Eusebius of Emesa in one of his discourses has quite a long passage about allegorizing. He allows that it cannot altogether be rejected but he is very cautious about its use. It tends to read meanings into the text which are good in themselves but are simply not present in the text. It can be an illegitimate short cut. A man who is bound or who is in prison is anxious to be free by any means, but not all means are right. Had all ancient interpreters of the Bible followed this advice, subsequent generations would have been saved the necessity of reading a great deal of nonsense. (The Search for the Christian Doctrine of God, p. 829, emphases added)
The history of hermeneutics alone demonstrates that this is not the best possible world. 🙂
Related posts:
trinitarian or unitarian? 2 - Irenaeus on Jesus' ignorance
podcast 219 - Thomas Reid on First Principles and Common Sense - Part 1
podcast 115 - the aborted council at Serdica in 343
podcast 306 – Two Readings of Mark – popular or esoteric? – Part 2
The Latin Trinity Chart 3 - Henry of Ghent to the rescue
R.I.P. Dr. Larry Hurtado
The Arguments of Hebrews 1-2 - Part 2
Debating Dale Starter Pack
Quote: Stephen Nye on disliking the clear as such (Dale)
Dr. Sanguinetti responds to the Challenge argument