A subtitle could read, “The Destruction of Truth when Scripture is Spiritualized (Allegorized) by Cunningly Devised Fables, with Examples from the Preaching of a Pastor.”
While the Bible does establish predictions that employ the literary device of symbols, they cannot be twisted to signify whatever one wishes: Scripture has only one correct interpretation (2 Pet 1:20), and the Bible explains the significance of the symbols it employs. Thus we must, to give the text a true meaning, interpret these texts literally—that is, the symbols represent what other passages of Scripture define them to mean. It is not possible to take the prophecies or symbols of any chapter and make them mean whatever one wishes—the Bible defines its symbols and definitively specifies its meaning. Correct interpretation is not speculative, but exegetical—it comes from evaluating the plain declarations of the text, not reading into it what it does not say to create “predictive prophecy” or spiritualizing of scripture. Taking the text for what it says, the reader discovers that God has made amazing predictions and revealed incredible truths.
There is a form of interpretation of Scripture that does not glorify God, and does not derive from the Spirit of God, Who is the Teacher of Truth (1 Jn 2:20-21, 27). This is known as allegoricalism or spiritualizing scripture, which is not taking scripture literally. It’s a rejection of the plain meaning of the text for some convoluted symbolic interpretation that doesn’t even exist in the text, context or elsewhere in Scripture. The principles of sound hermeneutics are completely abandoned and another explanation is given, a “deeper” one supposedly, without concern over the actual true meaning of the Scripture or the lack of meaning of an object or number or something else in Scripture.
Allegoricalization or spiritualizing scripture is a literary device and a narration of Scripture in which events, actions, characters, settings or objects represent specific abstract ideas either not taught in God’s Word or not connected in any way to a given text. They are given a fanciful symbolic meaning, meandering in the paths of out of control imagination and mental gymnastics, in contradiction to what the passage, context and the rest of Scriptures rightly divided teaches, which results in corruption and destruction of truth and of sound doctrine. Objects are deposed as being simply objects, spiritualized and given a meaning that God never gave. Although allegorizing is dependent upon symbolism, the presence of symbols in a literary work does not make it an allegory. This literary device is most commonly heard in O.T. teaching and the Book of Revelation. Essentially, symbolism (typology) is the use of objects, words, characters, numbers, locations, or abstract ideas as symbols to represent something beyond their literal meaning or tied to other symbols in Scripture that have no actual relation.
A subjective approach, symbolic allegoricalization is meant to bring out some hidden meaning but actually allows the interpreter to make a text mean whatever they want. They might start with what they’d like the Bible to say or perhaps defend their own thinking by finding a passage to say it. This changes God's Word as much as adding or taking away from the Words (Rev 22:18-19), maybe worse. Though we have all the correct words, we shouldn’t treat them like play-doh.
Allegorizing or spiritualizing scripture is not taking scripture literally; it denies the plain meaning of the text or specific words or symbols for another highly subjective spiritualized meaning. The principles of sound hermeneutics are abandoned and another explanation is given, a “deeper” or more “spiritual” or “hidden” one supposedly, without concern over the objective truth of the text. This causes massive problems in that truth fails to retain absolutism and Scripture is wrested. It is the death knell of sound hermeneutics (biblical understanding and interpretation of the Bible). It’s a product of fables and the motivation of ear ticklers and (mostly) unregenerate souls who do not understand Scripture, so they interpret them in such a manner they are only capable of.
Those who do this cannot follow the normal rules of hermeneutics, which require a literal approach to Scripture except where the Bible itself clearly indicates it is speaking symbolically. By taking verses out of their context and meaning, the allegorizer can make the Word of God mean whatever they want it to mean. Consequently, he then becomes the authority over truth, not the Triune God. And God's Word becomes a collection of confusion and contradiction.
This highly subjective interpretation methodology was created at the heretical and apostate school of Alexandra, Egypt, which was established only a few centuries after the passing of the last apostle, in the 3rd century, predominantly by the apostates Clement and Origin, two hero “Church Fathers” of evangelicals and reformed-Calvinists, and then progressed further in the following centuries by the heretic Augustine. This ungodly, apostate school became the headquarters for the allegorical method of interpretation. These aforementioned men were chief fathers of the allegorical method of Bible interpretation. Origin claimed that “the Scriptures have little use to those who understand them literally.” He described the literal meaning of Scripture as “bread” and encouraged the student to go beyond this to the “wine” of allegoricalism, whereby one can become intoxicated and transported to heavenly realms. Origen’s commentaries contained a wealth of fanciful interpretations, abounding in “heretical revisals of Scripture" (Frederick Nolan, Inquiry into the Integrity of the Greek Vulgate, p. 367). Augustine was so influential in changing the literal interpretation of prophecy to the allegorical that he has been called “the father of amillennialism.” Yet he testified that there were many in his day [5th century BC] who believed in a literal millennium. He said, “I myself, too, once held this opinion. . . . They who do believe them are called by the spiritual, Chiliasts, which we may literally reproduce by the name Millenarians” (Augustine, City of God, book 20, chapter 7). These men also embraced massive amounts of other false and blasphemous doctrine, since Egypt was a place where false teaching proliferated in the early centuries after Christ, including “Christian” paganism, purgatory, universalism (with even the devil saved in the end), baptismal regeneration, rejection of Christ’s Deity and the Spirit’s Deity, rejection of the inspiration of the Bible, and of course this false methodology of Bible interpretation, and more. They were also the unofficial originators of Roman Catholicism, and Rome took advantage by using the same corrupted tactic to read into the Bible many new doctrines and false dogmas, which then consequently flowed out with the heretical Protestant Reformers (such as Calvin, Luther, Zwingli), along with other Roman heresies including baptismal regeneration and persecution of dissidents and critics, many of which teachings still stand strong as a bulwark in Reformed Calvinist and Protestant churches.
Without relying on his writings, many still follow Origin's methods by continuing to spiritualize God's Word. Many also follow Augustine's methods and beliefs as well, while actually relying on his writings. Protestantism hijacked the Catholic allegorizing and spiritualizing even in its own approach to the Bible and the Protestant denominations (e.g., Anglican, Presbyterian, Lutheran, Methodist) have interpreted the Bible allegorically, especially concerning prophecy, with very few exceptions, following the example set by their forefathers. Again, this is one of the errors they brought out of Rome. Many Mennonites, most in fact, follow this heretical practice as well. As mentioned above, practically everyone that interprets Scripture in this manner, with very very few exceptions, is unsaved. Unregenerate. Lost. Unredeemed. Absent of the indwelling Spirit of God. Period. Claiming otherwise denies God's Word (Pr 8:8-9; 20:21-22; Is 28:9-10; 2 Tim 2:15; 2 Pet 3:16-17), denies the workings of the Holy Spirit (Jn 16:13; 1 Jn 2:20-21, 27) and makes God out to be a liar (ibid and ibid). Denial only further establishes the unregenerate estate.
While symbolism does exist in the Bible, for it to be true symbolism or allegory, it must be explained both clearly and precisely in the context (primarily), or elsewhere in Scripture. Preaching that disregards or opposes the literal meaning of a text to something allegorical and fanciful, meandering in the paths of unbridled imagination, will corrupt both the symbol and text, and produce confusion, destruction of truth and unsound doctrine. Typology should never question or overthrow the plain and literal meaning of any passage or term or doctrine of Scripture.
The twisting and wresting of scripture by spiritualizing or allegoricalizing a passage or object does not come without consequence. It’ll radically affect other doctrines and passages of Scripture, especially in the area of Bible prophecy, but also doctrine. It’ll lead to fundamental change, since it influences all interpretation in the Bible. This unBiblical and heretical methodology has resulted in untold amount of false doctrines, false systems, false practices and even cults, its roots found in practically all false doctrines. In fact, it’s the supreme mode of interpretation for most if not all false Christian groups and cults, including many Mennonite sects.
Due to its highly subjective nature, it lends itself toward liberalism, since someone can easily make scripture mean whatever they want it to mean. The allegorizer is not so much concerned about each word in Scripture, but tying together thoughts and symbols, even extraBiblical ones, and taking passages in isolation and forming his own interpretations in contrast to what the passage, context and Bible actually says. They are essentially falsely dividing the Word of truth (cf. 2:Tim 2:15) and privately interpreting the Scriptures (2 Pet 1:21).
Forced interpretation (eisegesis) by spiritualizing, attempts to overthrow many plain texts because of conclusions derived from allegorical typology. There is true typology and false typology, and the line is broad between them. The Spirit of God teaches truth in a literal, normal sense and in no other sense. God is not the author of confusion or of mental gymnastics. The early Christians interpreted prophecy literally (Ac 3:19-21; Rom 11:25-27), and this is even admitted by most church historians. Historically and Biblically speaking, it’s been religious lost people guilty of this type of interpretation (condemned by 2 Pet 1:16-21 and 3:16-17), and practically all of them are left to this device since they are absent of the indwelling Spirit of truth. Personally, I was caught up in this dishonouring interpretation of Scripture (unwittingly), BEFORE I was converted and regenerated by the Triune God. It was how the Mennonite sect I was part of as a child taught Scripture, and it was an acceptable form of interpretation by practically all Mennonites and Evangelicals I would come in contact with, regardless whether they were conservative or liberal.
In allegoricalism, instead of “a more sure word of prophecy” (2 Pet 1:19), you end up with an ‘unsure’ word, with contradictions and chaos in the ranks, all of course in complete contrast to God, who is not the author of confusion, and in contrast to such passages as 2 Pet 1:21, which warn of private interpretation. Its a form of wresting scripture, and 2 Pet 3:16 declares it’s the “unlearned and unstable” who “wrest . . . the . . . scriptures, unto their own destruction.” To “wrest” means to pervert and twist Scripture and Biblical terminology and language in a false sense, the word carrying the idea of one being tortured and twisted on the rack. 2 Pet 3:17 warns it is an “error of the wicked” and can cause true saints to fall from their steadfastness (stability). Imitating “saints” however will lap this all up as good puppy dogs.
Below I will consider some examples and illustrations by pastor Tim Krahn from a diverse number of sermons in the O.T. (and some in the N.T.), who is a master at allegoricalizing Scripture (both O.T. and N.T. but especially O.T. — in fact, he once stated in a sermon ironically titled “The Sword of the Spirit” that he likes the O.T. for this, and thus consequently his preaching is flooded with this heresy) some with serious consequence. I had considered leaving his name out, but Biblical conviction dispelled such thoughts for three important reasons.
Spiritualizing Scripture, the eisegetical and disgraceful doctrine of allegoricalism, is a diabolical and corrupted practice of interpreting Scripture and exceedingly dangerous, producing confusion, contradiction, disgrace, and false doctrine. It is a serious matter concerning the truth of Scripture and people must be warned, lest I be guilty of transgressing the 9th commandment in concealing the truth or holding undue silence in this just cause (Rom 16:17; Ju 1:3; Lev 5:1; Ac 5:3, 8-9; 2 Tim 4:6), or holding my peace when error calls for reproof (Pr 24:23-25; 28:23; Ti 2:15; Lev 19:17) and complaint to others (Is 59:4; Rom 16:17; I Cor 1:11), to preserve and promote the truth between men (Ze 8:16), to stand for the truth (Pr 31:8-9; Ju 1:3; 1 Cor 16:13; Ezk 3:17) and contend against corruption of God's Word (Ju 1:3; 2 Pet 2:1; Rom 16:17).
He rejected any Biblical criticism of this clearly unBiblical practice, regardless of the Bible evidence provided debunking it. Multiple times he was approached and admonished in a godly manner concerning this heresy, but no repentance exercised ever for this corruption of Scripture and misleading of congregants to this day, as far as I am aware, while the instructions of Ti 3:10-11 is clear: "A man that is an heretick after the first and second admonition reject; Knowing that he that is such is subverted, and sinneth, being condemned of himself."
