Urban Puritano • September 2, 2024

New Book Preview

This is a subtitle for your new post

Foreword


Man shall not live on bread alone,

 but on every word that comes from the mouth of God. (Matthew 4:4 NIV)


“Pastor, would you please pray for me? I am struggling to read the Bible.”


Over the last fourteen years of pastoral ministry in the local church, this refrain (or a sentiment very similar) is one I have heard time and time again. This has come from Christians of virtually all phases of life and every educational background (with the exception perhaps of many new believers). The State of the Church surveys put out every two years by the late R. C. Sproul’s Ligonier Ministries as well as many other national surveys consistently show an uphill battle for every biblically faithful, historically orthodox Christian who seeks to contend for the faith once delivered for all the saints (Jude 1:3). The landscape of Christianity in the West in general, and the United States of America in particular, is marked by biblical illiteracy yet even worse—deliberate—that is, a chosen ignorance of the Scriptures. 


This unsurprisingly has led to a decay of doctrine in the souls of many self-professing Christians and a shallowness among many if not most local churches. There is little to no confidence and assurance in the sufficiency, inerrancy, and unique unrivaled authority of the written Word of God. Why? Well, many claim, “After all, when it comes to the Bible, it’s all a matter of one’s interpretation, so who can be right?”


The situation is often only exacerbated when we look at the present state of theological education. Many so-called evangelical scholars training current and future evangelical pastors today care far more about being respected in the eyes of the deceived scholarly world over humbly fearing and following the living God according to the whole counsel of His Word. Pastors, then, with a diminished view of Scripture, turn to gimmicks and tricks of leadership gurus and functionally abandon the Scriptures that uniquely bear witness to Christ (John 5:39) in whom unsearchable riches are found (Ephesians 3:8).


Moreover, today many who claim to be confessional and convictional Protestants openly or secretly seem to scoff at some of the core ideas that led to the Reformation and a recovery of so much sound doctrine that was muted in favor of tradition, superstition, and mysticism. The interpretation of the written, revealed Word of God can be and often is a demanding task. But it is always worth it as the God-breathed Scriptures are the vital core of a true God-fearing Christian’s discipleship. The Lord Jesus in His high priestly prayer asked the Father, “Sanctify them in the truth; your word is truth” (John 17:17 ESV).


Yet this is why Roberto Gazga’s book before you now is so needed and important, and I highly recommend it to you. Faithful local church pastors and elders (vocational or lay), Bible teachers, and Christian professors especially ought to take up this book and carefully read this (though I truly think most all Christians should as well). Roberto’s book is not just another book on interpreting the Bible (hermeneutics), though it will help you wisely interpret the Bible and delight in it. Roberto’s book is also not merely a polemic, though he will bless you as he rightly and precisely pushes back on some increasingly popular but incorrect paradigms in our day. Roberto’s book is also not simply a blessing for the sources he probes and gem quotes he has dug up that will bless you—though it will do this as well! Rather, Roberto’s book before you is an invitation and a plea for Christ’s blood-bought church to live under Christ’s lordship and to do so not according to our wits and whims but according to the Word of God. 


Our Lord directed people to the Scriptures claiming that they spoke of and would direct people to Him (John 5:39). Even in the first century, our Lord encountered and countered religious leaders who neglected the Scriptures for the traditions of men (Mark 7:6–13). Our Lord clearly cared about and asked about the content of the law (Luke 10:25–37) and countered the devil himself with the very written words of God-breathed Scripture (Luke 4:1–13). The holy text of Scripture is for the Christian what water is for the fish and food is for the daily life of all creatures. We will starve or die spiritually without Scripture. As Brother Roberto rightly reminds us, “Interpreters, at whatever stage of maturity, have to

get their hands dirty in handling the text.”


It is personal to you and me and every Christian. Why? Because God does not treat His Word lightly like we so often do. In fact, the way God is glorified by His people is never around or ignoring the Word but always through and with and under the Word. God takes His Word with the utmost seriousness, and so must we. Roberto writes as a thoughtful and committed churchman seeking God’s glory in all things. As you read, you will see and feast your mind on truth. Truth always has great earthly and eternal consequences, and Roberto knows this and believes it. This brother humbly presents the written, revealed Word of God and helpfully brings in faithful voices from the past who can aid us today in our present crisis, helping us grow in discernment. 


