I've read the “Left Behind” series, for example, and Salem Kirban’s books. Although I think there is a beast and a false prophet, etc., there are numerous incidents, and theological points that I disputed when reading them. It's been a while, so don't ask me to regurgitate them right now.
Revelation is presented as a vision (Rev 1:2), so allegorical and metaphorical elements are to be expected, although I believe they predict actual events.
The trick, to my mind, is to distinguish what is to be taken literally, and what is a metaphor for some literal event or person.
The greater trick is to determine how what you read can help you become a better Christian. I think a lot of sincere Christians may fall a bit short on this point.
Therefore, while I have definite views on the book, I also have many questions. I am not at all dogmatic about it.
There are only 2 things that I am dogmatic about: 1) without Christ as your personal Saviour, you are lost and going to a literal Hell, and 2) Jesus is coming again to judge the nations.
Every thing else is details on which I may well be mistaken. In fact #2 is secondary to #1. which is the only thing that really matters.
The interesting thing about this position is that if you can't seem to see your way thru to taking something literally, You are still faced with figuring out what it alludes to or what it is a metaphor of...
Many people fall into this trend and when claiming metaphor or allegory, they then drop the issue as unimportant...We should by 'searching the scriptures' be able to figure out what those allegories allude to...
All thru out history, the means has been there to mark or brand a person with the Mark of the Beast and has always been relevant as the bible describes it...
You must consider four principles to avoid problems in interpreting the Holy Scriptures:
A. Normal interpretation is basic.
This letter is to be read exactly as it is written, unless you are told to take it in some other way. The normal interpretation is plain literal, or obvious, interpretation. You are trying to read something into it other than what is written ("on another level") which is not that which is meant, and thus getting into argumentation.
B. Literal interpretation is normal.
Literal interpretation contains both plain literal language asd also figurative-literal language. Many people (and your approach here) fail to distinguish btween the terms, literal language and literal interpretation.
Figurative and/or allegorical interpretation is not normal.
This approach requires both literal and figurative language and lays an opinionated meaning (metaphorical, symbolical, or figurative) upon what is said or written in Scripture, and thus thrusts the interpreter on shaky ground which cannot be resolved by debate.
C. There Is Only One Primary Interpretation.
Scripture has but one meaning. There is only one primary interpretation to which all context lends itself. It applies directly to (a) those addressed, at (b) some specific timeindicated, and (c) must have a specific meaning for them. In light of this, it can be applied to us under similar conditions which exist relative to those conditions prevailing in the context. There possibly may be several secondary applications, but there is only one primary interpretation. There is one specific, intended meaning.
D. There Is One Single Sense
Every statement of Scripture has only one sense (an example is the sense of Isaiah 53:5 as used in 1 Peter 2:24)
One rule is that when the plain sense of Scripture makes common sense, seek no other sense. (To do otherwise distorts.) Again, the grammatical sense is the simple, direct, plain, ordinary, and literal sense of the words, phrases, clauses, and sentence (in both surrounding as well as general context).
Quoting William Tyndale, a gifed translator of our English Bible: "Thou shalt understand, therefore, thast the Scripture hath but one sense, which is the literal sense. And that literal sense is the root and ground of all, and the anchor that never faileth, whereunto if thou cleave thou canst never err nor go out of the way. And if thou leave the literal sense, thou canst not but go out of the way."
======
(The above is my slight adaptation of the discussion found in "HERE'S HOW! The Bible Can Make Sense To You Today!" by Dr. Fred Wittman, Morris Publishing (2000) pp. 26-28)
========
What I am saying about the article of this discussion is that I would strongly advise that no one take your recommendation to regard The Apokalupsis to be taken as a difficultly understood allegory. Actually, it is a revealing of The God's Will, not a concealment of it! And the reader should take it that way! If you don't understand something as plainly literal, don't make an allegory of it! Don't seek a "higher" level! Higher? False, probably.