Paul named names. People he was close to. Men he ministered with. Many times. Ten times in 1 and 2 Timothy alone. This is the Biblical standard, and he was obeying the Word of God, including his own writings inspired of God: "Now I beseech you, brethren, mark them which cause divisions and offences contrary to the doctrine which ye have learned; and avoid them." (Rom 16:17). Someone that habitually practices such corruption of God's Word (2 Cor 2:17) unrepentantly, needs to be exposed for it (Rom 16:17; 2 Tim 3:8-9).
Strangely, preachers like Krahn will appeal to the people to defend the truth by asking for “chapter and verse.” But what “chapter and verse” gives credence to any of this unBiblical heresy that meanders in the world of imagination and mathematical magic and not in the sound, grounded truth of God's Word? The only “chapter and verse” I can think of is the one that condemns it as “private interpretation,” which is 2 Pet 1:21, since it results in "cunningly devised fables,” (2 Pet 1:16). The same pastor will implore the people to “stand on the Word of God,” but what about this twisting, manipulating, and wresting Scripture—how is that standing on the Word of God? And what happens when someone does “stand on the Word of God,” by discerning, examining, testing, judging, challenging and criticizing these abhorrent practices, and faithfully and “earnestly contending for the faith” (Ju 1:3) because he loves the truth of God's Word which is greater than God's own name (Ps 138:2), by reproving and warning of these dangerous practices, as commanded (2 Tim 4:2)? That person is passionately hated. Slanderously, maliciously hated. The spin doctors start their web of tales and lies, and the witch hunt is on. They are maligned, slandered, falsely witnessed about, and motives and manners falsely judged. Finally, they are brought before the kangaroo court and then cast out into the street, with the attitude of the ungodly, hypocritical Pharisees, "Thou wast altogether born in sins, and dost thou teach us? And they cast him out." (Jn 9:34). Scriptures also speak to this. A lot. Majority of people hated Jesus, especially those in religious leadership positions, because He spoke the truth. The plain and bold truth, and very often sharp. Paul likewise, and no man would stand with him (2 Tim 4). Public preaching requires public scrutiny and thats what we got here. All of this is well summarized in 2 Tim 3:8-9,
"Now as Jannes and Jambres withstood Moses, so do these also resist the truth: men of corrupt minds, reprobate concerning the faith. But they shall proceed no further: for their folly shall be manifest unto all men, as theirs also was."
True Typology via Literal Interpretation
Before going into examples of this heresy of allegoricalism, let’s first of all consider some examples of true typology, non-allegoricalized, just plain literal truth from Scripture, in no particular order. As noted, typology to be true must firstly be explained somewhere else in Scripture or in that context (most commonly), which must also harmonize with the remainder of scripture and with sound doctrine, illustrating only what is elsewhere clearly taught and can never contradict the plain teaching of Scripture.
Gen 40, the dreams show true typology because the symbols are explained right there in the context. We are not left to guess what they mean.
Dan 8:6 speaks of a ram with two horns and then Dan 8:20 states, “The ram which thou sawest having two horns are the kings of Media and Persia.” The ram represents the kings of Media and Persia, not the establishment of the US, the bombing of Pearl Harbour, the twin towers, or any other fancy meandering of imagination.
Dan 8:2-8 the vision is interpreted in vv. 19-25. Dan 8:5-8 mentions a goat with a notable horn, and then Dan 8:21 states, “And the rough goat is the king of Grecia: and the great horn that is between his eyes is the first king.” Thus, a meaning is given for the “horn.”
The Rock in the OT from whence water flowed (Ex 17:6; Num 20:10-11) was a picture of Jesus Christ (De 32:4-37; 1 Cor 10:6). We don’t even need to go to the NT to know that the Rock of the OT was Christ (Ps 78:20, 35; Is 51:1; De 32; 2 Sam 22:2-3; 23:3).
The manna that came down from heaven (Ex 16:4), was a picture of Christ (Jn 6:33, 51, 58). On a side note, the manna wasn’t the Holy Spirit, as the hymn “Brethren We Have Met to Worship” falsely sings in Keswick fashion.
The ladder in Gen 28:12, its purpose is explained in that very passage, as a conduit for “the angels of God ascending and descending on it.” Jn 1:51 says the same.
Rom 5:12-21 concerning Adam, both in points of comparison and contrast. After telling us that Adam is a type of Christ (v. 14), vv. 15-17 show several contrasts, which help to prevent one from making unscriptural interpretations.
The “seven golden candlesticks” and “seven stars” in Rev 1:12 and 16 are explained in v. 20.
The valley of dry bones in Ezk 37:1-2 is interpreted in v. 11.
The parable of the eagles and the vine of Ezk 17:1-9 is interpreted in vv. 10-21.
The symbolic language in Isa 2:13-16 (vv. 10-22 is a prophecy of the Great Tribulation), is explained in vv. 11-12 and 17.
Is. 2:1-5 is a prophecy of the exaltation of Israel during the Millennium with symbolic language, “the mountain of the Lord’s house shall be established in the top of the mountains” (v. 2), which is interpreted in the context. The “mountain of the Lord’s house” refers to Jerusalem (v. 1) and the “mountains” and “hills” refer to other nations (vv. 2b-4).
The four soils of the parable of the sower and seed in Matt 13, the earthly soil symbols (vv. 3-8) of spiritual truth (vv. 19-23) are explained right there in context.
The meaning of the parable of the wheat and tares (vv. 24-30) is given in the context (vv. 36-43)
Heb 9:1-28 for the tabernacle.
Rev. 12. The devil persecutes Israel during the Tribulation (Rev. 12). The woman in this chapter signifies, typifies, Israel. Verse 5 shows the woman bringing forth Christ; it is obvious that Jesus was brought forth by Israel (Is 9:6-7; Rom 9:5). Israel is referred to as a woman (Is 54:5-7). The words of Rev 12:2 are almost an exact quote from Mic. 5:3, “Therefore will he give them up, until the time that she which travaileth hath brought forth: then the remnant of his brethren shall return unto the children of Israel.” Again, this speaks of Israel’s delivery of the Messiah. These symbols, which are symbols actually explained in Scripture, either in the context (mostly) or somewhere else, are not used in the NT of the churches.
The allegory of Gal 4:21-31 is given and then the meaning right in the context, which is God’s rule of interpretation.
Even though the above symbols are actually representative of true typology, that does not imply that all symbols in the Bible are to be interpreted typologically. They’re not. Many have no meaning beyond the actual literal meaning of the symbol itself in the passage. (The same applies to numbers in the Bible. Numerology is more along the lines of the occult, then Bibliology.) Furthermore, some take this further and claim that everything in the OT somehow points to Jesus Christ and salvation. That is not true. Though many things do, as the Bible indicates (Lk 24:44), that certainly does not mean everything. If that were the case, there would be some far-fetched false interpretations and false doctrine developed and even blasphemous ideas.
False Typology via Allegorical Interpretation
Now on to examples of false interpretation of typology through the allegoricalism of Scripture.
1. The Ladder of Jacob’s Dream (Gen 28:12-15). When the ladder in Jacob’s dream is turned into something other than explained in the passage, this is called spiritualizing Scripture. The pastor claimed the ladder refers to Christ Himself, so the angels run to and fro on Christ. Nowhere in the context or in Scripture is Christ referenced as a ladder, which then breaks the basic rule of typology. Jesus is referred to as many things (e.g. Light, Door, Shepherd, Physician, Rock) but never a ladder. So Jesus is not the ladder. Nor is it a picture of His gospel, another allegorical interpretation. It has no correlation to the Gospel.
Attempting to spiritualize the ladder by tying it to the double helix of the DNA is beyond a far stretch, and meandering in the world of mental gymnastics. DNA has absolutely nothing to do with the ladder of Gen 28:12, nor with Ps 139:16. The same goes for phosphate, one of the three elements of DNA; phosphate is not lighting up angels as they ascend and descend the ladder. There is no connection between DNA phosphate and angels of light or with the light of Ps 119:130, or Gen 28:12 for that matter. Ps 119:130 refers to God giving light to the lost through the entrance (disclosure) of His Word and it doesn’t come through angels. Angels don’t preach to sinners but minister to saints (Heb 1:13-14), as they did to Christ while in His earthly minister (Jn 1:51; Matt 4:11), which is the meaning of the ladder conduit of Gen 28:12.
The ladder typology is actually interpreted right in the passage itself and context. It was a picture of conveyance for the angels, reflecting their consistent ministry to Jacob (v. 12), exemplified in Jacobs life (Gen 13:1) and then later in Christ (Jn 1:51), exemplified in Matt 4:11. Both Jacob (vv. 14-15) and “the land whereon [Jacob] liest” (v. 13) as he dreamed this dream, would be greatly blessed of God—the covenants of Abraham and Issac had now passed on to Jacob—with the expectation of Gods angelic vessels ascending and descending the ladder (v. 12) being about Jacob and ministering to him (cf. Gen 32:1; Ps 104:4), as they faithfully do with all the saints (Heb 1:13-14). God was giving Jacob assurance that He would never leave or forsake him, and bring him back to the promised land (v. 15).
2. The Stone Under Jacob’s Head (Gen 28:18). Consider now a much more disastrous example of allegorizing scripture, that borders blasphemy. He connected Gen 28:18 to the stone in Dan 2:44-45, and then to the stones in Solomons temple, and then to us as lively stones (1 Pet 1:25), and then to stones being used in the building of the church, but that didn’t really work because most are made up of wood. None of these are actually connected to Gen 28:18 or to each other. There is no connection at all but he untenably attempted to tie things together that are untieable. This is not truth and completely detracts from the actual truth of what God is teaching.
In further detail, the stone of Gen 28:18, Jacob’s pillow, was interpreted as being Jesus Christ and then connected to Dan 2:34-35, where the stone cut without hands is interpreted also as Christ, which is then explained as the stone that obliterates the ten toes of the two feet of the image, which were interpreted (“easily” supposedly he said) as the ten commandments, because they consist of two tablets with five commandments each, and each foot has five toes: 5 + 5 = 10 — all this allegedly a picture of Christ, the stone, destroying or eradicating the ten commandments by Christ bearing the law on His body on the cross, defeating and destroying and obliterating the law on the cross, that very stone supposedly whom the builders of the tower of Babel rejected because they used brick (man’s works) in stead of stone, but not Solomon for he built God a house with stone, representing Christ. And the stones in Solomon’s Temple were cut by stone, not iron, because tools of iron are of the devil (the legs of the image in Dan 2 are, you guessed it, made of iron, which then indicates an alleged demonic nature of iron). Hence why our forefathers supposedly didn’t use iron to build churches. Hadn't heard that one before. Today we don’t need buildings of stone because the universal church, the people, are individual stones that make the whole universal building. And within those people are cells and in cells, DNA, which also contains stones, building who we are. This is what the stone represents that Jacob rested his head on in Gen 28:18.
W😳W. One is left speechless when Scripture is so badly twisted and manipulated. This is the fantastical pathway of conjecture taken, all based on a false foundation of allegoricalism, which subsequently produces false doctrine. This convoluted mess of pea soup is where spiritualizing scripture takes a very bad turn for the worst, God’s Word is treated like tomatoes falling off the back of a produce truck. It’s so bad on so many levels, it’s difficult to know where to start and maintain brevity and some level of sanity.
First of all, just because Jesus Christ is the “Rock” (De 32:4,15; 1 Cor 10:4; Matt 16:18) and “stone” (Ps 118:22; Is 28:16; Matt 21:42; Ac 4:11; 1 Pet 2:6-7) doesn’t mean the stone in Gen 28:18—used by Jacob for a pillow and pillar—is referring to Jesus. It’s not, not in any shape or form. It’s just a stone. Allegorizing a stone that has no meaning is not a sign of Biblical wisdom but a sign of something else altogether.
