Continuing with the information discussed in item #3, please consider
#4 The use of the allegorical hermeneutic by the Reformed people is tricky and even risky.
My Reformed friends aren’t going to like hearing this but it is true. Keep reading… Look, the use of allegory can be a train wreck if the person controlling the switch flips it too quickly or keeps it flipped for too long. And how does a person come to know how and when to flip the allegory switch? Think about the railroad switchmen who flipped the heavy levers that moved the small section of traintrack allowing a train to modify its course. Boy, if they made an error of timing, catastrophe would result.
The Reformed people use a fairly large allegory filter to view scripture. They see Israel transmogrify into the church at some point and cease to be a nation yet there is enough New Testament talk about Israel and the church to place their hermeneutic in question (note: all Reformed people may not do this but many do).
Look carefully at Romans 11 for example. I am not saying that Romans 11 is easy for Dispensationalists to translate and understand but scripture seems to be clearly continuing the distinction between Israel, the Church, and Gentiles. Some people from the nation of Israel become members of the Chruch along with some Gentiles by God’s grace is the idea. That does not eliminate the nation from possible future salvation in part or in whole.
Then there is the book of the Revelation. To use allegory here can allow a person to make scripture mean practically anything. We will zoom in upon individual details later but suffice it to say that the Truthinator does not understand the sweeping use of allegory as a justifiable hermeneutic.
I see the Bible being written in order for people to be able to read it and understand what is possible for them and to take on faith the futuristic information based upon God’s power and ability to deliver what He has promised. The Dispensational framework uses a “take the literal stuff as literal and the obviously symbolic stuff as such” if you will pardon my paraphrase. I do not believe the Bible was written as a code that would have to be deciphered later. This would give much too much power to the supposed holder of the deciphering key thus placing us back into Roman Catholicism again. I do not believe any of the writers wrote in code. Why not? Because none of the human tools for taking down God’s inspired word knew the result of their efforts would eventually become the Bible. They were writing to a primary audience.
The writers were writing letters and keeping records. Do people write their letters and keep their records in some kind of code? Maybe sometimes but not usually. They usually want people to be able to understand what they write. Also, the Bible itself places strong warnings against adding to and taking away from its message.
Please consider what I have written and respond if you like. We will continue with another installment soon. Thank you for your kind attention.