Roberto’s book is not only an invitation from a faithful churchman; it is also a challenge in the best sense of the word. Every single Christian from the least to the most mature must beware of and reject intellectual laziness and simply adopting Christian fads even among intellectuals (Proverbs 18:17). Whether you are a Christian who is a fresh, new convert or a seasoned pastor or tenured professor with a PhD, you and all of us must remember we have the mind of Christ (1 Corinthians 2:16); and as such, we are to discern God’s will and honor God with our minds (Romans 12:2; 1 Peter 1:13; Philippians 4:8; Colossians 3:2).


Though the Lord tells us His Word never returns void (Isaiah 55), and though through their faithfulness to the Lord and His Word our forebears turned the world upside down (Acts 17:6), and though believing faith comes through hearing and hearing through the Word of Christ (Romans 10:17), many now seem to believe based on their ministries and lives “I will do everything. The Word can do nothing” (reversing Martin Luther’s famous “I did nothing. The Word did everything”). Indeed, this appears to be the norm rather than the exception. 


I praise God for this book and commend it to you. Read it carefully in this present evil age. Hear what is being said. Think hard about the arguments being made and truths being proposed. Do the hard work and think carefully and prayerfully with your local church family about the role of God’s Word in your life and in your church. What role does the Scripture have in your life? In your family’s life? In your local church’s life? In the world? And if you see shortcomings or a less-than-biblical place for the Bible, what shall be done? The God of glorious grace opens the door for repentance and change of mind. Confess this sin and reorient yourself afresh under Christ’s lordship. Praise be to God! As Brother Roberto reminds us in this volume, “We have, in the text of Scripture from beginning to end, God’s strategic wisdom and tactical cunning summed up in the person and work of Christ.”


May this book be used by the Lord to help individual Christians and many local churches recover or renew their desire and commitment to have the mind of Christ. May the glory of God’s Word in the verses below bearing witness to God’s grace and truth in Christ the Redeemer become an increasing reality in every reader’s life, as well as every family, every local church, every community, and every school:


The Law of Your mouth is better to me Than thousands of gold and silver pieces. (Psalm 119:72)


The words of the Lord are pure words; As silver tried in a furnace on the earth, refined seven times. (Psalm 12:6)


The precepts of the LORD are right, rejoicing the heart; The commandment of the LORD is pure, enlightening the eyes. (Psalm 19:8)


But know this first of all, that no prophecy of Scripture is a matter of one’s own interpretation, for no prophecy was ever made by an act of human will, but men moved by the Holy Spirit spoke from God. (2 Peter 1:20–21)


And He said to them, “O foolish men and slow of heart to believe in all that the prophets have spoken! Was it not necessary for the Christ to suffer these things and to enter into His glory?” Then beginning with Moses and with all the prophets, He explained to them the things concerning Himself in all the Scriptures. (Luke 24:25–27)


Soli Deo Gloria


Brandon Myers

Senior Pastor of Christ the King Reformed Baptist Church, Niles IL

May 2024




Preface




What does the Lord Jesus have to do with interpreting both God’s Word and God’s world?


Conventional wisdom puts the cart before the horse, claiming that the world, whether scholarship or popular opinion, must dictate how the Bible is to be interpreted and who Jesus really is. Most critical scholarship argues that the world is a self-contained, self-explanatory system. It asserts that the Bible contains no overarching metanarrative and should be relegated to a haphazard arrangement of tales. It argues that Jesus was an itinerant rabbi who died a martyr’s death and later became the founding figure of a community of followers. In doing so, conventional wisdom gets the world, the Word, and the Lord Jesus woefully wrong. 


Christian wisdom in general and Calvinist wisdom in particular, however, self-consciously mediate and subjugate knowledge of the world according to the Jesus of the Word. In doing so, they get God’s world, God’s Word, and Jesus right, holding that the world is the theater of God’s glory in Christ, who is the
telos (goal) of all creation precisely because He is the raison d’être (fundamental reason and purpose of its existence). As the Bible says, He is the “Lamb slain from the foundation of the world” (Revelation 13:8). Calvinists observe that according to the Bible, Christ is the all-encompassing Alpha and Omega for both creation and redemption. 


This Calvinist self-conscious mediation and subjugation of knowledge of the world to the Jesus of the Word is a lifelong process. It is both a science and an art. It is a science insofar as it seeks to discover further truths from the axiom of God’s Word. It is an art insofar as this lifelong process can be as messy as a painter’s palette.


