Opponents of Allegory

The scholars of Antioch refused to accept a fable that promotes history. However, their way of interpretation brought some heresies.

Some people are struggling to distort the biblical sentiments "to write famous voices of the Bible scholars of the 4th century, Theodor of Mopistia, Biblical schools centered on Antioch". All for my own purpose. . They are thinking about foolish allegories and allegorical names of stupid names in their minds. They abuse the apostolic words as a blank authority to abolish all the meaning of the Bible. "

In the beginning of the third century, the origin of Alexander introduced the way to interpret the hidden, spiritual meaning of Old Testament verses into the church, regarded the Old Testament as a great allegory of Christ. Most of the Bible translations following him follow this tradition.

But not all. Some Christians are aware of the dangers of allegorical approaches. Someone must be responsible for translation of "spiritualization", otherwise the meaning of the Bible may be distorted to the form that the author of the Bible never considered.

As Paul said in the same way as Tarsus, Antioch is "not a despicable city." We know that this is the place where Jesus believers were originally called "Christians", but their secular reputation has also been established. Founded 300 years ago of Christ, this town of modern Turkish river Olontes became the third largest city in the Roman Empire.

Antioch stands at the intersection of the east and the west, giving the entire empire a great cultural and political influence. "Libanius, master of the master of Antioch and Hellenistic School, asked," What is the land and the ocean where city fame does not enter? " "Various attractions bring people from all walks of life from Africa, Europe, Asia, the island, and the mainland."

(206) Luther traditionally is an opponent of a fable and I believe that the true meaning of the Bible lies in its literal sense. His rejection comes from the help of the Catholic Church and the reformist Protestant. This problem involves improving a particular allegory to another particular allegory. Luther condemned the Catholic Church and ignored the grammatical consciousness of the Eucharist. · (207) Luther claims literal meaning. For him there is no real difference between the word of God and the sign of the earth. There is no way to move from a symbol to a symbol. The dual function of a symbol is to let the observer input God's true existence and at the same time express an infinite perceptual gap between God and man.

In the poet's fable, you have two levels, words and morality. Regardless of whether it is an allegorical theologist or a poet's allegory, even if the theologian's fable mentions that incident, it will continue to be the word we are reading. There is a way that Dante seems to be avoiding the whole at some point. How can I distinguish between the two modes - rhetoric mode - independently of each other? In fact, he continued, in fact, the difference is how you understand the literal meaning. In a sort of belief you might have, literally - the Bible is the Word of God, and you are reading it in theology. But if you decide, and someone may say that the Bible is truly an exceptional group of poetry stories, you are reading according to the poet's fable.