"Interpretation" in 2 Peter 1:20-21

However, by applying the passage as to the reader and not the writer, that is what is being done.

If you allow for illumination, then you cannot have the passage stand as you would read that no one can have a private interpretation given them of a prophecy.

I you allow for illuminating by the Holy Spirit to the believer, then the only solution is that the prophecy itself was given directly from God to the Prophet in contrast to the world who supplant God with oracles, balls, cards, palms...

 

IF you do believe in private Holy Spirit illumination, then you are inconsistent with your presentation of the passage. For by your own statement, such illumination is not allowable for private interpretation does not occur.

If you do believe as I have presented, that the passage concerns the writer (therefore not binding upon the reader), the Holy Spirit may certainly bring to the private individual such private illumination as God desires.

By the gentleness of my first post, I figured you would recognize your work on this passage perhaps incomplete or needing a slight course correction in the presentation.


I never broached the issue of allegory in this thread. Never even came to mind.


Besides I haven't run across anything that you have written on the topic of allegory in which I would disagree.

You did good as far as you went, all I did in my very first post was ascribe that your own application needed a slight revision.

From that point, I maintained what I stated with word definitions, context work, and other authority.

 

I think that we have seen the real danger of misguided "private interpretation", as in the JW and the Sda.

 

They would be object examples of NOT applying the correctBiblical methods of studying the Bible, and to NOT having the true Illumination of the Holy Spirit.

 

I'll begin by apologising for what was read as an insulting post, - my attempt at humour wasn't appreciated. I wasn't accusing you of scoffing at the Lord's Olivet prophecy of his coming, but at those of us who believe in a first century coming. (2 Peter 3)

That was indeed the objection several of us made to your post - "that we must interpret literally." Interpretation of prophecy should be in accord with all Scripture, which may not be literal.

I suggest that the passage itself calls for interpretation!

16 For we have not followed cunningly devised fables, when we made known unto you the power and coming of our Lord Jesus Christ, but were eyewitnesses of his majesty. 17 For he received from God the Father honour and glory, when there came such a voice to him from the excellent glory, This is my beloved Son, in whom I am well pleased. 18 And this voice which came from heaven we heard, when we were with him in the holy mount.
19 We have also a more sure word of prophecy; whereunto ye do well that ye take heed, as unto a light that shineth in a dark place, until the day dawn, and the day star arise in your hearts: 20 knowing this first, that no prophecy of the scripture is of any private interpretation. 21 For the prophecy came not in old time by the will of man: but holy men of God spake as they were moved by the Holy Ghost.​

Peter is saying that the Apostles preached "the power and coming of our Lord Jesus Christ" as eyewitnesses. Verse 19 (see other translations) asserts that that prophecy, i.e. the Old Covenant prophecy, proved to be sure & reliable - "the power and coming of our Lord Jesus Christ" was the fulfilment of prophecy.

It is not a question of how we should interpret prophecy, but how we should see Christ in OC prophecy.

 

2 Peter 1:20-21

20 Above all (prōton), you must understand (ginōskō ) that (hoti) no (ou) prophecy (prophēteia) of scripture (graphē) arises (ginomai) from the prophet’s own (idios) interpretation (epilysis),
21 for (gar) prophecy (prophēteia) never (ou) had its origin (pherō) in the will (thelēma) of man (anthrōpos), but (alla) men (anthrōpos) borne along (pherō) by (hypo) the Holy (hagios) Spirit (pneuma) spoke (laleō) from (apo) God (theos)

(Mounce Reverse-Interlinear New Testament)​

JofJ made mention of the "for" in verse 21 in that I did not deal with that word as he had.

To remove that hinderance:
Generally speaking, "for" is most often used as a synonym of "because."
Typically, "for" could also be written "because" and a sentence remain stable and easily discernible A teacher may ask, "Why?" and the child respond, "Because." and it mean essentially the same as "For this reason."

Occasionally, "Gar" (for) can also be used as an introductory word to further detail or clarification. This is typically called a coordinating conjunction. It takes two separate subjects and predicates and unites them in a single sentence. As it is used in this passage by explaining exactly where the prophecy originated. An English example may be, "I about died of sweat, for Texas is hot this time of year."

One can easily tell the difference because of that little coma. When "for" is used as "because," there is no coma.

