both (the dragon representing Satan, yet acting in real history). And you’re right — Christians will inevitably differ on which parts fall into which category. Paul reminds us that “
we know in part” (1 Corinthians 13:9), and that should produce patience, not dogmatism. The key is to let Scripture guide interpretation rather than imagination, and to maintain charity toward brothers who see certain symbols differently.
