| bio | website | sensusplenior.net |
|---|---|---|
| location | ||
| age | ||
| visits | member for | 1 year, 7 months |
| seen | Jan 9 at 23:08 | |
| stats | profile views | 90 |
I am in my senior term at the Seminary of the Wilderness. My first ten years were spent as bi-vocational pastor/evangelist in Utah preaching of Christ how I knew best and trying to improve by learning theology from Reformed, Wesleyan, Pentecostal, Baptist and other sources. The second ten years were spent as a BVP/E and discovering that I didn't know what I thought I knew and reading the Bible without outside influence. At the beginning of the third ten I started seeing Christ in the OT, and tried to figure out how and why. I intend in the fourth ten to figure out how to communicate what I learned last term. After that I might be useful for something.
My bias in approaching the Bible is that I believe that it exists in a form today sufficiently intact to be considered infallible. That apparent contradictions are intentional riddles designed to guide us in focusing on different aspects of Christ. That sensus plenior exists in a form which is discernible in a verifiable, and reproducible manner. And that God is a rewarder of those who diligently seek him.
|
Oct 20 |
comment |
Whose meaning are we trying to find? @Caleb To those who have decided a priori that God only intended to speak literally, the author's intent is God's intent. However, the church has traditionally believed that God also had a hidden spiritual meaning. The Catholic church has called it the Quadriga, and more recently discussion have used the term sensus plenior. Deniers of sensus plenior are in the same logical position as atheists. Since they don't see it, it must not exist. A single case disproves it. We can't call Joseph a type since he isn't mentioned in the NT. He must be a SP shadow. |
|
Oct 20 |
comment |
In what sense would Nathanael have “seen” in John 1:51? The ref to Jacob's ladder is right on. Cullam has the pun Cel'im which would be 'clefts in the rock'. The parted seas, torn veil, and cleft of the rock all symbolize the cross. One climbs a cliff through the clefts. Nathaniel saw the crucifixion. |
|
Oct 20 |
awarded | Supporter |
|
Oct 19 |
comment |
What is the tree of life in Proverbs 11:30? ...that is, using it without explaining the concept and methods well can be shocking. Using it without understanding produces free-for-all allegory. |
|
Oct 19 |
comment |
What is the tree of life in Proverbs 11:30? @Richard Thanks. It is difficult to make a case for sensus plenior without addressing methods and rules directly. I suspect that most are actually more comfortable with it than they think. The fig leaf apron as works righteousness, the serpent lifted up as Christ on the cross are simply the memory of sensus plenior. Perhaps an question like "What the heck is Bob talking about?" would allow for an explanation. Just using it without understanding it can be shocking to folks. |
|
Oct 19 |
awarded | Quorum |
|
Oct 19 |
awarded | Commentator |
|
Oct 19 |
comment |
What was Eve's role in relation to Adam? @Jack, God said He'd make them in his image and likeness, but he only created them in his image in v27. The act of making the likeness is not completed until Ge 5:1 In between, the story is told of Christ obtaining a bride through the cross and together becoming fruitful and multiplying. Christ is the "express image" of God, and his bride is "like him". 1 Jn 3.2 The bride of Christ is for His glory. 1 Cor 11:7 Hope this blesses you. |
|
Oct 19 |
answered | What does Jesus mean by generation when talking about the end times? |
|
Oct 19 |
comment |
What is the tree of life in Proverbs 11:30? @Richard, I do not believe that when God said "It is very good" that evil existed. If good and evil cannot be separated then we are speaking of co-eternal evil being an anti-God and dualism ala eastern mysticism. Our hope is that there is not an eternal evil since God will restore all things to being very good. |
|
Oct 18 |
revised |
How do Jewish scholars differ from Christian scholars in their approach to the Tanakh? I don't know if details make it more or less offensive. |
|
Oct 18 |
answered | What does “meek” mean in Matthew 5:5? |
|
Oct 18 |
answered | What is “Regula Fidei”? |
|
Oct 18 |
revised |
Jesus' command to hate your father and mother in Luke 14:26 explained the derivision of hate. |
|
Oct 18 |
revised |
What is “Midrash” and how does it relate to Christian principles of hermeneutics? got rid of pillows. |
|
Oct 18 |
revised |
What is the tree of life in Proverbs 11:30? edited to address comments |
|
Oct 18 |
revised |
How do Jewish scholars differ from Christian scholars in their approach to the Tanakh? rewrote content |
|
Oct 18 |
revised |
Where does the “slippery slope” of allegorical interpretations start? added 807 characters in body |
|
Oct 18 |
comment |
Jesus' command to hate your father and mother in Luke 14:26 The nature of riddle is such that it is based on ambuguity of words, grammar, ideas, etc. The phrase "had not previously hated" is where the ambiguity is introduced, which permits the alternate reading. The interpretation is validated by the definition of love, putting the other before yourself. At what point is a really careless accident not love? The point at which your care for the other was insufficient to protect them. The end result is that hate is simply not putting the other person first. Not loving them. |
|
Oct 18 |
comment |
What is “Midrash” and how does it relate to Christian principles of hermeneutics? @Jack Douglas I normally use the AV. Since you commented I have gone back to read it in Hebrew which does not mention "pillows". I stand corrected. Paul makes the point that the two rocks that were struck, were really one rock which followed them. But Jesus would not have had that commentary available. There are enough places where God calls himself the rock, that Jesus could ask the same question and reach the same conclusion. "There is no other rock". So it would be better to incorporate those in the answer. |