I would say that notwithstanding the historical role which Pentecostal Bible exegetes who ultilised Evangelical author-centred interpretive methods for bringing Pentecostal biblical theology into viable dialogues with Evangelical scholarship, we need not uphold their methods as the only valid Pentecostal approaches to Scripture readings. They represent just one phase of Pentecostal hermeneutics, amongst several other phases, all of which need to inform a robust Pentecostal hermeneutic, which would include— early Pentecostal allegorical readings of Scripture (Louis William Oliverio Jr., Theological Hermeneutics in the Classical Pentecostal Tradition: A Typological Account [Netherlands: Brill, 2012], pp. 15-17).

Dale M. Coulter provides two helpful essays on the seminal role which allegory served towards early Pentecostal theologising. First is his essay titled, “What Meaneth This? Pentecostals and Theological Inquiry” (Journal of Pentecostal Theology 10, no. 1 [2001]: pp. 38-64). There he points out how early Pentecostal presumptions about “different levels of meaning” in Scripture helped Pentecostal discern the varied experiences of the Spirit in salvation history (e.g., outer court, holy place, holy of holies → redemption, sanctification, Spirit baptism), which also illustrated how their dynamic view of revelation shares resemblance with the medieval multilevel hermeneutic. Second to note is Coulter’s essay, “The Spirit and the Bride Revisited: Pentecostalism, Renewal, and the Sense of History” (Journal of Pentecostal Theology 21 [2012]: 298–319), where he calls attention to how bridal imagery in Scripture shaped early Pentecostal historical consciousness. This of course, includes examples of allegorical reading of Song of Songs in early Pentecostal preaching and teaching.

There is so much more we can say. But to conclude for now, I would also say, as I understand the history, that the early Protestant Reformers never wholly dismissed allegorical readings of Scripture, and neither did they adhere to a modern scientific “author-centred only” reading of Scripture. Rather, they sought a theological reading of Scripture, which means they read Scripture in light of the great creedal confession and patristic readings. What they sought was not the quest of total objectivity in getting “behind the text,” but rather, a Christian reading of the Bible, and hence— a theological reading, fostered through a theological hermeneutic.

A good Pentecostal theological hermeneutic is therefore what makes that chorus so applicable for us who walk in the way of salvation, “My Beloved is mine, and I am His; His banner over me is love.”

“Therefore, being Pentecostal would have no interest in violating proper hermeneutics and do violence to the text to turn the Song of Songs into allegory. This article would imply an unfortunate and basic misunderstanding of pentecostalism. Therefore, there is no need to read the article as it is on it’s face and in it’s title a misguided effort.”

"Therefore, being Pentecostal would have no interest in violating proper hermeneutics and do violence to the text to turn the Song of Songs into allegory. This article would imply an unfortunate and basic misunderstanding of pentecostalism. Therefore, there is no need to read the article as it is on it's face and in it's title a misguided effort."

I would say that notwithstanding the historical role which Pentecostal Bible exegetes who ultilised Evangelical author-centred interpretive methods for bringing Pentecostal biblical theology into viable dialogues with Evangelical scholarship, we need not uphold their methods as the only valid Pentecostal approaches to Scripture readings. They represent just one phase of Pentecostal hermeneutics, amongst several other phases, all of which need to inform a robust Pentecostal hermeneutic, which would include— early Pentecostal allegorical readings of Scripture (Louis William Oliverio Jr., Theological Hermeneutics in the Classical Pentecostal Tradition: A Typological Account [Netherlands: Brill, 2012], pp. 15-17).

Dale M. Coulter provides two helpful essays on the seminal role which allegory served towards early Pentecostal theologising. First is his essay titled, “What Meaneth This? Pentecostals and Theological Inquiry” (Journal of Pentecostal Theology 10, no. 1 [2001]: pp. 38-64). There he points out how early Pentecostal presumptions about “different levels of meaning” in Scripture helped Pentecostal discern the varied experiences of the Spirit in salvation history (e.g., outer court, holy place, holy of holies → redemption, sanctification, Spirit baptism), which also illustrated how their dynamic view of revelation shares resemblance with the medieval multilevel hermeneutic. Second to note is Coulter’s essay, “The Spirit and the Bride Revisited: Pentecostalism, Renewal, and the Sense of History” (Journal of Pentecostal Theology 21 [2012]: 298–319), where he calls attention to how bridal imagery in Scripture shaped early Pentecostal historical consciousness. This of course, includes examples of allegorical reading of Song of Songs in early Pentecostal preaching and teaching.

There is so much more we can say. But to conclude for now, I would also say, as I understand the history, that the early Protestant Reformers never wholly dismissed allegorical readings of Scripture, and neither did they adhere to a modern scientific “author-centred only” reading of Scripture. Rather, they sought a theological reading of Scripture, which means they read Scripture in light of the great creedal confession and patristic readings. What they sought was not the quest of total objectivity in getting “behind the text,” but rather, a Christian reading of the Bible, and hence— a theological reading, fostered through a theological hermeneutic.

A good Pentecostal theological hermeneutic is therefore what makes that chorus so applicable for us who walk in the way of salvation, “My Beloved is mine, and I am His; His banner over me is love.”