tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3771009444113723863.post8863469106675669875..comments2024-03-21T10:33:24.876-07:00Comments on Articuli Fidei: The eclectic grammatical-historical literary method and sensus pleniorDavid Waltzhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/17966083488813749052noreply@blogger.comBlogger16125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3771009444113723863.post-10023130496012002292009-05-31T22:30:36.768-07:002009-05-31T22:30:36.768-07:00Hi David,
I was hoping to hear from you after you...Hi David,<br /><br />I was hoping to hear from you after you had a chance to look at the web site.<br /><br />Since scripture is not of a private interpretation, I am most anxious for others to correct errors in my observations.<br /><br />Thanks.Bob Joneshttp://idontknownuthin.comnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3771009444113723863.post-39925418392128816702008-09-30T17:31:00.000-07:002008-09-30T17:31:00.000-07:00Thanks David, There is much more that I haven't do...Thanks David, <BR/><BR/>There is much more that I haven't documented.<BR/><BR/>I know it sounds crazy, but I believe that there are four layers of legitimate interpretation that are firmly attached to the words used. <BR/><BR/>When you get your mind around it, it sounds even crazier. There are three more Bibles contained in the same Bible.<BR/><BR/>So far I have not found a single hint of contradicting the literal.<BR/><BR/>The Jews and early church both believed in four layers of interpretation, we have just lost how they did it. I believe the stuff I am documenting will allow everyone to rediscover it for themselves.<BR/><BR/>Children in our fellowship are getting the swing of it.<BR/><BR/>I hope to hear from you. The contact page at the site has my email.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3771009444113723863.post-51448393606562120422008-09-19T00:55:00.000-07:002008-09-19T00:55:00.000-07:00Hi Bob,Thanks for the link! WOW, you have compiled...Hi Bob,<BR/><BR/>Thanks for the link! WOW, you have compiled a lot of material...It will take some time for this Beachbum to digest it all...will try to comment later, Lord willing.<BR/><BR/>Grace and peace,<BR/><BR/>David<BR/><BR/>P.S. Would be very interested in your comments concerning the two questions I asked in my "The Tetragrammaton" thread.David Waltzhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17966083488813749052noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3771009444113723863.post-65409519987322208562008-09-18T22:55:00.000-07:002008-09-18T22:55:00.000-07:00I would be interested in your comments on the new ...I would be interested in your comments on the new examples I unpack at http://idontknownuthin.com<BR/><BR/>We can guess about what they did or didn't do, but I believe that once we are able to do it too, the guessing will end.<BR/><BR/>This site is not really a public site, mostly non-linear notes to help me remember what I have found so far, and various way to try and explain them.<BR/><BR/>Although they look like allegory, look for the old main page to see the rules that constrain the meaning.<BR/><BR/>Thanks.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3771009444113723863.post-84044120773637028192008-09-16T10:11:00.000-07:002008-09-16T10:11:00.000-07:00Hi Bob,Thanks for posting; you wrote:>>The a...Hi Bob,<BR/><BR/>Thanks for posting; you wrote:<BR/><BR/>>>The assumption that the NT authors required inspiration is the weak link in the argument. In fact, each usage complies with midrash techniques formalized by Rabbi Eliezer and were available at the time of Christ.>><BR/><BR/>Me: Beale and Carson (and others) are not convinced that Jesus and the apostles employed midrashic interpretation; however, other EV Biblical scholars believe that they did (plus <I>pesher</I> and allegorical methods). For an excellent introduction see Richard N. Longenecker’s <I>Biblical Exegesis in the Apostolic Period</I> (2nd ed.), pages 6-35.<BR/><BR/><BR/>Grace and peace,<BR/><BR/>DavidDavid Waltzhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17966083488813749052noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3771009444113723863.post-20911766236361994432008-09-15T18:06:00.000-07:002008-09-15T18:06:00.000-07:00Hello, The assumption that the NT authors required...Hello, <BR/>The assumption that the NT authors required inspiration is the weak link in the argument. In fact, each usage complies with midrash techniques formalized by Rabbi Eliezer and were available at the time of Christ.