Secondly, there is NO connection between the “Rock/stone” Jesus and the stones in Solomon’s Temple or the fact that they weren’t cut by iron, or the lack of stones in Babels Tower or with the stones in the heretical universal “church” or in our cells, supposedly. Tying scripture and words together that have zero connect besides the letters in the word, doesn’t get a stamp of validity. There is zero Biblical wisdom in what is done here. The Bible doesn’t read like this, or interpret like this, or harmonize like this. God the Spirit does not ever teach those He indwells in such a fashion.
Thirdly, Jacob’s stone does not equate the stone in Dan 2:44-45 (“the stone was cut out of the mountain without hands”), nor is that actually Christ but the kingdom of God, as Dan 2:44-45 declares, “God of heaven set up a kingdom, which shall never be destroyed: . . . IT shall break in pieces and consume all these kingdoms, and IT shall stand for ever.” We note the stone in Dan 2 actually destroys all 5 earthly kingdoms of Nebuchadnezzar’s image, not just the toes and feet, as falsely claimed. Just because there are ten commandments and typically ten toes on a man (Dan 2 doesn’t specifically say how many toes), doesn’t imply any connection between the two!
Fourthly, does God actually destroy His own Law by His Son, as allegedly claimed? God forbid. In Dan 2:44-45, the stone destroys all 5 kingdoms (there’s not just 4, but 5, though the fifth is an extension of the 4th) including the feet and toes. So what does this spiritualizing error implicate? That the stone allegorized as Jesus, is destroying His own ten commandments, actually attacking His own law, specifically aimed at the feet where the strength allegedly rests, because strength of sin is the law (1 Cor 15:56 was misused here as well) according to this pastor, so He had to destroy His own Law. Spiritually it was explained as Christ defeating the law by bearing it on His body and dying with Him on the cross. Heresy might be too soft of a word to describe this spiritualizing unbiblical rubbish.
The 5 kingdoms have nothing to do with God’s law (or Eph 6:12), nor is the law the strength of this image as also falsely asserted. The kingdoms of Nebuchadnezzar’s dream in Dan 2:31-45 depicted in the great image are four real historical kingdoms: Babylon, Mede-Persia, Greece, Rome and then there is a divided Rome (presently), though not considered a kingdom like the others. The toes and feet are divided Rome, which is actually the weakest of all five (vv. 41-42), not the strongest as was also falsely claimed.
God does NOT destroy His own law! This is a serious attack on God’s Word. The image, mystery Babylon, is not destroyed yet, but will be in the Tribulation (Rev 17-18). Christ didn’t bear the law on the cross, but our sins. God’s law is good and reflective of God’s glory. God does not destroy Himself. God did not put to death His own Law, the written Word of God. God’s Word is eternal—all the words, precepts, testimonies, commands, statutes, judgments, down to the tittles and jots, all of which encapsulates God’s law and settled forever in heaven (1 Pet 1:25; Ps 119:89, 160). Although the strength of sin is the law (1 Cor 15:56), it doesn’t mean the law is sin! Christ, “his own self bare our sins in his own body on the tree,” (1 Pet 2:24a), and “by himself purged our sins,” (Heb 1:3), NOT the law. The law is very much alive today, still a schoolmaster to bring sinners to Christ (Gal 3:24). 1 Jn 3:4 is as valid today as ever, sin being the transgression of the law, with all the lost “under the law” (Gal 5:18) which is written on their hearts (Rom 2:15). Once its job is executed—through the medium of evangelism like Christ did (Mk 10:17-21; 1 Cor 1:21)—in revealing sin and bringing sinners to repentance (Gal 3:10-13, 23), the regenerate saint is no longer under its penalty or power (Gal 3:24; Rom 6:1-23; 7:3-4). Yet the sinner-turned-saint establishes or fulfills the law, the law not made void through faith (Rom 3:31), by obedience to God’s commandments, precepts and statutes (Jn 14:23-24; 1 Jn 2:3-5).
This spiritualizing heresy paints a very different picture of the law, then what God does. “Wherefore the law is holy, and the commandment holy, and just, and good. . . . For we know that the law is spiritual:” (Rom 7:12, 14). Gal 3:21 asks rhetorically, “Is the law then against the promises of God? God forbid: for if there had been a law given which could have given life, verily righteousness should have been by the law.” Faith doesn’t end law-keeping. Why not? “That the righteousness of the law might be fulfilled in us, who walk not after the flesh, but after the Spirit.” (Rom 8:4). The law is righteous and fulfilled by the righteous but unable to impute righteousness. See also Matt 5:17-19.
The teaching that Christ put to death His own law, His own Word, that the law itself is sin, is not just heresy but nigh blasphemy! There are bad consequences in teaching such heresy. If Jesus, the stone, destroyed His own Law by His death, it’ll naturally produce other consequential effects. Such as: (a) If there is no law, then there is no transgression (Gal 3:23; Rom 3:19-20). How could sinners be guilty of transgressing the law, since “Whosoever committeth sin transgresseth also the law” (1 Jn 3:4a), when “where no law is, there is no transgression” (Rom 4:15)? Removing the law, removes the means of sinners condemnation, reproof and guilt, what Rom 3:19; Jn 6:7-11 teach. If this were true, there are thousands of passages of scripture that are untrue. “God forbid: yea, let God be true,” and whosoever teaches this sort of error, “a liar” (Rom 3:4). (b) The ten commandants are tied into all other commands, 613 in the OT and >2,000 in the NT. Destroying the ten, destroys them all. Consequently, true believers won’t need to “fulfill the law” as Paul proclaimed (Rom 3:31), or obey God’s Word (demonstrating ones love for God and the new birth), which completely opposes the truth (Jn 14:23-24; 1 Jn 2:3-5; Jam 2:14-26). (c) The premise to error (leaven) is greater error (leavening). Not only would salvation and righteousness be nullified with no law, i.e. no condemnation of sin and no righteousness fulfilled, but the corollary follows that there would be no salvation period. Destroying the ten would accordingly destroy the two greatest commandments, for “On these two commandments hang all the law and the prophets.” (Matt 22:40). To “inherit eternal life” (Lk 10:25) requires man to “love the Lord thy God with all thy heart, . . . soul, . . . mind. This is the first and great commandment. And the second is like unto it, Thou shalt love thy neighbour as thyself” (Mat 22:37-39). This has always been the foundation of the law (De 6:5; 10:12-16; 13:3; 30:6, 19-20; Lev 19:18). Salvation produces love for God and our brethren, for in conversion God “circumcise[s] thine heart . . . to love the LORD thy God with all thine heart, and with all thy soul, that thou mayest live” (De 30:6). No law, no salvation. Only hell.
The following report further discusses the Born Again Believers Relationship to the Law.
Fifthly, timber was also part of Solomons temple, not just stone (1 Ki 5:18). Iron is never depicted as evil or of the devil, as allegorizers claim, but the very opposite! In Jos 6, vessels of iron and brass are noted alongside silver and gold as being “consecrated unto the LORD: they shall come into the treasury of the LORD.” (vv. 19, 24). Even in building the Temple, iron wasn’t forbidden. What the verse actually says: “And the house, when it was in building, was built of stone made ready before it was brought thither: so that there was neither hammer nor axe nor any tool of iron heard in the house, while it was in building.” (1 Ki 6:7). All the things of the temple were completed before arriving at the temple, so no sound of construction tools were heard in the temple. And there’s no spiritual side to tools for building churches.
Six, the use of “brick” at Babels tower means nothing. Brick doesn’t represent dirt or man’s efforts or works, nor a picture of rejecting stone, i.e. rejecting God, as was claimed by this pastor. This spiritualizing rubbish distorts and corrupts the actual truth why God confounded the languages at Babel. Not because they didn’t use stone but because of their motives and rebellion to what God had specifically said. God said, “Be fruitful, and multiply, and replenish the earth” (Gen 9:1b) but they said “let us build us a city and a tower, whose top may reach unto heaven; and let us make us a name, lest we be scattered abroad upon the face of the whole earth.” (Gen 11:4). Using stone wouldn’t have changed anything concerning their rebellion.
In summary, the stone under Jacob’s head used for his pillar, the stone found in Dan 2 used to build the Temple but allegedly making up the “universal church” today, is not Jesus Christ or people pointing to Jesus; the feet and toes are not the ten commandments; the Stone in Gen 28:18 has NO connection to the stone in Dan 2:34 (it does not destroy the law because the image has ten toes that allegedly represent the ten commandments and Christ is the stone, nor did Christ destroy His law on the Cross) or to the stones in Solomons temple or to saved people as lively stones (1 Pet 1:25); God has NOT destroyed His own law, nor He did not bear it on His Son’s body on the tree! Jesus said, “it is easier for heaven and earth to pass, than one tittle of the law to fail” (Lk 16:17), so the law will never fail or be destroyed! None of this is true. This is false doctrine and pure fabrication made out of sheer cloth.
3. Numerology. Numbers are often spiritualized in this fantastical world of allegoricalism and mathematical magic, numbers such as 3, 11, 23, 5, 28, 26, 2, 22, 39, etc. In spite of certain numbers having some symbolic significance in Scripture (e.g. 666 in Rev 13:18, the numbers 3, 7, 12), assigning unwarranted meaning in an allegorical fashion, finding hidden meanings in numbers, words and order of words or attempts at arbitrarily connecting numbers, is a distortion of God’s Word. Numerology is taking numbers assigned in scripture, such as seven for seven days, or three for trinity, and spiritualizing them into meanings they do not carry. Numbers will carry different meanings depending upon what he does to them or what chapter or verse they are in (even verse or chapter numbers can dictate the meaning), thus making them mean what he wants when he wants. This is especially popular when it comes chapter and verse numbers, even though neither are inspired of God.
Let's consider some examples of allegorical numerology, taken from the same pastor, in no particular order:
Number 28. The conjecture was given that Gen 28 has some special meaning because the word “cross” is found 28 times in the Bible. There is no correlation between the two. It’s pure speculation and fabrication. When God inspired His Word to Moses, He did not give chapter or verse numbers, so they have no meaning whatsoever. They were put in the Bible by men in the 14th (chapters) century and 16th (verses) century (besides the Psalms, which have chapter divisions). Did God speak to and move a few Roman Catholics in the 13th and 16th century to put His Word into chapter and verse division, so that doctor bottle stoppers and Ruckmanites and Kellyites and Hoggardites today can play mental gymnastics with these numbers and come up with some advanced revelation found in the annals of man's imagination? Not only is this twisting Scripture, it’s also usurping authority from God the Spirit over God’s Word. A lot of this among KJV-only people was concocted by the extreme heretic Peter Ruckman, who taught that the KJV is advanced revelation.
Number 3. He claimed that "number three is for resurrection in the Bible." Since, after all, Christ was resurrected from the dead after three days. To further support this spiritualized theory concerning 3, he gave the example of Jesus raising Lazarus from the dead. But Lazarus was dead for “four days” (Jn 11:17, 39), not 3 days! So is number 4 also for resurrection in the Bible? The little girl that died, she was dead for less than a whole day before Christ raised her from the dead (Mk 9). So is number 1 also for resurrection in the Bible? Sometimes its 3, sometimes its 4, sometimes its 1? In another sermon he attempted to garner further support for his theory by claiming when Jesus referred to Himself as the God of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob, He was directly implying the resurrection because they are not dead and they are three. Wow. One must have a lot of knowledge to come up with this deep allegorical stuff. Just because the Jewish patristic fathers were 3, doesn’t mean that the the number 3 means anything there or anywhere else in Scripture. Like Mike Hoggard, his spiritual mentor in numerology, 3 can also mean divine completeness . . . sometimes, until it needs to mean sin, then it means sin. The meanings are arbitrary depending on what he wants or needs it to mean. Loosely tying together different things in Scripture that count to three (and actually not even staying consistent in that conclusion or meaning), and then giving the number three a meaning, is forcing an interpretation through allegoricalism that doesn’t exist anywhere in Scripture. And its vanity hocus-pocus, where the interpreter becomes his own little god.
