ABSTRACT
I do not intend to make any response [to this example]. For, by so entangling the historical narrative [with extraneous material], they no longer have a historical narrative. Since this is a fact, let them say what their source is for declaring who the first man was to be fashioned, in what way the disobedient one exists, and how the sentence of death
has been introduced. If they have indeed learned these things from the Scriptures, then what they call an “allegory” is evidently manifest foolishness. For [their allegorical interpretation] is proven to be superfluous in every regard. If, however, it be true that the text does not relate what has actually happened, this indicates something that above all needs to be understood: does what they have seized upon in their way of speaking as being “spiritual,” truly exist as spiritual [possibilities]? Where, therefore, have they derived this knowledge that they have accepted? How can they say that they have learnt to speak thus from the divine Scripture? At any rate, I keep silent, seeing that such is the situation. [. . .] (79) Therefore this is [what] [Paul] means by “what is said by way of an allegory.” He calls an allegory the comparison that can be made between what happened long ago and what exists at present.
