Ah, that's a really good point.
Writing cannot convey real time in the same way that you, as a writer, see whole scenes and worlds in front of you in your mind. That is so true! The comparison with linearity and Roman soldiers explains the difficulty very vividly!
The gift of evoking in the reader what lives in yourself, I agree, is done through the senses-exciting phrasing, so that one thinks one not only sees a scene, but smells it, tastes it, feels it. When I am ready to be sensually addressed, it evokes these very sensations.
I think that the differences in interpretation are only tried to be cleared up with stones and sticks by those who don't even want to get involved in an interpretation that differs from their own. Yet this is the opportunity where one's own mental horizon can be overcome.
I state that such rejection comes from the fact that one's own interpretation is too fleshless and too little contemplated in one's own thinking about a metaphor/theological text and that one can assume superficiality here and an unwillingness to engage in a sporting competition regarding the art of debating.