
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. π
Related posts:

Answer to Angeliqua's "The 1-2 Punch Against the Charge that Trinity is Tritheism"

Dallas Willard: God is Happy

What is idolatry?

The Latin Trinity Chart 3 - Henry of Ghent to the rescue

podcast 92 β Dr. Joshua Thurow on objections to atonement theories
podcast 326 - Dr. Licona's historical case that Jesus considered himself to be God - Part 1

Arius and Athanasius, part 5 -- Arius on the Unproduced Producer (JT)

podcast 256 - Aaron Shelenberger, from trinitarian to unitarian β Part 3

Do the Gospels disagree about Jesus and God? Part 1 - Three Options