Therefore, my present work of “art” starts within the “scientific” framework of the primacy of the Lord Jesus as revealed in God’s Word. Only He, through His Word correctly understood, can get the things of this world right.


I begin and end by asking myself two questions respectively:


Am I a Christocentric reader?


Am I a Christocentric teacher?


In painting, artists sometimes apply neutral colors (called
grisaille or bistre) to a blank canvas as underpainting to give the work more depth and realism. In the same way, I invite the reader to look over my shoulder as I have sought to paint a portrait of Christocentrism for God’s Word and God’s world. Perhaps my efforts will inspire you to paint your own Christocentric work of art. 


Each stroke is infused with a line of thought. What may be vibrantly seen in the final work belies the necessary tonal underpainting and the further grayscale on the canvas of my experience.


As a Calvinist Christian, I believe it is only natural and right to mediate and subjugate all of life to the primacy of the Lord Jesus as revealed in the Scriptures. He tells me He is the way, the truth, and the life. Therefore, I can see and live my knowledge of my experiences in the world only in light of Him. In His light I see light. Christians ought to take this as a joyful invitation to take the Bible seriously and “sanctify Christ as Lord in your hearts, always being ready to make a defense to everyone who asks you to give an account for the hope that is in you, but with gentleness and respect” (1 Peter 3:15 NASB). 


So how have my life’s experiences been shaped by the primacy and centrality of the Lord Jesus in both the Word and the world? By the grace of God I have been privileged to be called to teach children and adults in diverse settings, in both Christian elementary schools and the local churches I have been a member of. In those teaching capacities I have sought to open the Scriptures, to explain and teach God’s Word to God’s people. 


My hope is that parents, pastors, teachers, students, and lay leaders would ponder the eternal significance of God’s Word for God’s world, whatever their present understanding of both are. As for me, I humbly stand upon the unbreakable rock of Reformed Christocentrism. I can do no other, so help me God.





Introduction





The Christ of Scripture is central to the believer’s life. Too many Christians lack a robust understanding of this idea. It is not sufficiently fleshed out regarding hermeneutics (the branch of knowledge concerning interpretation of texts, especially Scripture), much less its applicability for the world we live in. Whether we call it Christocentric Calvinism or Reformed Christocentrism, we can gain a clearer and greater appreciation of this idea once it is incarnated in real-life reading of the Word and real-life application of that Word in the world. It is well past time for the rays of Christocentrism to escape the confines of the academy and be reflected and diffused in the church, in homes, and in the street. 


This work isn’t meant to be a formal theological or philosophical treatise. However, it may be more theological and philosophical than some may like. Indeed, I want to ground sound interpretation of the Word and the world upon a Christocentric foundation. But overall, my case is more impressionistic and suggestive rather than theologically and philosophically rigorous. For this I make no apologies.


After all, this work is deeply personal, born of reflection I was engaged in while living my calling and carrying out its duties as a teacher in the midst of an increasingly decaying and crumbling society and culture. I taught subject matter to children and adults, including an elementary school curriculum as well as the Bible respectively. Why? Because despite the cultural rot, God always has the first and last word on all matters. 


Although I’m no more than an armchair Christian philosopher or theologian, I still self-consciously tried to apply Reformed philosopher Alvin Plantinga’s advice to Christian philosophers in his famous essay “Advice to Christian Philosophers,” from 1984. He argued, “Christian philosophers must display more integrity––integrity in the sense of integral wholeness, or oneness, or unity, being all of one piece. Perhaps ‘integrality’ would be the better word here.” For our purposes, such integrality involves seeing Christ in all of Scripture for all of life.


I have two hopes, dear reader: (1) that you can adapt and integrate my work with your own experiences and (2) that you can encourage those in your sphere of influence, whether in your household, your local church, your college, or your seminary, to strive to see all of Christ in all of Scripture for all of life. Whether or not you identify with the Reformed tradition as I do, our shared faith commits all believers to seek the Lord Jesus “in whom are hidden all the treasures of wisdom and knowledge” (Colossians 2:3 NASB).


To that end, my portrait of Christocentrism according to confessional Calvinism is divided into three interdependent parts. 


Part 1 will lay a foundation for biblical interpretation according to confessional Calvinism, wherein I discuss some axiomatic principles of biblical hermeneutics (that is, proper interpretation) necessary to read Scripture correctly. Historic Protestant confessions such as the Westminster Confession of Faith (WCF) or the Second London Baptist Confession of Faith (2LBCF) explicitly demand and endorse such principles.


