@Ray I'm inclined to agree - his approach is pretty much guaranteed to produce a different interpretation of every text - kind of a Gnostic, hidden meaning approach. I think we should encourage Bob to improve his answers with explanation and references (though those thinks might be alien to his whole theology!).

Also, I don't want to drive someone away just because I don't agree with anything he says, but on the other hand do we need to consider whether some approaches are just not a good fit on a site that is fundamentally evidence-based by design?

Well Sensus Plenior as I understand it should be evidence based

e.g., the NT often quotes the OT, explicitly stating that there is a fuller sense than the original speakers understood

so better supported answers is by no means an unreasonable request

@Ray I have a feeling that Bob uses the term "Sensus Plenior" in a way that goes beyond the wikipedia definition for example - I am trying to work out what tradition he is speaking from - to me it reads like a form of Gnosticism

Which I'm fine with (well, in a sense)... but he can't expect to get many upvotes if he's not giving well-supported answers

I just spent some time on his website, specifically in the about section (sensusplenior.net/?page_id=2), which really seems to be saying that it is not gnostic and that it should be evidence based

E.g., Rule #3 (sensusplenior.net/?page_id=379) says "Since every word must be established by two or three witnesses, every shadow must have at least two supporting scripture witnesses. (This keeps us rigorous in methodology)"

that's why I am calling it Gnostic :)

ah, i see what you're saying

well at least he is theoretically interested in supporting conclusions with scripture

though to be honest, it seems almost like a comment bomb... he came, dropped a bunch of answers, and hasn't returned

Apparently I am man, I've got his number.

@Caleb "Are these the usage of the word life the same here or do they refer to the same thing?" you might want to rephrase that? :)

I have a question I'm about to submit that is sort of both about exegesis and hermeneutical approaches... asking about hermeneutical approaches of an NT author who quoting the OT

This is a strange question. Normally I would say questions of the pattern "Scriptural support for x" are off-topic - but what if x is hermeneutical approach? I'm inclined to say that it is on topic.

I agree

Not sure why it was deleted... I'd expect VtCs or something...

@Richard, was that you?

Admittedly it was not really a well-framed question

but there was a good question there

I agree there was a good question in there. I just wasn't loving the wording. I didn't even VtC on that one. The OP deleted the question, unfortunately.

Apparently, if the OP deletes the question and there are no answers on the question, it gets permadeleted. (News to me!)

ohh, interesting

there were three questions, and none of them was really worked out at all

I hate seeing people bail on the site....