----- Original Message ----- 
From: "H Dorrington" <hjdinfl@...>
>I wonder what percentage of theological disagreements happen because we 
>accepted Sensus Plenior (the "Exegetical >application wherein a deeper 
>meaning is inferred from a Scriptural verse or passage.")

This definition of Sensus Plenior is only partial.  SP also assumes this 
deeper meaning isn't implied by the original authors themselves and meaning 
is drawn from the text that the original authors never intended or never 
knew about.  I can't speak for the others, but I reject Sensus Plenior 
simply because the original authors, divinely inspired, knew what they were 
implying.

>over Paul's exhortation in 1Cor 4:6 "Do not go beyond what is written."

Inference doesn't go beyond what is written.  It simply affirms God through 
the original authors implied in "what is written".

I can only guess the underlying assumption, but the onus is on those who 
deny divinely inspired implication to prove 1. the original authors never 
meant to imply (were not theologizing in their narrative/imperative), and 2. 
the reader/hearer is not expected to pick up on the divinely inspired 
implications in the text.

Christ slapped the wrist of Nicodemus precisely because He expected 
Nicodemus to have inferred the necessity of "new birth"/"regeneration", 
which is all over the Old Testament.

Chad Bresson
Xenia, OH