I refer to the liberal tendency to allegorize the New Testament, and explain away the literal reading of a passage in exchange for a "deeper meaning" that the writer was attempting to communicate. For example, the passage I previously quoted (and will expand) regarding the plain reading of Rev 20:13-15
"And the sea gave up the dead which were in it, and death and Hades gave up the dead which were in them; and they were judged, every one of them according to their deeds. Then death and Hades were thrown into the lake of fire. This is the second death, the lake of fire. And if anyone's name was not found written in the book of life, he was thrown into the lake of fire."
Unless one has a pretext that ALL will be saved, the plain reading of this passage indicates that someone (those whose names are not written) will be cast into the lake of fire. However, Origen would suggest this is merely an allegory for the removal of the sinful nature, or some such other, since it is "known" that all will be saved. Thus, the reading is not literal.
Sensus Plenior
Second, to invoke Sensus Plenior to impugn a reading of the scripture is to impugn a method of interpretation that Paul was well schooled in himself, being a scriptural scholar.
It has always been understood that the scripture as a whole, and the Torah in particular, is written on four levels, Pshat, Remez, Drush and Sod, ranging from the literal to the esoteric. Sod, in fact, refers to the “mystery” of scripture, that being personal and meditative revelation.
Your concept of and the word for “Paradise” is, in fact, based on an understanding of these four levels. (PRDS = “Pardes” = “orchard” = Gan Aiden)
You are instead limiting yourself to understanding only the first and most superficial level, the literal story, told through the dark glass of multiple translations and composition by committee.