Part 2 will provide an example of these interpretive principles applied to a challenging Old Testament text. It constitutes an extended reading for teaching and preaching Christ in the manner of passages about the roads to Emmaus (Luke 24) and Gaza (Acts 8). This will necessarily involve getting our hands dirty, for only in such a way can we rightly divide the Word of truth. We will have to employ various tools in order to judiciously and rationally draw out the text’s single
sensus plenior (fuller sense). That is, human authors in the Old Testament intended to convey a message to their audiences. God often had a concurrent redemptive-historical intention related to Jesus’s ministry to convey to a future audience via the divinely inspired sacred text. He was able to do this because He alone is sovereign over both history and the process of recording the redemptive-historical events themselves. We will therefore use a robustly Reformed grammatico-historical method wedded to a Christocentric redemptive-historical approach. We will scratch the surface in addressing the right reading of figurative language and typology, simultaneously rejecting the medieval interpretive paradigm known as the quadriga, a word that comes from the Latin name for a chariot drawn by four horses abreast, which later became the name of an approach to hermeneutics. Various church fathers and medieval theologians up to the great Thomas Aquinas recognized four levels of meaning in Old Testament texts: literal, typological, tropological, and anagogical. We will touch on these concepts later. Suffice it to say now that those horses don’t haul.


Finally, in part 3 we will commend the fortunes of a Reformed Christian worldview as applied to some key areas of education. There is a continuity between a right reading of the Word and a right vision for the world, which the content of education inevitably deals with. No matter what model or system of education you participate in, the primacy and supremacy of the Lord Jesus is central and paramount. Whether it’s a traditional Christian day school, a classical Christian school, a co-op, a homeschool, or the kitchen table for tutoring your or someone else’s children entrusted to you, authentic Christian education presents a challenge worth considering by all involved. It is a challenge worth wrestling with as much as Jacob wrestled with the angel of the Lord until he received his blessing.


And so I have organized this work to exhort a right reading of the Word of Jesus to exemplify Jesus as a warrior and to elucidate key issues of the world according to the Lord Jesus. I encourage you to see all of Christ in all of Scripture for all of life!


CHRIST'S SCOPE AND SCEPTER: HIS WORD, HIS WORLD


Coming Soon!




