I'm not talking about the point of the message, I'm talking about the fact that certain things in the Bible were meant to be taken literally, certain things were not.
And these are my points:
First, as far as I recall, all biblical parables are spiritual – that’s what makes them biblical parables, but if you can show me any that are not, please feel free to do so. Otherwise, "common sense" is not a factor in determining whether or not they are to be understood as literal.
Second, just by purely reading verses in isolation, it is not always discernable as to whether they should be understood literally or spiritually – we cannot determine God’s ultimate purpose for them within the whole of the scriptural scheme of things using “common sense” as an ultimate criteria. At first glance, many verses may appear self-contained, innocuous, and straight forward - to be understood literally as-is, yet they often can be anything but that. So, to come to a correct biblical interpretation through the Holy Spirit (for without the Holy Spirit no one can perceive God’s word correctly), we must first find and compare spiritual with spiritual: a much deeper dive of scripture is needed than what may seem necessary relative to immediate context.
Given that you didn’t explain what the “things” are you had in mind, sure, you can find a few basic sentences that can stand on their own, but for the most part, “common sense” will not bring you to a correct understanding of God’s word. There are many verses, such as the following that have doctrine completed or explained elsewhere- dare I say most verses - if not because of the verses themselves, then because of the overriding scriptural context they exist within/under, which affects meaning as much as the verses themselves do, maybe even more so.
So, simply reading verses in isolation does not always yield how they should be understood - whether literally or spiritually, nor do they reveal God's greater purpose for them within scripture. Please read the following verses as an example of this. Were we to read
Gen 16:11- 12, in isolation, “common sense” would dictate that they were simple, self-contained statements, with no need of looking elsewhere.
[Gen 16:11 KJV] 11 And the angel of the LORD said unto her, Behold, thou [art] with child, and shalt bear a son, and shalt call his name Ishmael; because the LORD hath heard thy affliction.
[Gen 21:2 KJV] 2 For Sarah conceived, and bare Abraham a son in his old age, at the set time of which God had spoken to him.
However, were we to look further into scripture - into the New Testament in this case - we would find the following revelation, which revelation, changes the intent of the verses dramatically from what seemed initially as literal, into spiritual:
[Gal 4:22-24 KJV]
22 For it is written, that Abraham had two sons, the one by a bondmaid, the other by a freewoman.
23 But he [who was] of the bondwoman was born after the flesh; but he of the freewoman [was] by promise.
24 Which things are an allegory: for these are the two covenants; the one from the mount Sinai, which gendereth to bondage, which is Agar.
God wrote the Bible as one integrated spiritual book about Christ and salvation, from Genisis to The Revelation, even though it may not always seem so on the surface- with the earlier parts generally forming a spiritual basis for the latter.
This is why scripture informs us of the following:
[2Pe 1:20 KJV] 20 Knowing this first, that no prophecy of the scripture is of any private interpretation.
[1Co 2:13 KJV] 13 Which things also we speak, not in the words which man's wisdom teacheth, but which the Holy Ghost teacheth; comparing spiritual things with spiritual.