The "for" of verse 21 is not to be separated from the whole of verse 20. Together they are a compound sentence with the coordinating conjunction "for." Sometimes, folks will use "and" but personally, I never thought "and" carried the importance "for" did when used as a coordinating conjunction. It just seems that more emphasis is added. But that is purely my own stuffy personality.

Btw, the KJV punctuates with a period, which is not the best way, it should be a coma between verse 20 and 21 so that the "for" is not used as "because" but as the coordinating conjunction as it should be used.

In other words the reason that no prophecy of Scripture arose from the prophet's own interpretation (one conjuring up a prophecy by some trickery, or rational thinking done by worldly folks - some will remember the show "The Mentalist") was because Scripture prophecy never originated in the will of humankind, but born by the Holy Spirit as God spoke to the prophets.

The word "epilysis" means interpret (as one interprets for another - think of Daniel telling the meaning of the handwriting on the wall), to unbind the meaning, to explain. Any of those definitions may be used for "Interpretation." So the prophet never conjured up his own interpretation, explanation, revealing... for what was to take place. What is the last book John wrote called? Revelation. How did John get what was to be written?

Young's Literal Translation works through these two verses in this manner

20 this first knowing, that no prophecy of the Writing doth come of private exposition,
21 for not by will of man did ever prophecy come, but by the Holy Spirit borne on holy men of God spake.​

That is, the writer of the prophecy, the one the prophecy was given and recorded, was solely responsible for interpreting (explaining, unbinding the meaning, reveal, disclose...) and did not get the prophecy from any human exertion, but from God's mouth to the prophet's ear.

How the reader (or in the prophet's day the lister) responded was not the responsibility of the prophet. People had freedom to respond however they felt appropriate at the time.

Remember the parables were often confusing to the worldly minded, but the Lord Jesus would do the work of explaining? That was the work of the prophet. They by sign and words would disclose the prophecy so the common folk understood. Did not the Christ state that ALL He said and did was directly from the Father?

The reader of the prophecy has whatever freedom either in the flesh, or that allowed by the Holy Spirit to attend to the prophecy however they desire.

One other point.

It was mentioned that cults can form when one decides to read a prophecy the way they want, which may not be consistent with the good understanding of the Scriptures.

Frankly, I am rather unconcerned about that, merely because it should not impress me to change the work on 2 Peter 1:20,21. That may seem harsh, but I am not overwatch and responsible for the actions nor beliefs of cults. I will post correction to their errant doctrines, and as God leads will attempt to persuade when I encounter them, but ultimately the deceitfulness of which they embrace is their own responsibility.

I think I have pretty much responded to all the objections that JofJ raised, but if I missed something, then I am certain that he will let me know.




I sense that I need to add this personal reflection on the interaction I have had with JofJ. He has always been the greatest of gentlemen when we banter.

I have the highest regard for John. He is scholarly and experienced. He needs to be heeded for he speaks with authority and wisdom.

He deserves double honor if not more, and I had no desire to make this much contention with him, but merely encouraged him to attend more carefully to a single phrase. I would never have done other then applaud his work had there not become more of an issue.

He, no doubt, gets very tired, dismayed, and grieved with some responses I have given on this thread. Yet, I do so want him to know the high esteem he has.

Now, unless there is a cause, I will bow out of the discussion.

I have written far more than I ever intended, and my apologies that it may be too rambling to make decent reading.

 

I thought it was an outstanding point agedman made.

 

The second coming event has not happened yet!

 

Interesting that he fulfilled all OT prophecies in actual history, and literally, but Preterist now see God doing a switch and fulfill it all spiritual sense!

 

Now to get involved in the new direction of the thread ..... If John continues to ignore me, I hope others will raise the points I am making.

You don't understand at all Y1. ALL prophecies have been or will be fulfilled in a literal sense. That means real events will take place consistent with a specific sense of the prophecy -
i.e.
Jesus' virgin birth prophesied -

Isaiah 7:10 Moreover the Lord spake again unto Ahaz, saying, 11 Ask thee a sign of the Lord thy God; ask it either in the depth, or in the height above. 12 But Ahaz said, I will not ask, neither will I tempt the Lord. 13 And he said, Hear ye now, O house of David; Is it a small thing for you to weary men, but will ye weary my God also? 14 Therefore the Lord himself shall give you a sign; Behold, a virgin shall conceive, and bear a son, and shall call his name Immanuel. 15 Butter and honey shall he eat, that he may know to refuse the evil, and choose the good. 16 For before the child shall know to refuse the evil, and choose the good, the land that thou abhorrest shall be forsaken of both her kings.
Fulfilled soon after by Isaiah's wife:
8:3 And I went unto the prophetess; and she conceived, and bare a son. Then said the Lord to me, Call his name Maher-shalal-hash-baz. 4 For before the child shall have knowledge to cry, My father, and my mother, the riches of Damascus and the spoil of Samaria shall be taken away before the king of Assyria.
But note that Isaiah already had a son, Shear-jashub.