Number 10. Ten was spiritualized, claiming that the ten faithful spies upon Israels entrance into the land of Canaan, relate to the Ten commandments. As already mentioned, the ten toes of the Dan 2 image allegedly depicting the ten commandments. This is not Biblical truth. If there was a meaning to the alleged 10 toes of the last (present) "kingdom," it would have to be prophetic since Dan 2 is prophecy and very likely referring to the 10 kings in Rev 17:12-17. This is literal interpretation backed by scripture and harmonizing with prophetic truth. The Ten commandments are not prophecy. They are not the the 10 toes of the idolatrous image. God's law is good and right, but idolatry is not. There’s absolutely no connection. I mean whatsoever. And its perverting truth of Scripture and denigrating God's law, through unbridled imagination and not interpreting literally by context. Just because there are ten toes and ten commandments, does not imply any special significance to the number 10, which then demands spiritualizing all no. 10’s in the Bible, since God's Word is consistent and not contradictory. Because he sees the “10” as significant, he actually creates false doctrine and blasphemes God's law, like he did with the law being allegedly destroyed, which meant the image couldn’t stand, but was taken to the Cross, because the 10 toes are destroyed, and thus the image couldn’t stand. This is ludicrous and serious perversion of God’s Word. None of it is true. The law wasn’t destroyed. It still stands today; it brings us to Christ (Gal 3:24) and we obey it and fulfill it when we are converted (Rom 3:31).
Number 11. The number allegedly stands for judgment and curse, because of Gen. 11, the portion of Genesis dealing with the Tower of Babel. If I were to go to every chapter 11 of every book in the Bible, would I find chaos and judgment, as he described it? How absurd. If it actually happened to work out that way, it wasn't by design, because chapter numbers are not inspired of God. They were added by man. If it were design, I should be able to go to every chapter 11 and find disorder, judgment, and chaos. It can't be done. Why isn't the number 11 about faith? Heb 11 is the famous “faith” chapter. Isn't that as valid as Gen 11, being about judgment and curse? The end product of the heresy of allegoricalism is charging God's Word with confusion, contradiction and chaos. Its changing the very character of the Bible and of God.
Number 5. Five is often given an allegorical meaning. He gave it the meaning of grace because of what Joseph did with Benjamin: "And he took and sent messes unto them from before him: but Benjamin's mess was five times so much as any of theirs..." (Gen 43:34). Where does this come from? Nowhere does the Bible say “five means grace” because of what Joseph did for Benjamin. If it were so, I should be able to correlate every instance of "five" in the Bible to the meaning of "grace." But nothing of the sort is even remotely true. Is it grace that causes the lost God-rejectors to be “tormented five months” in the Tribulation (Rev 9:5,10)? How about the “five fallen” kings of the Great Whore (Rev 17:10), do they represent "grace"? I speak as a fool.
Number 39 and 22 and 2. Since Joseph was the age of 39 when his brothers came to him in Egypt and there are 39 books in the OT, 39 is special and supposed to mean something. Even though there are actually only 37 books in the OT (both Kings and Chronicles are divided into two in English Bibles and most other translations, but they are not in the original Hebrew text). Since he was 39 now and it had been 22 years since Joseph had his visions, and since nobody knew what he was talking about until it was revealed now, 22 years later, the Book of Revelation is brought into the picture because 2 stands for Revelation and it has 22 chapters (2 twos and 22 chapters 😁), and the “revealed” is connected to “Revelation.” Since Joseph is a type of Christ (some false typology here as well), then there is alleged spiritual significance with 22. As noted, but also in Psalm 22 for example, which, he says, contains Christ’s words (“Eloi, Eloi…”) on the cross (though much more, conveniently ignored), which no one allegedly knew, just like no one knew Josephs dream. Did you get that? What happened to Joseph at 39 must have been intentional because there are 39 books in the Bible. Further, it was 22 years since his dreams, and that was intentional as well since Psalm 22 is in the Bible, and then latter God would have a Roman Catholic make 22 chapters in the book of Revelation so that book can be connected to Joseph over in Gen 42 (which makes me wonder whether that chapter should have been 39 or 22 🙄). This is an attempt at connecting the un-connectable, and making fantasy allegory to entertain the lusts of men, and the pride of a preacher. Chapter numbers are not inspired of God, so they infer no special meaning. Even if they were, they would still not reflect any special type of meaning. Numbers such as this are not connectable.
All this of course ignores the plain fact that the Bible was written with NO chapters or verse divisions, besides the chapter divisions between the songs in the Book of Psalms. Thus the numbers representing chapter divisions and verse divisions are not even inspired of God and thus not essentially part of the Word of God, besides, again, the Book of Psalms. It was an English Cardinal of the Roman Catholic Church ad Archbishop of Canterbury, Stephen Langton, who first divided the N.T. into chapters more than a thousand years after God's Word was written, in the 12th century AD, which was in the Latin Vulgate. In 1551, Robert Estienne (a.k.a. Stephanus) added verse divisions to his fourth edition of the Greek N.T., while en route between Paris and Lyons, France. The 1551 Erasmus-Stephanus Latin/Greek NT is the first printing of scripture with both numbered verse and chapter divisions such as we see in all Bibles today. The first English Bible to incorporate these divisions was the Geneva English Bible of 1557, not the KJV. They were put there by man simply for the ease of reference and study. God did not put them there. Outside of dividing chapters and verses, the numbers in itself mean absolutely nothing.
I strongly suspect that much of this is chiefly learned by Krahn at the feet of one Mike Hoggard, author of the heretical King James Code, and Reg Kelly (who is very close to Hoggard, and believes many of the same things, even has Hoggard preach in his church) and maybe Bill Gothard. According to Hoggard, while the original manuscripts in Hebrew, Aramaic, and Greek contained no chapter or verse numbers (no Bible’s did till the 16th century), God incorporated chapter and verse numbers into the KJV for the express purpose of creating these hidden numeric meanings. Really? I thought when God said that we were not to add to or take away from His Word, that He meant it (Rev 22:18-19). Isn't this exactly what these men are doing by putting meanings upon these chapter and verse numbers? And again, the Geneva Bible of 1557 contained the chapter and verse divisions, years before the KJV was complete.
Here is an example of Mike Hoggard spiritualizing, allegoricalizing words and numbers in the Bible. He says that as he read the bible he noticed the word "compass.” Because a compass is a key image in Masonry, he believed this might be a hidden reference to Masonry. He counted up the number of times the word is used in Scripture and found it totalled 39 times. 39 is 3 x 13, and since 3 and 13 both represent sin and evil in the bible, this confirmed for him that the word compass was a reference to Masonry, that God hid in the Bible. Just. W😳W. This reflects the exact same type of allegoricalism practiced by Krahn. But if this isn’t wresting the Scriptures and completely missing the point of Scripture, which God has not hidden from the saved (De 29:29; Matt 13:10-11a; 25:29) but from the unsaved (Matt 13:11b-12; 2 Pet 3:16), I don’t know what else would be. The further problem is that while there are 39 references in English to "compass," in Greek (which is the language the NT was written in) there are different words used to translate the word "compass," so the total does not actually add up to 39. The only way his system works is if he rejects God's inspiration of His words in Hebrew and Greek and believes that God inspired the English Bible, which is a damnable heresy because there is no such thing as a double inspiration. It also denies that canonization of Scripture was completed two millennial ago. But that is exactly what Hoggard believes.
What constitutes the reasoning between adding, multiplying, repeating, or dividing to find the multiple? It is convenient for one's presupposed theory I suppose.
Outside a certain camp (i.e. Peter Ruckman, Harold Camping, Sam Gipp, Gail Riplinger, Mike Hoggard, Reg Kelly, and others) nobody has ever assumed that these chapter and verse numbers were for anything other than enabling people to find passages and particular verses in the Bible with greater ease. This was something man added, not in the sense of adding to the Word to give new revelations, but simply as an editorial structure for literary ease. To use this to find new hidden revelation from the Bible is simply ludicrous. Reg Kelly preaches multiple sermons on this very subject and Mike Hoggard writes a book, but its all mindless vanity. If these numbers were added for any other reason, would they not do the very thing God commanded us not to do — add to His Word? That is exactly what Hoggard, Kelly and Krahn are doing when they use verse and chapter numbers in this way, and more than just editorial structure for literary ease. They are actually adding to God's Word, for these things are not found in God's Word that He inspired, the Hebrew Masoretic Text and the Greek Textus Receptus, which God declared complete (1 Cor 13:10; Rev 22:18-19). Pr 30:6 warns,
"Add thou not unto his words, lest he reprove thee, and thou be found a liar."
But then again, Hoggard also says that you cannot get revelation from the original language manuscripts, as they aren't as good as the KJV, because for one thing, the chapter and verse divisions and numbers are missing. Both Kelly and Krahn would agree with this analysis by Hoggard. Wow, what terrible unbelieving and unscriptural logic. He is in fact denying both the inspiration and preservation of God’s Word, as does Reg Kelly. Kelly even claims, “Whoa, I want you to know something. What I’m giving you will not work in any other [besides the Authorized Version] "Bible" in the world.” (Numbers in Scripture, Nov 11, 2012). In other words, there is no other Bible in the world besides the KJV that you can do these number games with. That should be a big red flag if there ever was! Its no surprise that the KJV has become a laughing stock to many. In essence, this is a diabolical, demonic attack on God's Word.
These men see a number, or get out their calculators and create a number, and then spiritualize it. They give it a meaning, which is inconsistent in Scripture and not of God. How absurd and preposterous! All this coding and numbers game and numerology is extremely arbitrary. Nothing in Scripture supports it and the only thing it produces is manipulation, confusion, unbelief and contradictions. It’s way off balance and Pr 11:1 warns, "A false balance is abomination to the Lord: but a just weight is his delight.” I cannot think of anything besides outright false doctrine or a false gospel that could be more displeasing to God than when someone intentionally misuses His Word. Hence the serious warning of 2 Pet 3:16-17, that those who wrest the Scriptures are doing a work of the wicked. Spiritualizing numbers is in fact a form of numerology, which is of the occult. It’s also mental gymnastics gone mad, taking a number and skipping all over the Bible with it. The King James Bible does not contain a system of numbers that are linked with words or phrases in the scriptures. This is NOT how the Holy Spirit teaches His truth, literal truth, scripture harmonized with Scripture. The text, context, grammar, syntax, must be exegeted and wonderful truths and treasures come forth out of God's Word, not this mind boggling unbridled imagination of numbers that change the meaning of scripture and produce false doctrine. Numerology is engaging in a dangerous game of perversion of Scripture. We must be studying the Word and by that I mean all the actual words that God gave. Not playing indiscernible math games that are figments of someones imagination. The whole system of numerics and numerology and KJV codes casts great doubt upon the inerrancy of Scripture and upon many verses that tell us that truth isn’t hidden from those who are saved, and that all saved people know the truth. Well many people do not know this whole system of numbers because it is not found in Scripture and is almost entirely in error.
God gave His Word so that man could know it (De 29:29), not to hide it or require people to use a math calculator as they read through it. Who actually becomes the authority of Scripture with this baseless, useless and unfounded numerology? It’s not God I can tell you that much, since its found nowhere in His Word. The teacher of this heresy actually becomes the authority, with the whole unscriptural system of allegoricalism/spiritualizing. When someone is teaching in this manner, the Holy Spirit is not. That much we know. He can’t because these things are found nowhere in Scripture and He teaches in a normal, literal manner only (Pr 8:8-9; 22:20-21; 1 Jn 2:20-21, 27; etc).
The dangerous false teacher Mike Hoggard claims to get extra revelation (meaning special revealed knowledge of hidden things) from the Bible. Naturally when a saved person diligently studies the Bible he is going to grow in knowledge, understanding, and wisdom by allowing the indwelling Spirit of God to teach him through studying the historical, grammatical, contextual, syntax of the words found in God's Word, precept upon precept, line upon line, verse by verse, chapter by chapter, book by book, comparing passages that speak to the same subject, and rightly dividing the word of truth. But that’s not how Mike Hoggard however appears to believe that God teaches the saint, but rather by “revelation.” By that I am gathering that he means that he'll look at a passage and have some sort of epiphany that shows him some secret piece of information, since what he teaches is not stuff that can be had from a simple literal reading of the Word.