Share

By Urban Puritano August 23, 2026
The author of What Is a Reformed Baptist? gives baptism four senses — but the engine is allegory's, and his own confession already ruled on it. Tom Hicks — a confessional Reformed Baptist pastor whose very handle, @TomHicks2LCF, flies the Second London flag — recently offered on X what he weirdly called "the fourfold sense of Christian baptism." Four numbered senses, each pinned to a medieval label: immersion as a sign of union with Christ (literal); a sign of Christ's death and resurrection (allegorical); a sign of the believer's death to self and new life (tropological); a sign of the believer's passing from this world into the next (anagogical). Patrick Schreiner — author of The Four Senses of Scripture, the most prominent recent case for recovering the quadriga — welcomed it: a smile emoji and a "thank you" GIF. The gesture is light. It is also telling, and it is why this small thread from X repays a longer look. The author of the retrieval's flagship book has just cheered the fourfold method as it steps off the page. What was a claim about how biblical texts mean is now applied, with the movement's blessing, to how a sacrament means. I want to be careful not to pay this the wrong compliment. One could call the post creative and mean it warmly. It seems as if many confessional Reformed Baptists do. But the creativity is the whole problem, not a mitigating grace. A hermeneutic is a discipline: it constrains what a thing may be taken to mean and tells you when you have gone wrong. A heuristic is a generator: it prompts you to produce, and it never runs dry. The fourfold scheme, turned on baptism, constrains nothing. It generates — four slots, and an invitation to fill them. That a godly and able pastor can fill them so readily is not evidence the method works; it is evidence of what the method is. A scheme that can find its four senses in a text, in an ordinance, in a hymn, in a handshake, is not discovering four senses in any of them. It is running its apparatus, which will always yield four, because yielding four is what it was built to do. Not a bug — the feature. There is a name for the faculty at work. Pareidolia is the mind's readiness to see a face where there is only cloud; apophenia, its broader cousin, is the readiness to see connection where nothing is in fact connected. The quadriga laid over a sacrament is apophenia in its Sunday clothes — the familiar fourfold silhouette projected onto a subject that never asked for it. Baptism is not a text with a literal sense and three spiritual ones stacked above it. It is one sign, and it signifies richly: union, death and resurrection, new life, the hope of glory — all of it whole and undivided in a single thick redemptive-historical reading of the texts that give it (Rom. 6:3–5; Col. 2:12; 1 Pet. 3:21). Sorting that one meaning into four medieval bins does not enrich the meaning. It multiplies the bins. And then the thread did the argument's work for it. A reader, Mark Harrelson, noticed a gap: "5. For remission of sins. You missed that one." The fourfold scheme had left out something the Nicene Creed itself confesses of baptism — and a fifth item is an awkward thing to hand a fourfold sense. Hicks's answer has real theological content, and none of it is wrong: Christ procures remission at the cross, faith is the hand that receives it, and baptism asserts and confirms it to the believer. Hold that sacramentology; it is sound. Then watch what the method makes him do with it. Remission, he said, is "contained in the allegorical sense." The four senses did not produce remission; challenged, they absorbed it, folding a fifth doctrine into a slot already holding another. That is not a fourfold reading yielding its riches. It is an elastic container stretching to swallow whatever the objection supplies. If the allegorical sense can take on remission after the fact — remission, which has no quarrel with the "death and resurrection" already sitting in that bin — then the "senses" are not distinct compartments of meaning the sacrament yields. They are labels roomy enough to relabel. Press them and they expand; and a scheme that expands on demand has stopped dividing anything at all. Remission was never a missing fifth sense. It was already inside the one meaning of baptism, exactly where union and new life and hope already were. The category error is the surface. The deeper problem is confessional — and here the irony turns tragic. And the tragedy is only multiplied by however many Reformed Baptists it influences to downplay or contradict the this foundational confessional hermeneutic. Hicks is no bystander to the Second London; he wrote the book on it. In What Is a Reformed Baptist? he argues that Reformed Baptist identity is confessional identity — that to be a faithful Reformed Baptist is to hold the historic confessions, and the Second London above all. The man who taught a generation that being Reformed Baptist means holding this confession has now read baptism in a way the confession forecloses. He cannot wave the objection off, because it is his own standard, in his own book, that raises it. The Second London, with Westminster, declares that the true and full sense of any Scripture "is not manifold, but one." Those four words do logical work. "Not manifold" is a denial — not a ranking, not a subordination, but a denial — of multiple senses as such. It denies the genus. And the quadriga, a theory of four senses, is the most prominent species of that genus. The denial of a genus necessarily contains the denial of its species: deny that Scripture's sense is manifold, and you have denied, in the same breath, the fourfold scheme that is manifoldness's flagship. To confess 1.9 is to have already declined the quadriga — and having declined it for texts, one has declined it for whatever else the fourfold silhouette gets projected onto next. This is no novel reading of the phrase. It is the plain force of "not manifold," and it is how the confessional tradition treated the question. Tyndale, Perkins, Whitaker, Leigh, and Turretin did not say the spiritual senses must be kept subordinate to the literal. They said Scripture has one sense. The men who wrote "not manifold, but one" were denying multiplicity, not tidying it into a hierarchy. The confession does not only deny; it directs. Having called the true and full sense "not manifold, but one," the same paragraph says how the one sense is found: it "must be searched and known by other places that speak more clearly" — Scripture set beside Scripture, read under the analogy of faith. That is the confessional method for establishing a doctrine's full meaning, baptism included: not four bins to be filled, but the gathering of every text that bears on the sign