Allegorical Interpretation of the Bible
ฝัง
- เผยแพร่เมื่อ 4 ก.พ. 2025
- This video provides an overview of Origen's "Allegorical" or "Spiritual" interpretation of the Bible.
Origen's "On First Principles" (trans. by John Behr; Oxford University Press, 2019): amzn.to/4cqwf4C
Disclaimer: All Amazon links are associate links, wherein I receive a percentage of your total purchase.
Saint Origen
Wow, that was an excellent introduction to Origen’s views on the interpretation of Scripture! So good!
I also love in his Commentary on Matthew how Origen expresses how those who follow Christ up the mountain of maturity will experience a Transfiguration of the Word from letter to Spirit, and thus behold the Law (Moses) and the Prophets (Elijah) and even the gospels (Jesus) in a new glorified Light.
So too, I think Paul introduces the “new covenant” not as a new set of writings, but rather as a new mode of interpretation (2 Cor 3:6, Rom 7:6). As the Spirit of God illuminates the Text through the gift of spiritual interpretation, we are thus granted (like Joseph or Daniel) a new spiritual understanding of the Revelation. Only then does it truly become what God is speaking!
Interestingly, Augustine sought to UNDO much of what Paul and Origen previously established with their focus on the Spirit of the Word. As such, Paul was very clear that we are to become partakers of a new covenant “NOT of the letter, but of the Spirit, for the letter kills.” (2 Cor 3:6)
Meanwhile, Augustine named his writing “On the Spirit AND the Letter”, encouraging the Church to partake of the Spirit of the Word without actually letting go of the letter. But Paul referred to this approach to Scripture as adultery. (Rom 7:1-6)
As such, Paul taught a circumcision of the heart, NOT the flesh, by the Spirit, NOT the letter (Rom 2:28-29, Gal 5:11, Col 2:11). Whereas those in Jerusalem were looking to keep the letter of the Law still in place, and thus still maintain a certain sense of righteousness of works by outward conformity to the Law's Letter, rather than shifting purely towards a transformation of the heart by the Spirit! (Gal 5:1-12, 2:12)
So too Origen does a great job highlighting how the stories of genocide and violence ought not to be taken literally (in their carnal/bodily sense) lest we befoul and defame the true nature and character of God as Love! For taken literally, many Bible stories minister condemnation, violence, and wrath, and thus become what Paul refers to as a ministry of death and condemnation, for the letter kills. (2 Cor 3:6-9)
But taken spiritually, the Word can still edify and nourish as Origen suggests. Thus the flood of Noah can be understood as a death (water baptism) of the old man, not a wrathful destruction of all creation (1 Pet 3:21). And the Lake of Fire can be discerned as a baptism of the Holy Spirit and Fire that purifies and refines, rather than a literal fire that torments eternally. (Matt 3:11, Mal 3:2-3).
Thus where Scripture does not align with and uphold the true nature of God as revealed in the Boundless Love and Compassion of Christ,the outer chaff of the letter needs to be winnowed away, so the edifying spiritual contents can be enjoyed.
you said " Scripture as adultery. (Rom 7:1-6) " and Augustine named his writing “On the Spirit AND the Letter” I don't know anything about Augustine , but this spirit and letter in Romans 7 Is not talking about the letter and spirit, I believe he is talking about marriage. Not interpreting the word. We are married to the world the flesh and the devil. To be the bride of Christ we must be dead to the world or the world must be dead to us if we love the things of this world more the Jesus, why would he marry a whore that lusts after any lover that comes her way? No! Jesus is the bridegroom we are to be his bride, when and only when we are dead to self and only alive unto him. The dead in Christ will rise first . God is spirit, the literal written word is only a blueprint of God not the logos of God he is spirit and the things of the spirit ( scripture ) is natural . But the things of God are spiritually discerned. I know you know all this i am sure.
I am just saying all this to say we can not judge Augustin and Origen or any other church fathers by the standards we have today . They do not have the internet lol . They had limited knowledge. So I don;t Judge them for not understanding things
@@timvickers947
“But far be it from me to boast, except in the cross of our Lord Jesus Christ, through which the world has been crucified to me, and I to the world.” (Gal 6:14)
I agree that Paul definitely speaks of dying to the world and to the old self/nature, so that we can be wed to Christ (2 Cor 11:2). So that Christ can become our new identity (Gal 2:20, Col 3:9-12). Through that great mystery of marriage. (Eph 5:32)
But here in Romans 7, I think Paul is using the metaphor of marriage in a slightly different way to make a somewhat different point about NOT MIXING the old covenant of the letter with the new covenant of the spirit…
“But now we have been released from the Law, having died to that by which we were bound, so that we serve in newness of the Spirit and not in oldness of the letter.” (Rom 7:6)
Likewise, in Romans 2, Paul tells us that there is a (literal) circumcision of the flesh “by the letter” and a (symbolic) circumcision of the heart “by the Spirit”. (Rom 2:28-29, Col 2:11). And thus Paul was no longer preaching a literal circumcision as Genesis 17 required as the central act of covenant making. For instance, see Galatians 5…
“1 It was for freedom that Christ set us free; therefore keep standing firm and do not be subject again to a yoke of slavery.