Yes God does uses numbers (obviously) and does assign some significance or at least repetitive mention to a few numbers such as 7, 3, 40 and 12, which have some meaning in themselves but that is not numerology or allegoricalism. God does not use numerology, or require His words or numbers to be spiritualized. There is a massive difference between God’s use of numbers and what Krahn, Mike Hoggard, Reg Kelly, Camping and others are doing. The whole concept of numerology is actually never taught in Scripture, and virtually meaningless, nor does God ever tell us to add, subtract, multiply, divide or use any other mathematical formula on the numbers. Almost all numerology is associated to some degree with chapter and verse numbers but that's nonsense. As already mentioned, the chapter and verse numbers were added by editors of the translations. The originals had no chapters and verses, and no Bibles had them till the 12th and then 16th century respectively. Hoggard also changes the definitions of words to alter the meanings of the verse (such as the Bible words “compass” and “folly,”) and tons of scripture as well. From what I have directly read and heard, both Krahn and Kelly do the same. Hoggard hugely manipulates many numbers (and words, and Scriptures) and randomly applies meanings to assigned numbers, for his own “revelation” purposes. He manipulates God’s Word for his own selfish purposes. In his book “King James Code” he spends much time telling you how many times a number, word, or phrase occurs and how that means something, but then will change the meaning as needed in his sermons. For instance, 3 allegedly means Divine Completeness (Reg Kelly says “Deity”), until he needs it to mean sin, then it means sin. The meanings are arbitrary depending on his agenda—what he wants or needs it to mean. Then if you actually count to see if that number, word, or phrase actually does occur the number of times he says it does, you will find most times that he has miscounted. Sometimes he counts how many times something occurs in the entire Bible and other times it is just the Old or New Testament, so that in this way he can come up with the spiritualized meaning he needs, to fulfils his agenda. No rhyme or reason to how he does it, he just works his mathematical magic. It is so manipulative and bad, it isn't funny. He has also used the meanings of numbers from other people, but then decided that he disagreed on some of them, so he changed them. So exactly who is right? This is the type of confusion that abounds in these camps, that is wholly not of God, but it's also how false teachers flow. If God made these things mean something other than their basic, underlying meaning, wouldn't everyone with the indwelling Spirit agree on this? It is all just a bogus, mindless, mass of spam and vanity, a waste of time, and the same repeated mental math gymnastics of Harold Camping.
As aforementioned, Hoggard believes you can get special revelation from scripture, as he allegedly has, which is where some of this allegorical numerology stems from. Not merely knowledge but "special revelation" of hidden things. But beware he says, God will make you pay a steep price for it. Wow, where is that false religious concept found in Scripture?! I think the steep price is what Rev 22:18-19 says, an eternally steep price. Special revelation and paying steep prices for being special are both false and utterly ridiculous concepts. Apparently he thinks all of the numbers in the Bible are there for a hidden reason and we can calculate them out in order to get the hidden knowledge and codes. No wonder he studies the bible with one hand and a calculator in the other (he actually said that!). Yikes! I wonder what they did before the invent of calculators? He is completely oblivious to all his discrepancies and how heretical this actually is. It appears he has learned well from the wolves in sheep’s clothing, Peter Ruckman and Harold Camping. His “King James Code” exists only in his imagination, or rather in the imagination of the familiar spirit tapping him on the shoulder and giving him special revelation (as he thus claims: “Remember, all of this information that you see before you, has been the process of revelation, and not education. The Lord would tap me on the shoulder and tell me what to look for” — source), which isn’t God. God’s revelation was completed nearly two millennial ago and God is not the author of adding to His Word or error or confusion or manipulation of Scripture. We know who the author of this is, which is why God warns that those who “wrest [the] Scriptures” are “unlearned and unstable” and working an “error of the wicked” (2 Pet 3:16-17) which are obviously ALWAYS lost people in Scripture. Mike Hoggard is a dangerous false teacher for a lot more reasons then just his heretical Bible codes and everyone would be wise to flee from this wolf, like Scripture commands (Rom 16:17; Ac 20:28-21; Matt 7:15; Eph 5:5-11; 2 Jn 1:9-11; 3 Jn 1:9-11; Rev 2 & 3; etc).
4. The Grass and Flowers (1 Pet 1:24). The grass and flowers in 1 Pet 1:24 is spiritualized into the original Bible text copies of God’s Word copied by the scribes. The allegorical idea of 1 Pet 1:24 is given that as flower and grass withereth and fadeth away, so did the Hebrew and Greek copies of manuscripts which were written on papyri and skins, till eventually they completely faded away. Then along came the KJV, allegedly fulfilling God’s promise of perseveration (1 Pet 1:25). This is not only corruption and heretical spiritualizing of 1 Pet 1:24-25 but also a blatant, insidious and Satanic attack on the very Word of God. Apparently God didn’t keep His promises after all, since the preservation promises are actually connected to inspiration.
Now here is a good example of how dangerous and evil spiritualizing typology can actually get. This scripture has absolutely nothing to do with the paper Gods Word was written on or to the Bible texts that God inspired, and what is spiritualized and falsely interpreted (vv. 24-25a) is actually contradicted by the very context, “the grass withereth, and the flower thereof falleth away: but the word of the Lord endureth for ever.” (v. 25b). The verse says God’s Word endureth forever and will never fade away, unlike grass and flowers, but v. 24 is spiritualized and corrupted to imply that the old manuscripts will not endure forever because they were written on paper made of grass, so according to this pastor, they did not endure forever. They vanished, because we have no originals today. This is evil, subversion and defiling the eternal Word that God inspired and promised to preserve for ever, unto all generations.
In another sermon, he spiritualized 1 Cor 14:29 to imply the same meaning as 1 Pet 1:24-25, which passage reads: "Let the prophets speak two or three, and let the other judge." Apparently the two or three prophets are the two or three original languages of Gods Word (I.e., Hebrew, Greek and some Aramaic, two mostly and a bit of the third), while the English KJV judges them 🤪 I couldn't make this stuff if I tried.
If text copies do not exist of the original languages, the Hebrew Masoretic Text (OT) and the Greek Textus Receptus (NT), then we’re in big trouble since God explicitly promised perfect preservation of them. Furthermore, the KJV translators used those very texts to translate the English Bible. If they do not exist, if they faded away and vanished as Krahn proclaims, then God’s promises of perfect preservation are not true, and the KJV has absolutely no weight or surety to stand upon, since it was translated from that very text. This is the end result of such unfounded heresy, confounding his own position. God is not glorified but horrified in this teaching. In attempt to exalt the KJV, he actually destroys it in the process.
God has promised to preserve every word of Scripture perfectly, forever (Ps 12:6-7, 33:11, 119:152, 160; Is 30:8, 40:8; 1 Pe 1:23-25; Matt 5:17-19, 24:35) including the perfect passive form of the words “It is written.” God promised these words will be available to all generations (De 30:11-14; Mat 4:4; Jn 12:48; 2 Pe 3:2; Ju 1:17; Is 59:21). What God inspired, He preserved. This is perfect preservation. You can’t preserve something that doesn’t exist. God inspired the OT in Hebrew and the NT in Greek and they are perfectly preserved for us to this day. The KJV translators knew that, which is why they confidently “Translated out of the Original Languages” (first page of both OT and NT in KJV). Copies of originals hold the same authority as originals, which is what Christ and the apostles had as they ministered in the 1st century. They didn't have originals as far as the original manuscripts, but copies. Tragically, men such as this pastor reject the truth of Scripture for some man-made fantastical meandering far removed from Biblical reality and truth. This is also a good example of wresting the Scriptures (2 Pet 3:16-17).
In the same context, Krahn forced Ps 12:6-7 and Pr 30:5-6 into an unscriptural application, spiritualizing these passages as well, neither of which passages directly apply to the KJV but to the inspired and preserved texts the KJV was translated from. God’s promise of the preservation of Scripture wasn’t to a translation but to the words He inspired: Hebrew and Greek. The KJV is an accurate translation from God’s inspired and preserved Word, which is also the position of the KJV translators. But Krahn forces these passages into a fairy tale where the KJV is the Bible that God has promised to preserve forever.
5. Israel and Esau (Rom 9:13). This is a popular one, out of Rom 9, and gets much fanfare from the world mental gymnastics club. Israel (Jacob) is likened to our saved spirit and Esau to our flesh. But even more, Israel today apparently represents Esau, while Gentiles represent Jacob. No, Israel is still Israel today, and Esau is still Esau. Israel does not represent Esau or Esau, Israel. Israel means Jacob and can never be Esau. We, saved or unsaved Gentiles, do not represent Jacob or Esau. We are not Jacob or Esau. Jacob does not represent saints, he represents Israel, the election of national Israel. Thats it. Esau is not our flesh born into bondage. Esau and Jacob do NOT represent “born of the flesh” and “born of the Spirit” in Jn 3:6 respectively, distorting both this new birth passage and Rom 9:13. We’re not Israel today, not spiritual or physical Israel, which teaching actually appears to perhaps correspond with the seriously evil replacement theology (i.e. the church is now Israel). Nor do Jacob and Esau connect with Isaac and Ishmael in Gal 4.
6. Joseph's Silver Cup (Gen 44). The silver cup of Joseph (Gen 44) is NOT the N.T. of Jesus Christ, even though this pastor claimed: “the silver cup that Joseph put in the bag, was the cup of the New Testament of the Lord Jesus Christ,” nor is it the “cup of salvation” in Ps 116:13, nor is it the cup of the Lord’s Supper, nor is it the cup that Christ drank of God's wrath. Its just an expensive and personal drinking cup made of silver, an object Joseph wisely used to bring his lost brothers to repentance for what they had done to him. How was the connection made to the N.T.? Through the Rock being Christ — since the rock in the O.T. is described as Christ in the N.T., the cup allegedly in the OT must be the N.T. since that was the mystery revealed through the N.T. What? Wow. That is some convoluted disaster. None of this ties together in any shape, form or fashion. There is absolutely no connection. Just because the rock of the O.T. is further explained in the N.T. (but also in the O.T.) doesn’t mean the silver cup means anything besides a silver drinking cup, and definitely not the N.T.!
Josephs silver cup also has nothing to do with Ps 116:13. Taking the allegorical typology of Joseph this far results in making the silver cup on Josephs table the “cup of salvation” (Ps 116:13), which Krahn did— whereas the cup is simply a silver drinking cup that is without life giving ability. He did this by proclaiming that Josephs brothers had what they needed in food and money as Joseph sent them on their way, but they didn’t have a cup. They didn't have the cup of salvation in Ps 116:13. But they needed the cup, which is why Joseph put it in the sack. What?! What does this even mean? They didn’t want the cup! That meant they had stolen it. Them not having a cup and Krahn attempting to make it appear they needed that cup (since, allegedly the cup is the N.T. according to this pastor) is severely corrupting and wresting Gen 44 and completely spiritualizing that passage, but also adding to God's Word. This is greatly dishonouring to the Lord and to His Word and is plain heresy. Its also a lie. He is not speaking the truth of God’s Word, and dishonouring the Lord Jesus Christ and the Father in the process.
