SCRIPTURAL COMMENTARY used to include a lot of allegory, but not in the past few centuries. I was surprised to see Erasmus, one of the moderns, supporting it in section 2 of The Handbook of the Militant Christian:

Let me mention another requirement for the better understanding of Holy Scriptures. I would suggest that you read those commentators who do not stick so closely to the literal sense. The ones I would recommend most highly afterSt. Paul are Origen, Ambrose, Jerome, and Augustine. Too many of our modern theologians are prone to a literal interpretation, which they subtly misconstrue. They do not delve into the mysteries, and they act as if St. Paul were not speaking the truth when he says that our law is spiritual.

I'm not sure if Erasmus meant it this way, but I now realize that allegory can be a very practical kind of interpretation. Dry history, or dimensions of buildings, does not yield much advice for daily life. Allegorical interpretations of those things, however, can address the most pressing needs. Whether they are the main interpretation is quite another matter, but God needn't have limited Himself to one or two meanings per Bible story.

[ http://php.indiana.edu/~erasmuse/w/03.06.22a.htm ]

To return to Eric Rasmusen's weblog, click http://php.indiana.edu/~erasmuse/w/0.rasmusen.htm.