For the last couple of days, I’ve been sharing how traditional Rabbinical Judaism approaches the story of David and Bathsheba.
It boils down to one word: Allegory.
While Christianity hardly goes into any depth at all (as usual) in its treatment of this story…
Rabbinic Judaism has allegorized this story to the point where good is being called evil and evil is being called good.
I closed yesterday’s post by saying the best way to interpret Scripture is to simply accept what it says at face value…
Instead of twisting it around into a bunch of weird contortions like a drunk yoga master.
So let me say something that’s for sure gonna tick off a good majority of pastors, preachers, and Bible teachers out there.
Allegory should have little to no place in how you understand the Bible or shape your beliefs.
Ya feel me?
Sure, allegorizing might be cool for illustration purposes…
But not as the basis for finding the truth…
And definitely not for forming doctrine.
Again, allegorizing means taking a Bible passage and saying it means something other than the plain reading of the text.
The Christian church does this all the time…
Especially in how it approaches Yeshua’s Sermon on the Mount.
Yeshua says he did NOT come to abolish the Law.
But somehow, the gentile church twists the plain meaning of the text to say Jesus did abolish the Law.
Again, this ain’t no different than calling “good” evil or “evil” good.
Sadly, the Church has relied on allegory as one of their main ways to interpret Scripture and preach sermons.
Why?
Because it helps them back up manmade traditions and push their agendas as if they were God’s truth.
In other words, religious leaders create doctrines first, then force Scripture to fit their ideas.
Allegory lets them twist any passage to say whatever supports their theology.
And one of the best examples of this is in how the story of David and Bathsheba is treated.
The next time we meet, I’m gonna show you exactly how we let predetermined bias contort and twist our understanding of the Scriptures.
But for now, let’s get into the takeaway for today.
The takeaway is to simply just be aware of how we let our biases color our understanding of pretty much anything.
But nowhere is this more rampant than in theology.
Why do you think there are more than 20,000 Christian denominations out there?
It’s pretty much because each denomination’s doctrines are built upon the biases pushed by the founders of each of those denominations.
Again, we’re all guilty of this.
The only solution is to be humble and recognize that we’re doing it.
The plain, simple reading of the text is usually the best…
Unless it’s being made clear that what is being said IS a metaphor.
Like Peter’s vision of the blanket of animals being let down from heaven.
Christianity makes the gross error of taking that vision literally and interprets it to mean that somehow God’s kosher food laws have been abolished…
When really the “unclean animals” were being used as a metaphor for gentiles.
Anyway, I digress.
See ya all next time.
CONNECTING THIS TEACHING TO THE NEW TESTAMENT
“He replied, ‘Isaiah was right when he
prophesied about you hypocrites;
as it is written: ‘
These people honor me with their lips,
but their hearts are far from me.
They worship me in vain;
their teachings are merely human rules.’
You have let go of the commands of God
and are holding on to human traditions.‘
And he continued, ‘You have a fine way of
setting aside the commands of God in order to
observe your own traditions!…
Thus you nullify the word of God
by your tradition that you have handed down.
And you do many things like that.’”
-Mark 7:6-13
I agree with your basic point that we shouldn’t “read into” things, especially when we are doing so to interpret a biblical passage or narrative in the way we want it to be interpreted.
But, on the other hand, there are deeper, spiritual meanings to much that we read in the Bible.
The Jewish system of biblical exegesis called PaRDeS is very well suited to this proper form of properly interpreting much of what the Bible says.
For example, the “R” stands for “Remes”, which is the deeper, spiritual meaning, and we see this used by Yeshua when he gives the Sermon on the Mount.
The “P” is the “P’shat”, the plain language meaning (which is what you propose to be the only way we should interpret (if I read you correctly), and the Pharisees taught just that- such as “Do not murder”. But Yeshua taught to not even hate in your heart, which is the Remes of that commandment.
The same for “Do not commit adultery”- the Remes says do not even lust with your eyes.
I think the issue is reading into something what you want it to say, instead of reading it and understanding what it says.
I agree with you. And I was thinking the same thing actually when writing today’s post. 
This post calls out the crazy allegorizing that goes hogwild off the deep end.