<BR/><BR/>In Gen 2:21 each word has multiple meanings in Hebrew: took also means married, flesh:mankind, sleep:death, etc. You can verify these then substitute Christ for Adam. It now reads "And God caused Christ to die and he died and he married a certain limping side and redeemed mankind" This is verifiable sod or sensus plenior. The limping side of Christ is the side with the bruised heel.<BR/><BR/>The story of Tamar contains the birth of Christ, Ehud and Eglon are a picture of Christ on the cross, etc. Each picture is verifiable using uninspired techniques. And the techniques explain the apostle's usage of the OT.<BR/><BR/>I hope this blesses you.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3771009444113723863.post-71720849704089814302008-09-15T09:00:00.000-07:002008-09-15T09:00:00.000-07:00Hello Dean,Thanks for the links. BTW, Jonathan has...Hello Dean,<BR/><BR/>Thanks for the links. BTW, Jonathan has been in my “Links” sidebar since the beginning of this blog (though he has not be very active of late…)<BR/><BR/>Grace and peace,<BR/><BR/>DavidDavid Waltzhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17966083488813749052noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3771009444113723863.post-41891201356017850912008-09-15T08:56:00.000-07:002008-09-15T08:56:00.000-07:00Hi Chris,I am going to suggest that there is a dif...Hi Chris,<BR/><BR/>I am going to suggest that there is a difference between reliable and infallible. SP can be reliable if the interpretation falls in line with the infallible Tradition. <BR/><BR/>But to know if an interpretation is infallible, that would only occur if it becomes part of the infallible Tradition.<BR/><BR/><BR/>Grace and peace,<BR/><BR/>DavidDavid Waltzhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17966083488813749052noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3771009444113723863.post-34464706825981539322008-09-15T02:44:00.000-07:002008-09-15T02:44:00.000-07:00There are some interesting thoughts on the Grammat...There are some interesting thoughts on the Grammatical-Historical Method and how it applies to Catholic theology in the light of evangelical exegesis at <A HREF="http://crimsoncatholic.blogspot.com/search?q=ghm" REL="nofollow">Jonathan Prejean's blog</A>.<BR/><BR/>A summary of his thesis is this:<BR/>"The grammatico-historical method is neither a necessary nor a sufficient condition for objective meaning of Scripture."<BR/><BR/>Perhaps some good posts to start with would be these:<BR/> - <A HREF="http://crimsoncatholic.blogspot.com/2005/08/argument-from-hypothetical-evangelical.html" REL="nofollow">Argument from a hypothetical Evangelical</A>.<BR/> - <A HREF="http://crimsoncatholic.blogspot.com/2005/08/sixteen-word-objection-to.html" REL="nofollow">Sixteen Word Objection to Evangelicalism</A>.<BR/> - <A HREF="http://crimsoncatholic.blogspot.com/2005/08/ummmmm-no.html" REL="nofollow">Ummmmm, no</A>.Deanhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15585960278745846006noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3771009444113723863.post-21623976655700368612008-09-15T00:23:00.000-07:002008-09-15T00:23:00.000-07:00How is the Sensus Plenior reliably determined if i...How is the <I>Sensus Plenior</I> reliably determined if inspiration is not present?Christopher Smithhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09539170598198122642noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3771009444113723863.post-75119586441907389502008-09-14T20:45:00.000-07:002008-09-14T20:45:00.000-07:00Hi Chris,You posted:>>Just to clarify with r...Hi Chris,<BR/><BR/>You posted:<BR/><BR/>>>Just to clarify with respect to your own (the Catholic?) position: you are arguing that the Catholic Magisterium employs an ISPA in the same sense and with the same authority as the Apostles?>><BR/><BR/>Me: Good question...<BR/><BR/>According to Catholic theology ISPA ended with the apostolic age. The faithful employ USPA and UEGHM; in rare occasions the Holy Spirit imparts the gift of infallibility conerning certain dogmatic decisions of the Magisterium, which is a different category than the immediate inspiration (i.e. revelation) given to the authors of sacred Scripture.