Fulfilled 700 years later at the incarnation:
Matthew 1:22 Now all this was done, that it might be fulfilled which was spoken of the Lord by the prophet, saying, 23 Behold, a virgin shall be with child, and shall bring forth a son, and they shall call his name Emmanuel, which being interpreted is, God with us.​

Isa. 7:14 was perfectly fulfilled at Jesus' incarnation, but how should we understand/interpret the context - verses 15 & 16? The kings in question were "Rezin the king of Syria, and Pekah the son of Remaliah, king of Israel" who joined to invade Judah.

The prophecies in the Old Covenant Scriptures were ultimately & perfectly fulfilled by the incarnation, life, death, resurrection & ascension of the LORD Jesus Christ,
but
The context in the OC often refers to the situation when the prophet was speaking, of immediate concern to the hearers, & have a fulfilment at the time.

 

Are there relevant examples of OC "private interpretation?"

I suggest -

Exodus 25:8 And let them make me a sanctuary; that I may dwell among them.

Jeremiah 7:1 The word that came to Jeremiah from the Lord, saying, 2 Stand in the gate of the Lord’s house, and proclaim there this word, and say, Hear the word of the Lord, all ye of Judah, that enter in at these gates to worship the Lord. 3 Thus saith the Lordof hosts, the God of Israel, Amend your ways and your doings, and I will cause you to dwell in this place. 4 Trust ye not in lying words, saying, The temple of the Lord, The temple of the Lord, The temple of the Lord, are these. 5 For if ye throughly amend your ways and your doings; if ye throughly execute judgment between a man and his neighbour; 6 if ye oppress not the stranger, the fatherless, and the widow, and shed not innocent blood in this place, neither walk after other gods to your hurt: 7 then will I cause you to dwell in this place, in the land that I gave to your fathers, for ever and ever.​

The tabernacle, then the temple were owned by the LORD when they were dedicated, & he entered them in a cloud:

Exo. 40:34 Then a cloud covered the tent of the congregation, and the glory of the Lord filled the tabernacle.

2 Chr. 5:13 ..... praised the Lord, saying, For he is good; for his mercy endureth for ever: that then the house was filled with a cloud, even the house of the Lord; 14 so that the priests could not stand to minister by reason of the cloud: for the glory of the Lord had filled the house of God.​

The Old Covenant, with all its promised blessings & protection was dependent on Israel's willing (though not perfect) obedience. The Jews of Jeremiah's time claimed a literal fulfilment of God's protection, because the temple stood in their midst, in spite of their idolatory & general wickedness.

It seems also that in contrast with the disobedient king & his minions, Baruch, who supported Jeremiah & delivered his prophesies expected "great thing for himself" because of his faithfulness at a time of wickedness & judgment. But no; he would be protected but not given great things.

Jer. 45:1 The word that Jeremiah the prophet spake unto Baruch the son of Neriah, when he had written these words in a book at the mouth of Jeremiah, in the fourth year of Jehoiakim the son of Josiah king of Judah, saying, 2 Thus saith the Lord, the God of Israel, unto thee, O Baruch; 3 Thou didst say, Woe is me now! for the Lord hath added grief to my sorrow; I fainted in my sighing, and I find no rest. 4 Thus shalt thou say unto him, The Lord saith thus; Behold, that which I have built will I break down, and that which I have planted I will pluck up, even this whole land. 5 And seekest thou great things for thyself? seek them not: for, behold, I will bring evil upon all flesh, saith the Lord: but thy life will I give unto thee for a prey in all places whither thou goest.​

Likewise, should we expect prosperity in our day, when we can see judgments all around in a time of general wickedness? We are in a spiritual war situation.

Some prophecies we can take personally - "I am with you always" but other prophecies are more of a challenge - 13 And ye shall be hated of all men for my name’s sake: but he that shall endure unto the end, the same shall be saved. (Mark 13)

 

There are MANY prophecies that have yet to be fulfilled, to be at time of second coming itself and forward!