Using Drash in sensus plenior:
Linked portions indicating that marriage is of the flesh.
Ge 2:23 And Adam said, This is now bone of my bones, and flesh of my
flesh: she shall be called Woman, because she was taken out of Man.
Eve is flesh and bone of Adam. No mention of spirit.
1Ch 1...
The Sadducees would certainly reject this line of reasoning since it depends on a number of non-Torah passages and concepts. It's also not clear to me that Jesus used anything like the method you describe here. His reasoning is short, persuasive and direct.
Which scriptures would they be unfamiliar with? Job, Genesis Chronicles and Jeremiah are all scriptures they should have been familiar with. Showing that Jesus used the method, is a topic for a complete thesis paper which would show the apostles use of the method presumably having been learned from Jesus.
They were familiar with those books, but rejected all but Genesis as Scripture. Jesus restricted Himself to the Pentateuch for that very reason. I also don't see Him using symbols (or anything but divine revelation) to answer the marriage portion of the question.
@Jon Great comment, it made me go back and try to solve it in Genesis alone. I did not know that they only accepted Gen. Thanks.
@Jon That is the kind of scrutiny to which I wish to subject sensus plenior. Thanks.
"I also don't see Him using symbols (or anything but divine revelation) to answer the marriage portion of the question. " When we don't have answers we always assume divine revelation. How did Jesus know Nathaniel? Divine revelation. How did Philip know that Jesus was from Nazareth? Hmm... well they must have talked about it. Why not presume divine revelation as we do for Jesus and Nathaniel? Isn't it just as likely that Philip said to Jesus as they approached, "Hey Jesus, Nathaniel wants to know if anything good can come out of Nazareth!" Omniscience spoils kenosis.
I see my comment was unclear: the Sadducees accepted the first five books of the Bible (Genesis, Exodus, Leviticus, Numbers, and Deuteronomy). I don't dispute that Jesus could have used Scripture to answer the marriage question, but He didn't show us the reasoning for that half of His answer. As you point out, Jesus was an exceptional rabbi at a young age. How did he receive His _semikhah_ at 12?
Joh 7:15 And the Jews marvelled, saying, How knoweth this man letters, having never learned? He was not a formal rabbi. He was unleavened bread - untaught Word. Sesnus plenior is hidden in childish riddles, he only has to see enough at age 12 to ask the questions. Probably how the rabbis learned to teach that way. Pardes and the first formalized Mirash rules came into existence around that time.
Bob, I'd like you to know that I appreciate all the work that you've been doing on this answer, but so far none of the edits have really helped me understand it better. I wish I understood your method well enough to edit it down to a focused answer, because you have some good stuff here.
Discussion between Jon Ericson and Bo…
Discussion between Jon Ericson and Bo…