You are looking at karma and rebirth as having two different perspectives - figurative/ metaphorical or literal.
There's another two ways to look at this - "there is a self" and "all phenomena is not self".
If there is a self, you would think that the person who committed some action, would experience its results.
If there is a self, this self would be reborn after death. Most people take consciousness to be the self i.e. the same consciousness that moves throughout one's life and then after death, continues in another body.
What if all phenomena is not self?
From the SN 12.17 (although this quote comes from here):
Again, when the Buddha was asked by the naked ascetic Kassapa whether
suffering was of one's own making or of another's or both or neither,
the Buddha replied "Do not put it like that." When asked whether there
was no suffering or whether the Buddha neither knew nor saw it, the
Buddha replied that there was, and that he both knew and saw it. He
then said "Kassapa, if one asserts that 'He who makes (it) feels (it):
being one existent from the beginning, his suffering is of his own
making,' then one arrives at eternalism. But if one asserts that one
makes (it), another feels (it); being one existent crushed out by
feeling, his suffering is of another's making,' then one arrives at
annihilationism. Instead of resorting to either extreme a Tathaagata
teaches the Dhamma by the middle way (by dependent origination)".
So, the Buddha taught karma, but he also taught anatta.
In AN 5.57 (below), the Buddha told us to think "I am the owner of my kamma, the heir of my kamma", but this is only a soteriological tool, a skillful means, and not proof that there is a self.
“And for the sake of what benefit should a woman or a man, a
householder or one gone forth, often reflect thus: ‘I am the owner of
my kamma, the heir of my kamma; I have kamma as my origin, kamma as my
relative, kamma as my resort; I will be the heir of whatever kamma,
good or bad, that I do’? People engage in misconduct by body, speech,
and mind. But when one often reflects upon this theme, such misconduct
is either completely abandoned or diminished. It is for the sake of
this benefit that a woman or a man, a householder or one gone forth,
should often reflect thus: ‘I am the owner of my kamma, the heir of my
kamma; I have kamma as my origin, kamma as my relative, kamma as my
resort; I will be the heir of whatever kamma, good or bad, that I do.’
And what about rebirth?
From MN 38:
As he was sitting there, the Blessed One said to him, "Is it true,
Sāti, that this pernicious view has arisen in you — 'As I understand
the Dhamma taught by the Blessed One, it is just this consciousness
that runs and wanders on, not another'?"
"Exactly so, lord. As I understand the Dhamma taught by the Blessed
One, it is just this consciousness that runs and wanders on, not
"Which consciousness, Sāti, is that?"
"This speaker, this knower, lord, that is sensitive here & there to
the ripening of good & evil actions."
"And to whom, worthless man, do you understand me to have taught the
Dhamma like that? Haven't I, in many ways, said of dependently
co-arisen consciousness, 'Apart from a requisite condition, there is
no coming-into-play of consciousness'? But you, through your own poor
grasp, not only slander us but also dig yourself up [by the root] and
produce much demerit for yourself. That will lead to your long-term
harm & suffering."
When it comes to rebirth, you must ask WHO or WHAT is reborn?
Is it the self? Is it consciousness? None of these are permanent even in one's life. They are impermanent, conditioned, dependently arising and ceasing. The self is just a mental idea. Please see this answer.
So what is reborn? Well, suffering is reborn, and the mental idea of the self is reborn.