He went on to claim that the silver cup shows up in the NT. But it doesn’t. There is no relation between the cups of the N.T. (such as the cup of the Lord’s Table, 1 Cor 10:15; 11:23-25, or the cup that Christ drank), and Josephs silver cup. Neither were the 11 brothers accused of stealing the N.T. (remember, its the silver cup). The N.T. didn’t even exist in that day. Joseph didn’t put the N.T. in the sack so they would be guilty of stealing it, a Book that didn't even exist. He says, "[Joseph] put [the cup] in their sacks and thats what brought them back to Joseph, they came back. Saying what is it with this cup?” Here he completely changes the meaning of what actually transpired there, so as to keep his system of allegoricalism going, bouncing around like a ping pong ball, and completely missing the meaning of this passage. The brothers didn’t go back to Joseph voluntarily. They had no choice. Yet he claims they went back as if to inquire, “what is it with this cup?” NO, they knew exactly what it was with that cup and now they were being accused of stealing it. The cup was simply a tool, Joseph could’ve used a table but it wouldn’t fit into the sack. He used the silver cup because it was of great value, and it was very personal to Joseph, as per normal in those days of them royalty in high status. Nehemiah “was the king’s cupbearer” (Neh 1:11), so there is significance to the cup's value. The cutlery on Joseph’s table wouldn’t have been personal to him, but the cup was. It was a crime punishable by death for stealing the silver cup of the highest noble of the land under the Pharoah. The brothers knew that. They didn't ask what Krahn is proclaiming, and adding to God's Word. Further, Josephs words to be spoken by his steward to the brothers, “Is not this it in which my lord drinketh,” concerning the cup out of which Joseph drank in Gen 44:5, has absolutely no relation to the cup that Jesus drank of the wrath of God. There is just no connection whatsoever. Again, he forces a meaning into scripture that doesn’t actually exist anywhere, thus spiritualizing scripture, perverting Scripture.
Everything he spiritualizes on the cup “following it through the Bible” has absolutely no connection or tie whatsoever to Joseph’s silver cup in Gen 44. Its a false narrative. The silver cup just meant a cup and to tie it to anything in scripture beyond a simple drinking cup is to force and spiritualize typology that isn’t there. It also completely detracts from the actual narrative going on. The silver cup is connected in no shape or form or fashion to any other cup in the Bible. Its just an expensive silver cup owned by the highest man of the land under Pharaoh. It appears he just teaches whatever he wants it to mean. This isn’t Biblical interpretation but making the Bible say whatever he wants it to say. It is treating God’s Word worse than play-doh. This is typology gone bad and real mad. This is very bad interpretation. It is the very definition of allegoricalism/ spiritualizing of Scripture, and its so plainly perverted. He is corrupting the Scriptures with all his unbridled allegoricalism, which is never of God. The Holy Spirit is not the author of this serious confusion. God is not glorified in it. It corrupts scripture and doctrine. Nothing about the silver cup has any reflection whatsoever to the N.T. This is eisegesis, which is wresting Scripture, and NOT exegesis. Nowhere ever is any of these connections made, not even remotely. He is adding to God’s Word, and we know the serious warning about this in Rev 22:18. De 4:2 also speaks against adding to Scripture.
7. Consider additional examples of false typology, symbolism allegoricalized in Scripture.
Joseph’s Coat of Many Colours in Gen 3 has NO connection to the rainbow or swaddling-bands in Job 38:9 or Gen 9:13-14 or Is 40:5 or Ezk 1:28-30 or Rev 10:1. He cruised all over the Bible, attempting to tie Job 38:9 to Gen 9:13-14, which was tied Is 40:5, which was tied to Ezk 1:28-30, which was tied to Rev 10:1. None of these passages however tie together. Its just man-made fanciful thinking, at the expense of God's truth. The coat does not prophesy in typology. Neither does it represent the glory of God, or Christ being stripped of His glory, or the parting of Christ’s garments, or the shame of nakedness. None of this has any reference at all to Josephs coat of many colours; its just man-made fantasy that is designed to exalt man's alleged wisdom in the eyes of man. In truth, it does just the opposite. In eisegesing these fantastical bursts of imaginations, he said “this is not a newspaper article, it’s the Word of God.” God’s Word however doesn’t tie loose ends together that have no connection and make a doctrine out of them, like a newspaper could since its written by man. Truth is, he treated God’s Word worse than a newspaper.
The Words “Afar off” in Gen 22:4 and 37:18 simply mean what they do as used in the verse, a long way off. But when twisted out of their meaning and spiritualized they allegedly means they were "looking into the future, to the new Jerusalem." What?! Absolutely nothing even hints at such a meaning in the passage or in the context. This is classic eisegesis, putting in, or forcing in, a meaning what someone wants it to mean, that simply isn’t there.
The Twins Scarlet Thread in Gen 38:27-30 has NO connection to Rehab’s scarlet thread (Jos 2) or to the salvation given by Jesus in Is 1:18, just because all contain the word "scarlet." Krahn related Gen 38:27-30 to Rehab putting up a scarlet robe that saved her and then claimed that “the scarlet cord teaches you about Jesus’s salvation. That His blood be poured out for the remission of our sins. Isa 1:18 . . . sins be as scarlet . . . that’s what the scarlet cord signifies. . . . Zarah and Pharez were conceived in iniquity, in unrighteousness.” There is hocus-pocus with absolutely ZERO connection between these various scarlets and is way beyond a stretch of imagination. If the scarlet thread is signifying sin, then why didn't both twins have the thread on their hands? Only one did. So was only one born in sin? You see the ridiculousness of these allegorical games?! And neither do the twins reflect Christ’s two returns, as claimed. Pure conjecture and adding to God's Word. Thomas the apostle was “called Didymus” (Jn 11:16; 20:24; 21:2) which means one of two, i.e. twin. Does he now also somehow reflect the two returns of Christ, especially since he was a called apostle? Isa 1:18 is simply illustrating the seriousness and terrible stain of our sins, with God giving it the colour red, scarlet referring to a bright red colour. Thats what the word is referring to, nothing else. When Rehab put up the scarlet thread, it was bright red in colour so the Israelites could unmistakably see it. This is also the reason for the twin with the scarlet thread, so they knew which one was first borne. Attempting to spiritualize a symbol and then connect it to other symbols of the same nature, is dangerous and very egregious, and is NOT Biblical interpretation. There are also many other things in Scripture that speak of scarlet, like mystery Babylon (Rome) that will be destroyed in Rev 17-18 — does then also teach us about Christs salvation? God forbid! So he picks and chooses what types and objects he spiritualizes between a given type or object in the OT. That is not edifying to anyone but is confusion and damaging to the truth of Scripture, which has a literal meaning. Furthermore, the word "travail" in v. 27, concerning Tamar's birth of the twins is tied to the "travail upon a woman with child" in 1 Th 5:3, which was then connected to Christ's birth, both of is not even remotely the subject of 1 Th 5:3 but rather the sudden destruction of the unsaved at Christ's return at the end of the Great Tribulation, which is compared to the birth pangs of childbirth. There is absolutely no correlation whatsoever of 1 Th 5:3 or Christ's birth to Gen 38:27, besides the word "travail," which is spiritualized in attempt to tie three entirely different things together. 1 Th 5:3 is prophetic while Gen 38:27 is not. The latter is simply a woman giving birth to twins. This pastor rows by pure speculation and fabrication beyond a stretch of imagination, spiritualizing scripture into something that has zero relationship to the text at hand.
The First and Last in Gen 38:27-30, one baby being born first before the other, has NO connection to salvation passages such as “first shall be last; and the last shall be first” (Matt 19:30; 10:31) or that God came to Israel first before Gentiles (though He did). Yes there is that theme about first and last, a theme referring to salvation, and yes God came to Israel first, but neither have any connection whatsoever to the statement in v. 28 about a baby that “came out first.” How does salvation relate to one twin baby being born before the other. Twins have no option, one has to come before the other, but in salvation there is option. People can choose to appropriate God’s drawing, enlightening, and granting of repentance and respond to it, or not. I think it’s a fairly natural process for one baby to be born before the other, since both cannot be born at the same time. Attempting to make a connection between these things is pure fiction made out of sheer cloth. To attempt to tie these things together because of the word “first” is ridiculousness at a new level. This spiritualizing Scripture is greatly dishonouring to God and perverting the plain and literal teachings of Scripture.
Joseph Dealing with his Brethren Alone in Gen 45:1. He likened this to God dealing with His people Israel on their own, without the Gentiles there. But that is reading something into the passage that doesn’t exist. Nothing in the verse or the context or even the rest of Scripture hints at that. Not even in the Tribulation can this be true, as he falsely claimed. Though the 70th week of Daniel is a direct focus on the Jewish people, specifically their final week to bring them to salvation, God is dealing with the Gentiles concurrently, judging them through the instrumentality of the Antichrist, and saving many of them as well who call upon the name of the God of Abraham, God of Isaac and God of Jacob. The crucifixion of Christ was not only initiated by the Jews as he falsely claimed in this context, but also by the Gentiles (the Romans — who had power to stop the whole process). Both Jew and Gentile was complicit in putting Christ to death. One other thing, just because Jesus cried, “Father, forgive them; for they know not what they do” does not mean they are forgiven already as he claimed. Their forgiveness occurs when they repent, just like any other sinner and there is no universalism—a "damnable heresy" promoted by "false teachers" (2 Pet 2:1). Its amazing how far allegoricalism can go and the heresy it produces.
This is false hermeneutics gone mad, and a great disgrace to God. It really makes some Scripture seem rather ridiculous when you follow the allegorical viewpoint. How can people understand what the minister is talking about, when such spiritualized mumbo jumbo is substituting the plain statements of God’s Word! None of the types and symbols that are documented above has any contextual backing or elsewhere in Scripture. These examples of typology and shadows utilized haven’t been true typology but spiritualizing scripture, forcing scripture to say something that isn’t there, which is eisegesis. None of the false typology and numerology documented above has any backing in context or elsewhere in Scripture. It is fables and convoluted madness and a recipe for interpretational disaster, forcing Scripture to say something that isn’t true, and producing false teachings in the process. There is no “chapter and verse” to support these unBiblical teachings. Those who practice it are corrupting Scripture and adding to God’s Word (Rev 22:18). The Bible refers to it as “private interpretation” of Scripture (2 Pet 1:21) which results in "cunningly devised fables,” (2 Pet 1:16). The type or shadow MUST be clearly and precisely explained either in the context or elsewhere in Scripture, for that is how the Holy Spirit has authored His Word and teaches His Word.
Just because the Bible isn’t a newspaper article doesn’t mean it can be treated like an allegorical buffet table, picking and choosing what a type and symbol will mean. God gave His Word not to hide it but so we can know it (De 29:29). Indeed there are things that are deep and unable to be understood by the natural man, and God has purposed that for a reason (Matt 13:10-16), but that is still within God’s laws of literal interpretation. We don’t need to find or spiritualize some hidden truth in Scripture that essentially doesn’t exist, to bring out the depth and hidden treasures of Scripture. In fact, it does the exact opposite and makes the “interpreter” the authority over Scripture, and not the Spirit of God.
Allegoricalizers are short-circuiting the truth of God’s Word by their symbolic, spiritualizing of the plain statements of God’s Word. By appearing as super spiritual with unique insights they deny the Truth and fail utterly to exegete the Bible clearly to listeners and also to sinners who may be seeking the Lord. If the Bible can’t be taken literally how on earth can a sinner believe the God's Word concerning salvation or have assurance of heaven?
Allegoricalizers are guilty of adding to God's Word, while Scripture warns,
"Add thou not unto his words, lest he reprove thee, and thou be found a liar." (Pr 30:6)
Where does this come from since in Scripture it is not found? Mike Hoggard? Peter Ruckman? Reg Kelly? Gail Riplinger? All of the above? As mentioned under numerology, I suspect Krahn gets most of this from Hoggard and Kelly but also, likely, some from Commentaries as well, which are loaded with allegoricalism and Augustinism. Hoggard, Gothard and Kelly are all masters of this dishonouring and unBiblical allegorical interpretation method of eisegesis (which is putting in, reading ideas into scripture what you want the scripture to say) including numerology, rather than interpreting via the only Biblical and honouring method which is exegesis (and that is pulling out, allowing the Scriptures to fully teach me by text, grammar, context, right division). These men, including Krahn, appear to chiefly approach the Bible with preconceived ideas of hidden messages and numerics and then look for evidence to prove it, which produces all sorts of novel theories and heresies. When they look at Scripture, they are not seeing what is being taught there, literally, contextually and in harmony with the rest of Scripture, which is how God is glorified, but rather some hidden, spiritualized lesson to be had, and then bounce all over the Bible in their allegorical potluck, attempting to connect dots that don't connect, which is a disgrace to God. Hoggard, and even Kelly and Krahn, rarely expound Scripture in a true literal and exegetical manner. Allegoricalism and spiritualization according to their own interpretations is the preferred choice, which then exalts them in the eyes of man. Especially when it comes to the OT, and to a lesser degree the NT. Thus Scripture does not necessarily means what it plainly says, but what these men interpret it to say. They consequently become the arbiters of truth, and not the Holy Spirit of God.