2 Look! I, Paul, tell you that if you have yourselves circumcised, Christ will be of no benefit to you. 3 And I testify again to every man who has himself circumcised, that he is obligated to keep the whole Law. 4 You have been severed from Christ, you who are seeking to be justified by the Law; you have fallen from grace.
11 But as for me, brothers and sisters, if I still preach circumcision, why am I still persecuted? Then the stumbling block of the cross has been eliminated. 12 I wish that those who are troubling you would even emasculate themselves.”
If one reads the gospel commentaries of Origen, one will quickly discover these two distinct ways of relating to Scripture…literally or allegorically.
This same concept is applied to the Temple as well. Where the new covenant temple is the Body of Christ, a Spiritual House made up of many Living Stones, the Dwelling Place of God (1 Pet 2:5, Eph 2:22, 1 Cor 3:16)
@@transfiguredword I agree with all your point. My point did not come agaist anything you said I just wanted to say any part of Gods word can mean many different things. I did not mean to say anyone was teaching falsy . about 7 is about the law and grace . It might mean that too . But i also believe it mean the bride too. I dont know all there is about the word but I do see it in light its Gods word . There is no end to the word ,there is no end to God >
@@transfiguredword very good point. Just want to add something here as well. The word of God is not only one 2 levels but 3 30,0 100. the literal the allegory and the spiritual. Paul said the letter kills the spirit gives life. Jesus said , he only speaks in parables. literal allegory and spiritual. Just saying.
@@timvickers947 Agreed. Paul contrasted two (letter and spirit), Origen distinguished three (body, soul, and spirit), and John Cassian offered the church a fourfold interpretive schema sometimes referred to as the “quadriga”. This is likewise paralleled by the fourfold Jewish hermeneutical method now known as PaRDeS.
Awesome explanation of some of Origen's key theological points!
Origen conmects the dots no one really knew were there until he came along. Aphrahat has effected me in a very similar way. Im deeply indebted to these saints. I hope we find and translate more ancient commentaries. Jesus is Lord
Thanks! What do you think of universalism?
I agree with Jürgen Moltmann's approach to this question. We only know of one person who went to hell: Jesus Christ. But because Christ descended into hell, hell is no longer a hopeless place.
Thanks for watching!
I agree. Jesus said in John 6:37 that "ALL THE FATHER GIVES TO ME WILL COME." That doesn't mean we stop sharing the good news with whoever will listen. It means we leave the growth to God. He'll save who He'll save. I'm a born-again gay Jew since 1982. He's saving LGBTQ people and Jews, too. Are the TIMES of the Gentiles fulfilled? Luke 21:24 seems to say so. Is it ALL FULFILLED? I believe Revelation 18:4 is calling us all to turn off the world and turn on Jesus.
Hi Stephen, thanks for your TH-cam sessions, I enjoy them greatly and shar your admiration of Barth & Torrance. I appreciate that perhaps St. Origen is providing some possible options which may on occasions be helpful. I can however, see some problems as you no doubt do too. Torrance is quite adamant, as I think Barth, that Jesus was a particular historical figure (amen) who allows us to know God and by inference understand at least some important things about God. Without this, faith would be impossible. I also think of those who question the historical accuracy of the Gospel account of Jesus, the so called Quest for the Historical Jesus.' By the time these Bods are finished, Jesus is largely a figment or invention of the early Church's imagination. In terms of Genesis 1 -3, I refer you to John Lennox who says that if you read it carefully, it doesn't actually say that God created the universe in 7 days, simply that He created it systematically. Further, Jesus Himself refers to Adam and the fall, and it is difficult to see why we need a second Adam if the first one didn't commit sin, body, souls and Spirit? Just some thoughts. Many Blessings - Scott
Hi Scott, you definitely raise an important issue with this. I would say that the goal here is to remove stumbling blocks, but not to say that everything is only spiritual without having a literal event tied to it. So, I do not think Origen would use this to suggest that Jesus never lived, died, and was raised again. However, he does use it to dismantle impossible narratives, such as the one in Matthew 4, which he uses as an example. The Genesis example is more about the phrases in italics regarding God planting a garden, walking among us, the apple being literally good and evil, and Adam hiding from God. These are not "bodily" events but allegorical narratives with spiritual meaning. Hopefully that's helpful, and thanks for watching!
@@StephenDMorrison Thanks. I take your point about not having to insist on the literal in every case, so to speak. I just don't think that this is a helpful way of theological explanation. The Bible takes our bodily existence very seriously, i.e. we don't have any real existence without it, and most evangelicals already have what NT Wright calls a Buddhist view of no-bodily eternal existence. The incarnation and resurrection show that bodily existence is what it means to be human. I know you are not disputing this and I take your point about the apple not being literally bad, nor eating the apple, but the story is still designed to show that good and evil are both bodily and spiritual/intellectual and I think Origen's method is confusing on this point. To quote TF Torrance, theology (orthodox) has always referred to the soul of the body and the body of the soul without dividing the two. Thanks Stephen, I shall trouble you no more on this topic - Scott
@@ScottSimpson-zl7uu I agree with you about this. I do think there is room to critique Origen for a somewhat neo-platonic approach to the body. But when it comes to the Bible, I read him as using bodily as a metaphor. But I can see where you might push back on him about this, and I would as well. Thoroughly agree about the need for a embodied spirituality.