Known as a Messianic psalm, Psalm 22 graphically portrays the crucifixion of Christ a thousand years before the event.
Verses:1 to 26 foreshadow Christ’s crucifixion and resurrection;
Verses 27 through 31 foreshadow his millennial reign.
Some of the more obvious allusions in the text are:
My God, my God, why have you forsaken me? (Matt 27:46; Mark 15:34)
But I am a worm and not a man,
A reproach of men and despised by the people.
All who see me sneer at me;
They separate with the lip, they wag the head, saying,
“Commit yourself to the LORD; let Him deliver him;
Let Him rescue him, because He delights in him.” (Matt 27:43; Luke 23:35)
For dogs have surrounded me;
A band of evildoers has encompassed me;
They pierced my hands and my feet. (Matt 27:35; John 20:25)
They look, they stare at me; (Luke 23:27, 35)
They divide my garments among them,
And for my clothing they cast lots. (Matt 27:35; Mark 15:24; Luke 23:34; John 19:24)
One of the simple rules of interpretation is:
“A TEXT CANNOT MEAN HERE AND NOW WHAT IT DIDN’T MEAN THERE AND THEN” or perhaps more simply, there is only one meaning in a text, the original meaning.
Christ’s use of this Psalm pointing to Himself seems to contradict this simple rule of interpretation.
This leads me an idea expressed by the term
Sensus plenior: the idea that there may be a fuller sense in a particular text.
Sensus plenior can be defined as “that additional, deeper meaning, intended by God but not clearly intended by the human author, which is seen to exist in the words of a Biblical text (or a group of texts, or even a whole book) when they are studied in the light of further revelation or development in the understanding of revelation.” Raymond Brown, Catholic Biblical Quarterly 15/1 (1954) 141-62.
Can the “Fuller Sense” be used as an interpretative method today?
Are there things that we are missing in the Bible that haven’t been seen by us yet?
“When interpreters go beyond the safe guideline of original intentionality, the possibility of reading subjective opinions into the text becomes very real, of course. The only safeguard against eisegesis at this point is not to deny the reality of the fuller sense but to insist that that fuller sense be established only as an extension of the original sense and solely on the basis of subsequent biblical revelation.” The Modern Preacher and the Ancient Text, Sidney Greidanus. Eerdmans Publishing Company, Grand Rapids Michigan, 1988. p. 112. (Bolding added)
Christ Himself established the Psalm as a Messianic Psalm. It wasn’t considered as a Messianic Psalm until Christ Himself used the words to relate it to Himself.
So He established the reality of the fuller sense in Psalm 22.
A problem with using sensus plenior as an interpretive method is that it can lead us to allegorize a text bringing out meanings that are subjective and highly questionable.
Rob
Verses:1 to 26 foreshadow Christ’s crucifixion and resurrection;
Verses 27 through 31 foreshadow his millennial reign.
Some of the more obvious allusions in the text are:
My God, my God, why have you forsaken me? (Matt 27:46; Mark 15:34)
But I am a worm and not a man,
A reproach of men and despised by the people.
All who see me sneer at me;
They separate with the lip, they wag the head, saying,
“Commit yourself to the LORD; let Him deliver him;
Let Him rescue him, because He delights in him.” (Matt 27:43; Luke 23:35)
For dogs have surrounded me;
A band of evildoers has encompassed me;
They pierced my hands and my feet. (Matt 27:35; John 20:25)
They look, they stare at me; (Luke 23:27, 35)
They divide my garments among them,
And for my clothing they cast lots. (Matt 27:35; Mark 15:24; Luke 23:34; John 19:24)
One of the simple rules of interpretation is:
“A TEXT CANNOT MEAN HERE AND NOW WHAT IT DIDN’T MEAN THERE AND THEN” or perhaps more simply, there is only one meaning in a text, the original meaning.
Christ’s use of this Psalm pointing to Himself seems to contradict this simple rule of interpretation.
This leads me an idea expressed by the term
Sensus plenior: the idea that there may be a fuller sense in a particular text.
Sensus plenior can be defined as “that additional, deeper meaning, intended by God but not clearly intended by the human author, which is seen to exist in the words of a Biblical text (or a group of texts, or even a whole book) when they are studied in the light of further revelation or development in the understanding of revelation.” Raymond Brown, Catholic Biblical Quarterly 15/1 (1954) 141-62.
Can the “Fuller Sense” be used as an interpretative method today?
Are there things that we are missing in the Bible that haven’t been seen by us yet?
“When interpreters go beyond the safe guideline of original intentionality, the possibility of reading subjective opinions into the text becomes very real, of course. The only safeguard against eisegesis at this point is not to deny the reality of the fuller sense but to insist that that fuller sense be established only as an extension of the original sense and solely on the basis of subsequent biblical revelation.” The Modern Preacher and the Ancient Text, Sidney Greidanus. Eerdmans Publishing Company, Grand Rapids Michigan, 1988. p. 112. (Bolding added)
Christ Himself established the Psalm as a Messianic Psalm. It wasn’t considered as a Messianic Psalm until Christ Himself used the words to relate it to Himself.
So He established the reality of the fuller sense in Psalm 22.
A problem with using sensus plenior as an interpretive method is that it can lead us to allegorize a text bringing out meanings that are subjective and highly questionable.
Rob