One reason why Scripture is handled in this manner, spiritualized and allegoricalized, is because of a false position on the perseveration of God's Word. Krahn rejects God's inspired and preserved words in the Hebrew and Greek, proclaiming that the KJV is greater than the inspired words that God gave in these languages, and is the Bible that God has preserved for the world today. He obstinately quoted Ps 119:104 while preaching his allegorical corruption, calling those who hold to the actual real truth (that God inspired and preserved His words in the Hebrew Masoretic and Greek Textus Receptus) as false and his false way as truth, but he obviously does not “hate every false way." (Ps 119:104). Those that love the Word of God and endeavour to teach the truth will “study the word of God, and rightly divide it” instead of appealing to human reasoning (Col 2:8), logic and emotion, holding on to a position that is novel and contradictory to scripture, which starts the journey down the pathway of apostasy. It is leaven that leads to apostasy. No one can take the Sword of the Lord and twist it to their own liking, and get away with it.
Don’t deceive yourself, opposing these unscriptural teachings isn’t of “the devil,” its not “shooting fiery darts and unbelief” at the pastor, as this pastor slanderously asserts. I’m trying to help pastors like this, so consider these things and be wise.
After all this serious perversion of Scripture and confounding God's Word, and dishonouring God, this man had the gall to say,
“I thank the Lord for the Bible which reveals the truth to us and what a blessing it is for us today, may it be a blessing to you as well, especially when you look at the OT and you see these beautiful truths, shown in types.”
He disregards the literal meaning of texts to something allegorically, so that much of his teaching on types in the OT is spiritualized reading, a reading which has no sound exegetical basis in the text itself. So there is no "beautiful truths" being taught, only convoluted contradictions and confusion. There is no beauty in Scripture perversion, only ugliness.
In another part he claimed that he loved the O.T. for its opportunity to allegorize Scripture. When the Bible however speaks of types, it is not what he is doing here, not with Joseph’s silver cup or Jacob’s ladder, or stones, or Joseph’s coat, or the scarlet thread, or all other examples and the many not mentioned. He is spiritualizing all these types and symbols, and confusing them, and teaching something the Bible doesn’t. Not the context (which is the case almost 100% of the time) or anywhere else in Scripture verifies what he is saying. This obviously then means it is not true. Interpreting Scripture allegorically, a highly subjective form of mental gymnastics, actually destroys the absolute sense of God’s Word. If it does not mean what it literally says, it could mean anything that any interpreter says it means. It then ceases to be a “sure word” (2 Pet 1:19). If God's Word does not mean exactly what it says, there is no way to know what it does mean. God gave the Scripture to reveal truth to man, not to hide it or confuse it (De. 29:29). God gives saints His Holy Spirit at conversion, to teach the truth, lead in the truth, and know the truth, since the truth is plain and easy to understand to those who are born again (Pr 8:8-9; 22:20-21), and He never teaches in this convoluted fashion but in one manner only: literally. See Pr 8:8-9; 22:20-21; 1 Jn 2:20-21, 27; Jn 14:17; 15:26; 16:13. He uses the normal rules of human language in giving and instructing His Word. If one claims to believe the inspired Word of God is inerrant, but then spiritualizes Scripture, he doesn’t actually believe that of the Bible. A true literalist is very careful of every word and verse, never interpreting out of context or by falsely dividing, because he believes that God’s Word is inerrant, and every word, all of grammar, right down to jot and tittle, matters. And he fears teaching anything amiss, and does tremble before his Word (Isa 66:5), so he teaches literally as the Holy Spirit teaches, unless the context or passage clearly indicates otherwise.
What I would like to know is how do these men determine when to interpret literally and when symbolically, especially when it comes to the OT, which is mostly spiritualized? Some of the symbols and things they are spiritualizing have completely different meanings than what they are looking for, so it forces them to pick and choose what they will apply to the type or symbol and what they won’t. But that corrupts the symbol or typology, makes man the authority over the symbol and typology and belies the whole rational of allegoricalizing scripture. This is allegorical preaching nevertheless, seeing things in passages that are not there, and connecting things to passages that cannot be connected. The principles of sound hermeneutics are abandoned to a path of meandering in unbridled imagination and symbolic, spiritualized interpretation. Spiritualizing Scripture is a fundamental change, since it influences all interpretation from Genesis to Revelation. No longer can the allegoricalist follow the normal rules of hermeneutics, which require a literal approach to Scripture except where the Bible itself clearly indicates it is speaking symbolically. True preaching which is expository exegetical preaching, is word by word, verse by verse, precept upon precept, and finding the point of the text and preaching the literal, historical and grammatical truth of the text fully in its context. There is a richness and depth of OT passages that are not getting covered when Scripture is allegoricalized. God the Spirit does not and cannot teach people when Scripture is allegoricalized. Its not even possible since it goes against the truth of what Scripture actually says about that passage or symbol and whether it even is a type. Is God the author of error? He doesn’t sit at the table of error. Not everything in the OT was a shadow of things to come. Peter warns about private interpretation of Scripture (2 Pet 1:21) and wresting the Scriptures (2 Pet 3:16-17), and this is not the mark of a true teacher (2 Pet 1:16–2:3; 3:16-17). We must take God at His word and accept that He means what He says. Literally. The first lie Satan used was to ask Eve if God REALLY meant what He said. Well, He did. Literally. Not allegorically. God intended us to understand what He was saying, and for everyone to understand it the same way, so we should simply take His word at face value for what it says, as that is the only way everyone (that has the indwelling Holy Spirit) will come to the same conclusion. Yes, there are parables, which God always explains. Yes, there are visions, which God also explains. If not in the context, then somewhere else in Scripture you will find the interpretation of it. Yes there are literary devices such as metaphors, similes, etc. These should be recognizable. Many of the things these men are spiritualizing as types are not recognizable. They do not align with what the passage is saying about the type. This is a form of twisting Scripture, of eisegesis, where you are given the meaning to the word, type or passage, and not God. People that do this are not guiltless and will be held accountable for this dangerous and heretical twisting and wresting of Gods Word.
Literal Interpretation Must Rule
There are many more illustrations that could be given, but I think you get the idea. Allegory sidesteps the text and context of a verse, the common meaning of words and grammar of the verse. It’s also a doorway to the mystical approach used to promote pantheism, where God is in everything, which aligns with the said pastors teaching that Christ is in everything in the OT. This spells the death of sound hermeneutics. It also involves eisegesis—which is reading one’s beliefs or desires of what something should say into the Scriptures, a presupposition, rather than reading, studying and concentrating on what God is actually saying, comparing Scripture with Scripture.
There is typology in the Bible, but there are very specific rules with typology. Typology that isn’t explained somewhere in the context, is not true typology. The Holy Spirit who is the author of the symbols, also provides the meaning of the symbols. In His Word. At no time are we left to imagine the meaning of Biblical symbols. Allegoricalism (spiritualizing Scripture) is not a true method of interpretation. Its actually exceedingly heretical since it contradicts the Holy Spirit’s manner of interpretation. It turns the Word of God into play-doh, into a nose of wax to be twisted as the interpreter and teacher sees fit. It is a highly subjective way of making the Bible say anything you want and destroys the absolute sense of Gods literal Word. God gave the Scripture to reveal truth to man, not to hide it or confuse it (De 29:29), and the Spirit of Gods only teaches in a literal fashion (e.g. Neh. 8:8; Pr 8:8-9; 22:20-21; 1 Jn 2:20-21, 27; 1 Pet. 1:21; Jn 14:17; 15:26; 16:13). This is where God is glorified, when the treasures of Scripture are dug into a literal and normal sense and expounded, for there are deep things of God in Scripture but they aren’t hidden because God wants us to know them and we can discover them if we study diligently and rightfully and non-privately. Spiritualizing scripture and types and using numerology are methods that are not holy or Biblical to try to discern hidden things. Christ and His apostles used many OT passages by quote or prophetic fulfillment (around 700) and they always interpreted literally and in context, rightfully dividing the Bible (e.g. Ac 3:18-21; Rom 11:25-27) and never allegorically or in symbolism or unfounded typology, unless the symbol was explained in the immediate context. Trembling before Gods Word causes the true literalist to be very careful of every word and verse, never interpreting out of context or by falsely dividing or giving types and figures another meaning not found in the context or an extraBiblical meaning, which is eisegesis, because he believes that God’s Word is inerrant, and thus every word matters.
True types are limited to a divinely-ordained person, thing, event or incident, such as manna from heaven, or Moses smiting the rock or the valley of dry bones, etc. No ordinary common event, such as the simple eating of food or putting on of apparel, or having twin babies or Joseph’s silver cup or drinking from his cup or a scarlet thread, etc, would be a type. Not many OT or NT Scriptures refer to a mundane, common event or object as a type either, as we see in the above examples given, but that also doesn’t mean that every divinely-ordained person, thing, event or incident is a type. To interpret the Scripture symbolically without Biblical authority is not conducive to any firm conviction regarding prophetic or other subjects. How can we be definite about anything that depends on interpretation of symbols when we know that such interpretations are largely a subjective evaluation of the text and without Biblical authority? If the Bible is taken literally, and the symbols can be shown from other Scriptures to have a well-defined meaning, then such interpretations will bring great confidence because they are based on an objective evaluation of the written text which cannot change. But there is no confidence in subjective spiritualizing of Scripture, corrupting Gods words.
How is God glorified in any of this spiritualizing gymnastics and heresy? He is not. There is a very serious danger in misinterpreting, misusing and abusing the Word of God by eisegesis (i.e., making verses, words, etc, say what we want them to say rather than what they actually do say, forcing presuppositions). In this case eisegesis by spiritualizing Scripture. Such are casting great confusion and doubt upon the truth of Scripture, and do not care for the literal truth of what God is saying. They are on their little throne exalting themselves above the throne of God.
Interpreting Scripture allegorically, a highly subjective form of mental gymnastics, destroys the absolute sense of God’s Word. God gave the Scripture to reveal truth to man, not to hide it or confuse it (De 29:29). God gives saints His Holy Spirit at conversion, to teach and lead and know the truth, Who never teaches in this convoluted fashion but in one manner only: literally. See Pr 8:8-9; 22:20-21; 1 Jn 2:20-21, 27; Jn 14:17; 15:26; 16:13. He uses the normal rules of human language in giving and teaching His Word. God the Son made it clear that Scripture is to be interpreted literally (Lk 10:25-26) and He led by example and likewise expected man to interpret in a literal fashion. Normal literal method of Bible interpretation refers to the manner in which human language is ordinarily interpreted. When Gods Word is read, we read it in similitude to other literature, as any other piece of writing, not trying to force some allegorical, mystical, or figurative meaning into its plain statements.
Unless there is some very clear reason intrinsic within the text itself which requires a symbolical interpretation or unless there are other Scriptures which interpret a parallel prophecy in a symbolic sense, we are required to employ a natural, literal interpretation. None of the symbols or types illustrated above offer an clear reasoning intrinsic within the text itself or any scripture which require interpreting in a symbolic or allegoricalized sense. We use figures of speech, such as metaphors, in normal speech, but we understand that these are figures of speech by the context and we know how to interpret them. The Bible also contains figures of speech, but the Bible makes it clear that these are figures of speech and teaches us how to interpret them either by the context itself or by comparing Scripture with Scripture.
