A passage that has a significant literal meaning and a number of less obvious meanings is the story of Jesus walking on water. Matthew 14:24-31 says, “And in the fourth watch of the night he came to them, walking on the sea. But when the disciples saw him walking on the sea, they were terrified, and said, “It is a ghost ! And they screamed in fear. But immediately he spoke to them, saying: “Rest assured, it is I; have no fear. Peter replied, “Lord, if it is you, command me to come to you on the water. » He said, "Come." » Then Peter got out of the boat, walked on the water and came to Jesus; but when he saw the wind, he was afraid, and beginning to sink, he cried out, “Lord, save me.” » Jesus immediately stretched out his hand and took hold of him, saying to him: “O you of little faith, why did you doubt me? Jesus had returned from a solitary prayer on the mountain and frightened his disciples, but then he proved himself as always. This story is a great example of the importance of faith and focus. The literal meaning is that Jesus can help us overcome what seem like the most impossible problems, but we must be focused and have faith. Even being distracted for a second can cause us to waver, but all we have to do is cry out to Jesus, and he grabs us by the hand and lifts us above a seemingly impossible environment. An allegorical meaning of this story could be seen as the second coming of Jesus. We may be deceived by His return, just like the disciples, but if we are strong in faith and do not doubt like Peter for even a second, we will be rewarded. From a moral perspective, the passage could represent that unquestionable faith is the key to redemption, forgiveness, and overall salvation. First objection: The store... middle of paper ... matters the circumstances. First objection: The store... middle of paper ... matters the circumstances. Objection 1: Once again, there is a distinct connection between moral interpretation and literal interpretation. The unconditional love demonstrated through this passage is only possible in the literal moral sense. If one were to separate these two elements, the meaning would not be clear, so there cannot be more than one interpretation without separation. Second objection: this selection of text deals directly with God's perspective, so according to Thomas it would be perfect for interpretation; however, if this is to be interpreted beyond the literal meaning, so can any text in the Bible. Even though this specific passage appears to actually be God Himself speaking, the rest of the Bible could only be possible through God's revelation. Therefore, this selection is not different and cannot be interpreted without bias in several senses..