into one coherent teaching. Remission belongs to the doctrine of baptism not because it can be tucked into an allegorical slot, but because Scripture, searched and known — Acts 2:38 beside Romans 6, and the creed's "one baptism for the remission of sins" — teaches it as part of the one thing baptism signifies. The analogy of faith is intertextual, not fourfold. What was offered under the name of depth is a medieval grid standing in for the confession's own method — and standing in for it poorly, since the grid had no slot for remission until someone pointed out the lack. There is a stock reply that this is simply not what the Confession means. But asserting that "not manifold, but one" leaves room for other distinct senses is not an argument; it is the very thing to be shown, and it owes three unpaid debts: an alternative reading of the actual words "not manifold, but one"; historical evidence that the framers meant to leave a door open for distinct senses; and some account of the genus–species relation on which a man may deny multiple senses and keep four of them. Until those are produced, the four words stand. So — allegorist? Not by conviction. Despite recommending allegory to frame a spiritual sense for the doctrine of baptism, Hicks would reject the label, and the confession he wrote a book to commend rejects it for him. The charge was never that he holds allegory's creed. It is that he has borrowed allegory's engine and set it running against the very standard he taught the churches to keep. The soft retrieval of the quadriga keeps arriving at the same wall, and it arrives now in a new field. Whether the fourfold sense is offered for a passage or for the ordinance of baptism, the confessional verdict does not move. The waters are rich — rich with union, death, resurrection, new life, remission, and the hope of passing through the last judgment into glory. But that is the fullness of one sense, not the sum of four. There is a leaven here, and it is spreading. The manifold sense of Scripture, long resisted among Baptists, has unfortunately found a welcome among some Reformed Baptist pastors and seminary professors — and now it has jumped the tracks a second time, from the senses of a text to the senses of a doctrine. A fourfold sense of baptism today; a fourfold sense of the Supper, the church, the covenants tomorrow. Each step is greeted as recovery, as depth. But none of it is the confessional framing of the analogy of faith, and a little leaven leavens the whole lump. What spreads here is not a retrieval. It is a grid mistaken for a method, and a fad mistaken for a tradition. It may be someone's tradition. But not ours. Heuristic, not hermeneutic. Not manifold, but one. We distinguish. POST SCRIPT... Pastor Tom kindly unblocked me and replied to my X article: "Thank you for the post and the generous interaction. Allegory in the medieval usage was often severed from the meaning of the text and generated fresh meaning independent of the what the Word of God actually said. When the Reformers opposed allegory, that is what they opposed. But at other times, the Reformers employed allegory, but only when it was anchored in the one meaning of the text. Benjamin Keach was a faithful English Particular Baptist pastor who signed the Second London Confession of Faith. He wrote a massive interpretive tome titled Tropologia in which he proceeded to open the allegorical/typological, metaphorical, and tropological senses of Scripture. You can research it using AI and Google. He did not believe the one sense of Scripture is limited to the literal sense but expanded to typology and allegory and tropology. The same method of interpretation is evident from the preaching of Charles Spurgeon (often maligned by literalists). But these Reformed Baptist brethren didn't see any conflict with our venerable confession because there isn't any. It is found throughout our Reformed and Particular Baptist heritage. Tolle lege. The procedure of looking for the meaning of the text, how it points to Christ, how to apply it, and how it gives us hope for the future, arises from studying the way that Jesus and the apostles themselves studied the Bible. While I don't have space to work it out fully here, consider just one example from the author of Hebrews which is Paul, in case you were wondering. :) See Hebrews 12:5-6 and the manner in which the preacher handles the biblical interpretation of Prov 3:11-12. Context shows a fourfold sense. First, there is the plain sense. This is the truth that God trains or disciplines His sons. Second, there is the Christ-centered sense. God led Christ to the cross (Heb 12:2), and Christ learned obedience through suffering (Heb 5:8). He did this for us as our substitute and example. Third, there is the applied sense. God loves us, Christ teaches us how to suffer in love; therefore, in light of Christ, we can embrace suffering and persevere in love without becoming weary or fainthearted, knowing we are being made like Christ (Heb 12:11). Fourth, there is the final or heavenly sense. The goal of our training in sanctification is ultimately to see the Lord (Heb 12:14). Many other such examples of the Bible's interpretation of the Bible in this way could be shown. There is only one sense of the text. But that one sense is often though not always multilayered with many necessary implications." To which I replied: "Appreciate you for unblocking me to exchange replies. While some people decry this app, i find you get what you invest in it. Your input is greatly appreciated. I understand you may write more wherever you choose is best. My good faith yet pointed response will be a short list of where I consider you unhelpfully and sloppily blurring the lines logically, biblically, and confessionally: The first and most obvious: the 4fold sense as a tool for reading texts, versus interpreting a doctrine (e.g., baptism). A figure of speech, versus a second sense. Typology, versus invented allegory. Preaching a text, versus interpreting a text. Rejecting a method’s abuses, versus rejecting the method; illicit to overlay even the quadriga’s structure on our confession. And a big one: the implications of one meaning, versus four different senses or meanings." Please, stay tuned and be on the lookout for an episode of the Urban Puritano Podcast for a discussion of these issues.
By Roberto Gazga August 9, 2026
The body content of your post goes here. To edit this text, click on it and delete this default text and start typing your own or paste your own from a different source.
By Urban Puritano August 8, 2026
The body content of your post goes here. To edit this text, click on it and delete this default text and start typing your own or paste your own from a different source.

Check the Urban Puritano Shop