Please forgive me if this has come up before, but I have "attempted" to find this already mentioned and I am having some difficulty finding this info out. I personally have no issue with the concept of literal rebirth and accept it as part of the dhamma. That said, I have in the past been uncertain and from the reading I have done in this forum there are some who do not believe in the literal interpretation of the concept of rebirth.
I have no interest in getting into a debate as to whether or not one "should" believe in rebirth as I have had no problem finding threads on rebirth debates in abundance. My question is ASSUMING rebirth is NOT to be taken literally (again, for clarification this is not my view but I am curious for hypothetical reasons) how does this effect the concept of stream-enterer and once-returner? If non-literal rebirth is believed how does one explain these concepts? Not explaining why they are taught, but "explaining them in that context.
Again, I am not looking at attacking rebirth, I am genuinely curious how these things are viewed by the few who practice Theravada but don't take up literal rebirth. I also have no intention of baiting, I am not going to argue anything. Strictly looking for info and perspective. Not saying I won't participate, but not to argue literal vs. non-literal.
Thank you for all who participate.
BTW... if this thread is in the wrong place or if this has been addressed elsewhere, please move it or point me in the right direction and I humbly apologize.
*edited for clarification