What Does It Mean to Allegorize Scripture? (Gr. allegoreō)

Please Help Us Keep These Thousands of Blog Posts Free for All

$5.00

The term allegoreō (ἀλληγορέω), found in Galatians 4:24, literally means “to speak allegorically” or “to express something in figurative terms.” While the New Testament employs allegory in a limited, inspired context, the broader practice of allegorizing—especially as a method of interpretation—has often led to theological error and interpretive confusion. Understanding the difference between allegory as a literary feature and allegorizing as a method is crucial for maintaining the clarity, authority, and meaning of Scripture.

Allegorizing the Exodus narrative — blending literal and spiritual layers in the style of early Christian interpretation.

Biblical Allegory Versus Allegorical Interpretation

Scriptural allegory occurs when inspired writers use symbolic figures or events to represent spiritual truths. Such instances are infrequent and always the product of divine guidance. For example, Jesus’ metaphorical depiction of Himself as the Good Shepherd (John 10:11–16) or Israel as a vine (Psalm 80:8–9) are deliberate illustrations rooted in historical and theological context. These images clarify truth rather than obscure it.

In Galatians 4:24–26, Paul explicitly introduces an allegory: “Now this may be interpreted allegorically: these women are two covenants. One is from Mount Sinai, bearing children for slavery; she is Hagar.” Here, Paul presents a Holy Spirit-inspired comparison between Hagar (the Mosaic covenant and bondage) and Sarah (the new covenant and freedom). Importantly, Paul’s use of allegoreō is not an interpretive license to re-read Genesis through allegory, but rather a theological application rooted in apostolic authority.

The mistake arises when allegory, a rhetorical or literary device, is extended into a general hermeneutical approach—what we term allegorizing—which seeks hidden or mystical meanings behind the plain, historical sense of Scripture.

The Origin and Method of Allegorizing

Allegorical interpretation traces its roots to ancient Greek philosophy, particularly among Stoics and Platonists, who used it to reconcile traditional myths with philosophical ideals. Philo of Alexandria (ca. 20 BCE–50 CE), a Hellenistic Jew, famously allegorized Old Testament narratives to align with Platonic thought. For instance, he interpreted the “garments of skins” in Genesis 3:21 as symbols of the human body, and the rivers of Eden in Genesis 2 as virtues.

These interpretations depart entirely from the grammatical, historical, and covenantal context of the biblical text. They substitute philosophical abstraction for divine revelation, imposing meaning onto Scripture rather than drawing it from the inspired author’s intent.

The Church’s Early Adoption and Later Rejection

Early Christian theologians such as Origen, Jerome, and Augustine heavily employed allegorizing. Origen believed Scripture had multiple levels of meaning—literal, moral, and spiritual—and prioritized the spiritual above the literal. This framework permitted imaginative readings of Scripture, often without exegetical constraint. Augustine’s allegorical reading of the Good Samaritan parable, for instance, identified the Samaritan as Christ, the innkeeper as Paul, and the inn as the Church—associations entirely absent from the text itself.

Though such interpretations sought spiritual insight, they frequently undermined the clarity and authority of Scripture by making its meaning dependent on subjective human reasoning.

By contrast, the Reformers—particularly Martin Luther and John Calvin—rejected allegorizing as methodologically unsound. Calvin warned, “It is the first business of an interpreter to let his author say what he does say, instead of attributing to him what we think he ought to say.” They restored the literal sense as the primary meaning of the text, guided by the Historical-Grammatical method.

The Historical-Grammatical Method: A Necessary Safeguard

The Historical-Grammatical method seeks to understand the original meaning of the text as intended by the human author, under divine inspiration. It considers grammar, vocabulary, literary form, historical context, and covenantal setting. This method affirms that the Bible is a coherent, self-interpreting document, and that its meaning is stable, accessible, and authoritative.

This approach stands in contrast to allegorizing, which is inherently subjective and leads to interpretive chaos. Allegorical interpretations often reflect the theological or philosophical inclinations of the interpreter rather than the inspired meaning of the text. As a result, such interpretations may introduce doctrines foreign to the Bible and subvert key teachings—especially those concerning creation, sin, redemption, and eschatology.

Theological Dangers of Allegorizing

One significant danger of allegorizing is the potential to deny the historicity of critical biblical events. For example, some allegorists assert that Adam and Eve were not historical persons but merely literary symbols for humanity. However, Scripture affirms their historicity: “Therefore, just as sin came into the world through one man, and death through sin…” (Romans 5:12). The entire doctrine of original sin and redemption hinges on the reality of Adam as a historical figure.

Another danger is the erosion of Scripture’s authority. Allegorizing tends to elevate human imagination over divine revelation. When interpreters allegorize the judgment narratives of Genesis or the eschatological prophecies of Revelation, they often replace God’s declared purposes with moralistic or spiritualized themes detached from the text. This undermines the clarity (perspicuity) and finality of the Word of God.

As Isaiah 55:8–9 reminds us: “For my thoughts are not your thoughts, neither are your ways my ways, declares Jehovah. For as the heavens are higher than the earth, so are my ways higher than your ways and my thoughts than your thoughts.” Scripture must speak for itself; interpreters are stewards, not re-creators, of its meaning.

The Unique Role of Apostolic Allegory

Paul’s use of allegory in Galatians 4 is divinely authorized and serves a specific theological function. It should not be imitated as a method of interpretation by others. Unlike modern readers, Paul was guided by direct inspiration and empowered by the Holy Spirit to unveil deeper covenantal truths (Galatians 1:11-12).

John 14:26 and 16:13 clarify that the Holy Spirit would teach the apostles “all things” and “guide [them] into all the truth.” This guidance was not extended universally to all believers but was specific to the apostolic office. Therefore, while Paul could employ allegory infallibly, modern interpreters are bound to the text’s literal, historical meaning.

Biblical Literacy Through Faithful Interpretation

Faithful understanding of Scripture demands the discipline and humility modeled by the Bereans, who “examined the Scriptures daily to see if these things were so” (Acts 17:11). It requires a rejection of speculative methods and an embrace of exegetical integrity.

2 Timothy 3:16–17 declares: “All Scripture is breathed out by God and profitable for teaching, for reproof, for correction, and for training in righteousness.” Allegorical interpretation obscures this profitability by displacing the clarity and sufficiency of God’s Word.

Scripture communicates through coherent grammar, historical settings, and literal events. Its authority rests not in what it could mean allegorically, but in what it does mean historically and textually.

Conclusion

The verb allegoreō, while used in a single instance by Paul under inspiration, does not authorize the allegorizing of Scripture as a general method. Though Scripture employs allegory as a literary device in limited, divinely directed contexts, the practice of allegorizing as an interpretive framework is foreign to the Bible’s own interpretive norms. It introduces subjectivity, undermines historical reality, and opens the door to doctrinal error.

In contrast, the Historical-Grammatical method, grounded in the literal sense of the text and guided by the Holy Spirit through Scripture—not apart from it—preserves the integrity, clarity, and authority of God’s revelation. To allegorize is to shift trust from the Word of God to the imagination of man. Faithful interpretation demands the opposite.

You May Also Enjoy

Michael the Chief Archangel: (Gr. Archangelos)

About the Author

EDWARD D. ANDREWS (AS in Criminal Justice, BS in Religion, MA in Biblical Studies, and MDiv in Theology) is CEO and President of Christian Publishing House. He has authored over 220+ books. In addition, Andrews is the Chief Translator of the Updated American Standard Version (UASV).