<BR/><BR/><BR/>Grace and peace,<BR/><BR/>DavidDavid Waltzhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17966083488813749052noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3771009444113723863.post-91082406362692417182008-09-14T16:08:00.000-07:002008-09-14T16:08:00.000-07:00So David,Just to clarify with respect to your own ...So David,<BR/><BR/>Just to clarify with respect to your own (the Catholic?) position: you are arguing that the Catholic magisterium employs an ISPA in the same sense and with the same authority as the Apostles?Christopher Smithhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09539170598198122642noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3771009444113723863.post-14015359773604690332008-09-14T12:47:00.000-07:002008-09-14T12:47:00.000-07:00Hi Rory,You posted:>>I must misunderstand th...Hi Rory,<BR/><BR/>You posted:<BR/><BR/>>>I must misunderstand the other position. The way I am imagining it seems untenable. So do those who deny the inspired sensus plenior argue that the virgin birth of Christ was the sign foretold to King Ahaz and known via the GHM? Surely not. I know you disagree with them Dave, but can you tell me how they would answer?>><BR/><BR/>Me: Certainly not via a strict GHM; that is why Beale uses the phrase, “eclectic grammatical-historical method”. He speaks of a “broader context” and “canonical approach” when dealing with apostolic exegesis. IMHO, he sometimes qualifies traditional terminology to the extent that the original meanings are almost lost. (For some additional thoughts on this, see Chris’s post in the combox of the previous thread, and my response.)<BR/><BR/><BR/>Grace and peace,<BR/><BR/>DavidDavid Waltzhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17966083488813749052noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3771009444113723863.post-49155446912781157162008-09-13T16:03:00.000-07:002008-09-13T16:03:00.000-07:00Hi Chris, Just briefly checking the blog during a ...Hi Chris, <BR/><BR/>Just briefly checking the blog during a game time-out (Ducks vs. Boilermakers)...<BR/><BR/>My bad, the uninspired use of <I>sensus plenior</I> should read “uninspired SPA” not ISPA (I apologize for the confusion); a silly typo on my part, will correct the main post now, and then get back to the game. <BR/><BR/>As for Rory's comments/questions both here and in the previous thread (as well as yours), will try to address them all tomorrow after church (I am in a college football mode today!). <BR/><BR/>Grace and peace,<BR/><BR/>DavidDavid Waltzhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17966083488813749052noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3771009444113723863.post-78133347057226834972008-09-13T13:55:00.000-07:002008-09-13T13:55:00.000-07:00David,You said that you reject the notion that we ...David,<BR/><BR/>You said that you reject the notion that we should not employ an uninspired ISPA. Since the first letter of ISPA means "inspired", the concept of an <I>uninpired</I> ISPA strikes me as something of an oxymoron. I'm afraid that the text to which you linked regarding the Catholic approach to biblical interpretation is far too lengthy for me to attempt to read. Could you perhaps summarize for me what you feel is the primary thrust of that document? Is the Catholic magisterium claiming to do ISPA in the same way as the Apostles? Or is it somehow engaging in un- or less-inspired ISPA?Christopher Smithhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09539170598198122642noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3771009444113723863.post-82817977480371241302008-09-13T12:41:00.000-07:002008-09-13T12:41:00.000-07:00Wow Dave,Great timing. I was just working on some ...Wow Dave,<BR/><BR/>Great timing. I was just working on some questions from your other thread, and you have answered the main ones. I suppose I can see why those who deny an inspired sensus plenior would encourage the apostolic hermeneutic. Would it be because they simply used natural gifts and rules of interpretation, and therefore we have the ability?<BR/><BR/>But I do not see how we can avoid an inspired sensus plenior. Does the grammatical historical method reveal the virgin birth of Christ in Is. 7? It seems to me like the plainest and most obvious "sign" given to Ahaz, who refuses to ask for a sign, cannot possibly be the birth of Christ 700 years later. Rather, Isaias' wife bares the child in ch. 8, and who before he reaches and age of accountability, "the land before whose two kings you are will be deserted." The sensus plenior of Mt. 1:23 even interprets the "young woman" specifically as a virgin, which could not possibly have been foretold form Is. 7 alone, without an inspired second sense.<BR/><BR/>I must misunderstand the other position. The way I am imagining it seems untenable. So do those who deny the inspired sensus plenior argue that the virgin birth of Christ was the sign foretold to King Ahaz and known via the GHM? Surely not. I know you disagree with them Dave, but can you tell me how they would answer?<BR/><BR/>Thanks,<BR/><BR/>RAnonymousnoreply@blogger.com