317-548-2146

Allegorical Methods 

Question

Throughout the history of the Bible, allegorical methods have been employed as a means to discover a “hidden meaning” in the text. Outline the use of allegorical approaches and discuss the benefits and pitfalls of utilizing such an approach to interpret Scripture today.

Response

Allegorical methods have a long history of usage throughout the history of biblical interpretation. In its simplest form, Philip Miller explains that allegory is a literary unit that has a “hidden, figurative, or symbolic meaning,” and that the allegorical method of interpretation “treats any or all of the Bible as allegorical material.”[1] The usage of allegory began in ancient Greece to protect sacred Homeric writings in the face of scientific advances, then moved into Jewish circles to interpret portions of the Septuagint, such as the Song of Solomon from its scandalous content, and then into New Testament writings such as Paul’s use of allegory in Gal. 4:21-31, which applied certain Old Testament passages to Christians.[2] William Klein, Craig Blomberg, and Robert Hubbard also note that Philo used the allegorical method to interpret the Hebrew Scriptures when a passage was unworthy of God, difficult, or involved explicit allegory.[3] Furthermore, an allegorical approach continued to evolve under Clement of Alexandria who thought that Scripture had a dichotomist meaning that consisted of body (literal) and soul (spiritual) and Origen, as a trichotomist, who assumed a threefold body (literal), soul (moral), and spirit (spiritual) meaning to Scripture.[4] Following Origen, Aquinas added an anagogical or moral component to allegorical interpretation until the Reformers began to harness its advancement by highlighting the authority and literal nature of Scripture.[5]

The benefits of the allegorical method are twofold. First, Miller explains that the Church Fathers used allegory to correct an overly literalistic Jewish interpretation and to refute a Gnostic literalism that attempted to undermine the validity of the Old Testament.[6] The application remains in modern vernacular. For example, if an individual is asked to remember an event and says, “that rings a bell,” it would be absurd to apply a literalistic interpretation to the phrase. Accordingly, an overly literalistic approach to every biblical passage or genre may render the interpretation invalid. Second, symbolism continues to be important to the Christian faith as can be seen in sanctuary decor, art, worship, prayers, and hymns as well as in baptism and communion with the symbols of water, bread, and wine.[7] Accordingly, the segment of allegory that highlights figurative and symbolic meaning provides interpretive benefits. However, often the pitfalls of the allegorical method outweigh the benefits. Klein, Blomberg, and Hubbard explain that the allegorical method often “seems to play fast and loose with the text.”[8] Furthermore, Miller notes that historically the allegorical method often originated from wild speculations and became a method of proof-texting church tradition.[9]

In light of the benefits and pitfalls, the question remains as to whether utilizing such an approach to interpret Scripture is relevant for today. Craig Blomberg recognizes that the literal meaning of a text is not always correct, so the interpreter must determine the “original intention of the author as communicated through the written text to the original audience.”[10] In other words, the biblical text ought to be interpreted in light of its literary genres, and if the text contains allegory, figurative language, or symbolism, then the interpretation should consider the impact, but allegorizing with no authorial intent risks eisegesis rather than exegesis.[11]

Bibliography

Blomberg, Craig L., and Jennifer Foutz Markley. A Handbook of New Testament Exegesis. Grand Rapids: Baker Academic, 2010.

Klein, William W., Craig L. Blomberg, and Robert L. Hubbard. Introduction to Biblical Interpretation. Nashville: Thomas Nelson, 2004.

Miller, Philip. “New Hearing for the Allegorical Method.” Perkins Journal 29, no. 2 (1976): 25–34.

References

[1] Philip Miller, “New Hearing for the Allegorical Method,” Perkins Journal 29, no. 2 (1976): 26.

[2] Ibid., 28.

[3] William W. Klein, Craig L. Blomberg, and Robert L. Hubbard, Introduction to Biblical Interpretation (Nashville: Thomas Nelson, 2004), 26.

[4] Ibid., 38–39.

[5] Miller, “New Hearing for the Allegorical Method,” 32–33.

[6] Ibid., 33.

[7] Ibid., 34–35.

[8] Klein, Blomberg, and Hubbard, Introduction to Biblical Interpretation, 39.

[9] Miller, “New Hearing for the Allegorical Method,” 32.

[10] Craig L. Blomberg and Jennifer Foutz Markley, A Handbook of New Testament Exegesis (Grand Rapids: Baker Academic, 2010), 228.

[11] Ibid.