If someone claims to believe the inspired Word of God is inerrant, but then spiritualizes Scripture, he doesn’t actually believe that of the Bible. A true literalist is very careful of every word and verse, never interpreting out of context or by falsely dividing, because he believes that God’s Word is inerrant, and every word matters. And he fears teaching anything amiss, and does tremble before his Word (Is 66:5).
The Bible is to be read, interpreted and understood literally. Prophecy is fulfilled literally. Every word must be taken at its primary literal meaning unless the facts of the immediate context clearly indicate otherwise. This is the basic rule for understanding any literature in fact. Even among the secular, no sensible person would interpret literature by allegorizing. If the Bible doesn’t mean exactly what it says, there’s no way to discern what it exactly does mean. The teaching of God’s Word is then thrown into complete and utter confusion. Truth is spoiled and destroyed. And its difficult to be edified from allegorical mental gymnastics called "preaching," but isn't from the text in hand.
Careful attention must be given to the choice of words, grammar and syntax of the sentence and context. God inspired every Word of Scripture, including the tittles and jots. The exact words are there on purpose because God chose them and spoke them. You cannot take scripture and arbitrarily give meanings to words, meanings that aren’t there. In the historical aspect we understand God communicated in a historical setting. Therefore the historical setting gives meaning to the communication. All three encapsulate literal interpretation, the basic method of premillennialists since this how the Holy Spirit teaches (1 Jn 2:20-21; Pr 8:8-9). The literalist makes God the centre but the allegoricalist makes man the centre.
Christ and His apostles used many OT passages by quote or prophetic fulfillment (around 700) and they were always interpreted literally and in context, rightfully dividing the bible (e.g. Ac 3:18-21; Rom 11:25-27). Peter was clear that Scripture must be interpreted literally (2 Pet 1:16-21; 3:16-17). Christ rebuked His disciples for not believing the prophecies in their literal interpretation (Lk 24:25-27).
God gave the Scriptures to reveal truth to man, not to hide it (De 29:29). God made human language, and He has communicated His revelation to man in normal human language that is interpreted in a normal way that language is interpreted. The apostles always interpreted Scripture literally (e.g., Ac 3:18-21; Rom 11:25-27). Bible prophecies have always been fulfilled literally. Prophecy is light, not darkness (2 Pet 1:19). The Bible’s final book of prophecy, Revelation, is so named because it is given to reveal truth, not hide it. Prophecy is to be understood in the normal way that human language is understood because it is God’s revelation to mankind in human language. For instance, prophecies about Israel were fulfilled literally. In De 28, Israel’s entire history was given in this great prophecy (see particularly vv. 63-67). This prophecy describes Israel’s defeat at the hands of foreign powers and her dispersion to the ends of the earth, and they have been fulfilled literally and precisely over the past 2,000 years, beginning with the Babylonian Captivity and then Rome’s destruction of Jerusalem in AD 70 and again in AD 135. Prophecies of the Gentile nations were fulfilled literally and prophecies of Christ’s first coming were fulfilled literally and the stage is set today for the literal fulfillment of the remaining prophecies.
In contrast to allegoricalism and spiritualizing of Scripture,
“The literal method is a true and honest method. It is based on the assumption that the words of Scripture can be trusted. It assumes that since God intends His revelation to be understood, divine revelation must be written based on regular rules of human communication. To interpret literally means to explain the original sense of the speaker or writer according to the normal, customary, and proper usages of words and language. In order to determine the normal and customary usages of Bible language, it is necessary to consider the accepted rules of grammar and rhetoric, as well as the factual historical and cultural data of Bible times. It is proper for a word to have various meanings and senses. However, when a word is used in a given situation, it should normally possess but one intended sense or meaning. This is the regular law of linguistic exchange among sensible people. Music lovers seek to understand music composers, not by out-thinking and out-sensing the composers, but by following the latter’s choice and use of precise musical notes. Students of Music Appreciation courses do not go about trying to listen for something which is not there, but attempt rather to know the intended meaning and mood of a given composer through his use of the notes. Otherwise what the composer is trying to say is ignored and what the interpreter wants to say becomes the important factor. Literal interpreters believe that Scriptural revelation is given to be understood by man. It believes the Bible to be revelation, not riddle” (Paul Lee Tan, The Interpretation of Prophecy, pp. 29-30).
So the literal sense of Scripture must always rule. This involves literal, grammatical, and historical aspects of interpretation. In the literal we understand the message as its literally given to us. There are figures of speech, there are some types and even some allegories. We must understand the text will make it obvious when these figures, types and allegories are to be applied, as is the case in any normal language. In the grammatical aspect we understand God communicated through human language, intending His revelation to be understood. Therefore the meaning of the message is to be understood in the normal sense and use of the language. One must understand the language to understand the message.
God’s Word is plain and perspicuous (meaning clearly expressed and understood), and all its words are important since we are to live by its every word (Matt 4:4). The saint doesn’t look for some spiritualized and allegorized hidden symbolic meaning of truth but understands that truth is to be found through the literal, in context, rightly divided, interpreted, and studied Word of God alone. He knows that this is the only means whereby the truth is taught by the indwelling Spirit of truth. So he doesn’t take verses out of their context, he doesn’t symbolically twist God’s Word out of its actual meaning, but interprets carefully in context and by rightly dividing the word of truth, understanding that all scripture and doctrine harmonizes, nothing contradicts, and God is not the author of confusion. The doctrine of perspicuity is about absolute truth, and it, like all scriptural doctrine, is attacked by the world and the devil, and by all who work for those.
The Bible says we have a “more sure word of prophecy; whereunto ye do well that ye take heed” (2 Pet 1:19). We are also told that “the prophecy came not in old time by the will of man: but holy men of God spake as they were moved by the Holy Ghost” (2 Pet. 1:21); and that “no prophecy of the scripture is of any private interpretation”(1 Pet. 1:20). If this is the case, and it is, then any method of interpretation which leads to uncertainty, surmise, and supposition cannot be right. Since the Holy Spirit wrote the Scriptures, we can be sure of its message by comparing Scripture with Scripture. No verse of Scripture should be considered out of its context, and every verse should be compared with other Scriptures bearing on the subject of the verse under consideration. That’s what it means that “no prophecy of scripture is of any private interpretation.”
Conclusion
Everything documented as examples of allegorizing are just fables. It is convoluted, spurious and fallacious misinterpretation and misrepresentation of Scripture with no basis in truth. It’s replacing sound doctrine with fables because of some personal lust and itching ears (2 Tim 4:3-4), attempting to come across as someone with great knowledge of the bible, when in reality it does the very opposite. Its also virtually meaningless. Useless.
These serious concerns, criticisms and expose are not unfounded. Preaching truth mixed with error is how Satan leads into apostasy. If it were all lies almost nobody would follow, but teaching some of the things Krahn, Hoggard and Kelly are, does alter God's Word from the way it was meant. It is thus not surprising when scripture is given a different meaning altogether which happens very often in these men’s preachings.
Spiritualizing Scripture, an unbridled imagination, belongs in the garbage can from whence it came. It has no Biblical authority at all and produces false doctrine. The same goes for numerics. The symbolic, or “spiritual” interpretation is made to teach whatever is in the heart of the interpreter, and literal teaching is ignored and overruled by “spiritualizing.” The power is in the message of a passage, not in the formulation of a sermon that doesn't communicate what a passage says. To “spiritualize” Scripture is very serious. It is sinful, for it is willfully twisting Gods Word away from its actual meaning. Though it may be supported by some commentaries (such as Matthew Pool, Matthew Henry, Scott and Clarke, etc) and by other men (such as Peter Ruckman, Reg Kelly and Mike Hoggard), the believer’s authority rests not with commentaries or with men but with the Word of God. Many of the arguments of those who follow this system of interpretation are “semi-sceptical,” and that comes out especially over the original Bible issue. In fact, their attitude often follows that of the scoffer (2 Pet 3:3).
Do your ears itch for this type of heresy? Do “cunningly devised fables” (2 Pet 1:16) excite you? Saved people don’t follow them (2 Pet 1:16). Let me warn you what 2 Tim 4:3-4 says,
“For the time will come when they will not endure sound doctrine; but after their own lusts shall they heap to themselves teachers, having itching ears; And they shall turn away their ears from the truth, and shall be turned unto fables.”
The allegorizing nightmare has grave consequences indeed, producing contradictions and lies, serious errors (possibly even blasphemy), distortion and corruption of Scripture, twisting and wresting typology into something with no resemblance to truth, which ought to be unheard of in a faithful witness.
Pr 14:5 says,
“A faithful witness will not lie: but a false witness will utter lies.”
And Pr 12:17,
“He that speaketh truth sheweth forth righteousness: but a false witness deceit.”
What would be the purpose of manipulating, misrepresenting, misusing and seriously abusing God’s Word in such a disgraceful fashion, in this dishonest handling of the Word of God (2 Cor 4:2)?
God never works in a way that circumvents the Bible. If the meaning of Scripture is mangled, is the Holy Spirit in it?
Scripture has only one meaning. There may be more than one application, but never more than one interpretation. Scripture is plain and perspicuous (meaning clearly expressed and understood—Pr 8:8-9), and all its words are important since we’re to live by its every word (Matt 4:4). Believers don’t look for some spiritualized/allegorized hidden symbolic meaning but understand truth is found through the literal interpreted, rightly divided, and diligently studied Bible alone. The doctrine of perspicuity is about absolute truth, and it, like all scriptural doctrine, is under great attack.
Do you love the truth? Truth by nature is antithetical. You can't love truth and error simultaneously. Loving health mandates hating disease. Loving truth requires hating error, which then requires rejecting and reproving error. Loving sound doctrine means hating false doctrine. You can't both love and hate false doctrine at the same time. To get rid of false doctrine and practice, you must treat them like they matter to someone, at least to God, and hopefully you. The opposition of truth with error, is noted through Scripture.
“Therefore I love thy commandments above gold; . . . and I hate every false way” (Ps 119:127-128).
“Abhor [hate] that which is evil; cleave to that which is good [Biblical]” (Rom 12:9b).
Oppose this heresy of allegoricalism, spiritualizing Scripture, wherever you hear it.
Nothing I write is done for personal gratification but for the single purpose of the furtherance of the truth of scripture, that is sound doctrine. My desire is that pastors do the right thing and teach and practice only sound doctrine, as commanded of the bishop (Ti 2:1; 1 Tim 1:3), for it’ll save both you and the people you are preaching to:
“Take heed unto thyself, and unto the doctrine; continue in them: for in doing this thou shalt both save thyself, and them that hear thee.” (1 Tim 4:16).
If what you teach is in line with the clear and explicit teaching of God's word, then I will back you without hesitation. If what you teach is not in line with the clear and explicit teaching of God's word, then I will, without hesitation, call you out on it. Truthfully, I haven’t always done that but conviction and reproof of the Lord through His Word compels me to further consistency in this serious matter. And God holds me responsible for being a watchman (Mk 13:34) and a Berean (Ac 17:11) but He doesn’t hold me responsible whether you listen to the warnings or not.
The Bible is not a Book to be trivialized. It is God’s inspired and inerrant Word. To misrepresent or change the meaning of the words inspired by the Holy Spirit in any way is a serious matter even if it is done with the best of intentions. It is not necessary to embellish Scripture with fiction to increase the impact of the message. The simple literal interpretation of God’s Word, when preached in the power of the Holy Spirit, will have more impact than any spiritualizing drama. It is the Holy Spirit’s work to convince of sin, righteousness and judgment, and lead and edify His people in the truth, and since He chose the words of Scripture we should expect that His words literally interpreted will be the most convicting and helpful.
“All scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness: That the man of God may be perfect, throughly furnished unto all good works.” (2 Tim 3:16-17).