Allegorical interpretations

[Matthias]

I’ll begin this thread with an allegorical interpretation of Internet theology discussion forums.

 

[Matthias]

“The problem with the allegorical method of interpretation [of scripture] is that it seeks to find an allegorical interpretation for every passage of Scripture, regardless of whether or not it is intended to be understood that way.”

What is wrong with the allegorical interpretation method? | GotQuestions.org

What is wrong with the allegorical interpretation method? Should the Bible be interpreted allegorically? Is allegorical interpretation too subjective?

www.gotquestions.org

Brackets are mine.

For those who have read the early Church Fathers, I would submit that Origen is the champion of the allegorical method of interpreting scripture.

 

[Wrangler]

“The problem with the allegorical method of interpretation [of scripture] is that it seeks to find an allegorical interpretation for every passage of Scripture, regardless of whether or not it is intended to be understood that way.”

God's word requires a high reading level. Fact is, it is a very figurative book. Yet, not all is figurative. It takes discernment guided by God's Spirit.

IMO, trinitarians badly confuse which is which. For instance, John 1:1 is figurative. How can ANYTHING be with someone and "be" that someone? It is a metaphysical and epistemological impossibility.

Rather than recognize the figurative use of language, different senses of a god, they appeal to mysticism.

 

[Behold]

I would submit that Origen

Origen was "nutz".

He created the concept of "soul sleep" that the Cult of Mary redesigned as "purgatory".

How crazy was Origen?

He read "some made themselves Eunuch's" in the scripture, and took a knife, and castrated Himself.

What is that?

That's "Crazy".