Christ Superior to Angels (1:4-14)
Discussion of Sensus Plenior
Sensus Plenior in the Interpretation of the Old Testament
In the vast majority of Old Testament quotations in Hebrews, as throughout the New Testament, we encounter an understanding of texts that does not grow out of grammatico-historical exegesis—that is, out of the actual meaning intended by the original authors for the original readers. Because of this, the use of these quotations in Hebrews often has been questioned or even rejected by scholars as arbitrary and frivolous. These texts, it is alleged, simply do not mean what the New Testament authors take them to mean.
It is a fact that the New Testament writers find more meaning in texts than the original authors intended, or even could have known. In this they follow an already established Jewish practice wherein certain texts were regarded as having more meaning than was realized in their particular historical contexts, as, for example, in the so-called messianic psalms. These texts pointed beyond themselves to the future. The first Christians, all of them Jews, read their (Old Testament) Scriptures differently after they had encountered the risen Christ and the fulfillment he brought. From that time on, Christ was the hermeneutical key that unlocked the meaning of the Old Testament—their interpretation became christocentric. Many texts (not all!) were now seen to point to Christ and what had happened, was happening, and would happen through him in the future.
The meaning of texts now seen retrospectively through the new prism of Christ often is called sensus plenior, a fuller or deeper sense. Here, the original author alluded unconsciously to things beyond his purview, the ultimate meaning of which could be known only at a later time by those who experienced the fulfillment brought by Christ.
Sensus plenior very often involves a correspondence between what was originally referred to and its counterpart in the era of fulfillment. Such a correspondence might ordinarily be thought to be a matter of mere coincidence, but here the relationship is regarded as divinely intended. It is important to realize that sensus plenior has its foundation in the following presuppositions: the sovereignty of God; the inspiration of the Scripture; the unity of God’s plan of salvation; and, most importantly, Christ as the telos, the goal, of God’s plan to redeem the created order from its fallenness.
In almost every instance the correspondence is apparent, substantial, and discernable. Generally, there are controls at work: the analogies involve historical patterns and they concern significant, not peripheral, matters. If one attempts to step into the shoes of these authors and to understand their use of these texts, it becomes clear that their practice is neither arbitrary nor subjective. There is an underlying rationale to sensus plenior that guides our author and that makes his use of Old Testament texts intelligible and convincing.