"Interpretation" in 2 Peter 1:20-21

Obviously - have I ever written anything to suggest otherwise?

 

Balaam was a professional prophet & he knew that God was blessing Israel, while Israel lived in obedience to God. He used that knowledge to instruct the Midianites to seduce the Israelites & so bring God's wrath against them. When a professional prophet speaks, he is speaking as a false prophet & in this case a private interpretation.

We should take the warning even it it does not comply with the OP.

 

I believe most of us can agree that the inspired word of God was complete with Revelation. I would not believe someone can prophesy today. And predicting is not prophesying. I can predict things on occasion but that is from experience and reason and not from revelation from God.

​

On this we can't agree. God swore and oath on his own Holiness that he would fulfill Abraham's promises. When God alone passed through the fires on both sides he was essentially in OT times way signing an unconditional contract. I'm unwilling to spiritualize away God's promises when the plain text of the NT says otherwise. You may quote a verse that can be interpreted several ways based on your beliefs but you don't have a clear cut verse. Whereas I have lots of verses talking about a future kingdom. Revelation is the most clear and obvious. We wil reign for a thousand years with Christ on this earth. That is the plain sense of the text.

 

Well at this moment I don't have an issue with the creeds/confessions (at least I don't think so) but if it ever came down to the bible or those creeds/confessions, I'd choose the bible. To me a creed/confession is just a way of stating succinctly what you think the bible says.

 

I'll give one last comment & move on.

Balaam was NEVER a holy man but like his ass spoke the words God put in his mouth. He knew from his encounter with the LORD & the words God gave him that Israel was a called out, separate people protected & blessed by the LORD. He used that knowledge to teach the Midianites to join with Israel & seduce them, & so Israel would incur the wrath of God.
As God says in Revelation -

2:14 Nevertheless, I have a few things against you: there are some among you who hold to the teaching of Balaam, who taught Balak to entice the Israelites to sin so that they ate food sacrificed to idols and committed sexual immorality.​

False teachers such as Peter condemns in 2 Peter 2. Whether "private interpretation" of Scripture or posing as Scripture teachers, I think the point is clear.

BACK TO THE BIBLE!

 

I hold with the 1689 Baptist Confession, as a nice summery from the scriptures of main Christian doctrines, but would only see the Bible inspired, and if the Bible and Confession disagree, always side with Scriptures!

 

Agreed.

That seems unlikely, unless Peter is referring to Apostolic age prophets. e.g. Agabus - Acts 21:10-14. The prophecy was clear, but the private interpretation was "Don't go to Jerusalem." Paul went with the prophecy, not the private interpretation.

I consider it must be for the hearers/readers of the Scripture, not the prophets themselves, except, like Agabus they are in a situation to interpret their own God-inspired prophecy .

We need to consider the context - (NKJV)

16 For we did not follow cunningly devised fables when we made known to you the power and coming of our Lord Jesus Christ, but were eyewitnesses of His majesty. 17 For He received from God the Father honor and glory when such a voice came to Him from the Excellent Glory: “This is My beloved Son, in whom I am well pleased.” 18 And we heard this voice which came from heaven when we were with Him on the holy mountain.
​

Peter begins this section by referring to their transfiguration experience - they saw the glorious Lord Jesus & heard the voice of his Father, owning him as his beloved Son.

They weren't telling "Bible stories" about Jesus,or giving a simple biography, but were eye-witnesses of the Lamb of God in his glory, and ear-witnesses of the word of the Father. Jesus was the living fulfilment of prophecy -

19 And so we have the prophetic word confirmed,[We also have the more sure prophetic word] ....​

What/Who the OC prophets prophesied is fulfilled - the prophets prophesied, not themselves understanding their prophecies (1 Peter 1:10-13) & the Apostles reported & proclaimed the fulfilment. So pay attention -

19 ..... which you do well to heed as a light that shines in a dark place, until the day dawns and the morning star rises in your hearts; 20 knowing this first, that no prophecy of Scripture is of any private interpretation,​

Take heed to the Apostolic message - Peter is confirming by the Gospel of the Lord Jesus Christ what/who the prophets have been writing about.

21 for prophecy never came by the will of man, but holy men of God spoke as they were moved by the Holy Spirit.​

I consider the passage is not giving guidance for the reader to interpret Scripture (private interpretation) but forbidding any interpretation at variance with Apostolic interpretation. I think this is where there is serious disagreement between us, as you used the verses as proof texts for "literal interpretation."

When we go back to the OC prophets, keep in mind that whatever the circumstances of the prophecy, Jesus is the focus of prophecy & the perfect fulfilment.

 

The full realization of the propehcy of Joel still yet to happen!

 

Please explain - what is YOUR private interpretation of Joel? Presumably you disagree with Peter's inspired Pentecost sermon.

 

Jonah is an interesting example -
He received a prophecy concerning Nineveh;
He interpreted it as God expecting the Ninevites to repent & not be destroyed & fled in the opposite direction;
He considered his death in disobedience would be preferable to forgiveness for the Ninevites;

Jesus gives his interpretation/application to himself as a "Jonah" by his death & resurrection;
He applies the repentance of the Ninevites, & so their forgiveness, to the Jews of this generation who refused to repent, & so perished within 40 years.

None of that challenges or doubts the literal record & fulfilment of Jonah's prophecy. It does show how OC prophecy can (should?) be interpreted in terms of the Lord Jesus Christ as the fulfilment of prophecy.

 

Ezekiel still yet to happen!

 

So "Ezekiel still yet to happen!" is your private interpretation of Joel. Do you EVER read your own posts? Do you EVER read the posts you purport to be replying to ?

If you did, you could learn a lot, & contribute constructively to the forum.

 

An example of private interpretation is seen in the prophecy of Caiaphas -

John 11:47 Then the chief priests and the Pharisees called a meeting of the Sanhedrin.
‘What are we accomplishing?’ they asked. ‘Here is this man performing many signs. 48 If we let him go on like this, everyone will believe in him, and then the Romans will come and take away both our temple and our nation.’
49 Then one of them, named Caiaphas, who was high priest that year, spoke up, ‘You know nothing at all! 50 You do not realise that it is better for you that one man die for the people than that the whole nation perish.’
51 He did not say this on his own, but as high priest that year he prophesied that Jesus would die for the Jewish nation, 52 and not only for that nation but also for the scattered children of God, to bring them together and make them one. 53 So from that day on they plotted to take his life.​

Does their evil plotting against Jesus amounts to a private interpretation of Caiaphas' prophecy? Or were they interpreting Caiaphas' ex-officio prophecy correctly?

 

Peter did NOT quote all of Joel as happening at that time, and Ezeckiel 37-38 is still yet to happen...

 

John, I would love you to respond to my recent posts.

If I understand the raison d'etre of your argument, it is to oppose those of us who see the interpretation of prophecy as relating to our LORD Jesus Christ & his church - as taught by Jesus himself & the Apostles;
whereas
you consider OC prophecy to be yet unfulfilled as it relates to the nation of Israel & needs a future dispensation in which it will be literally fulfilled.

I consider private interpretation to be interpretation contrary to the Apostles' teaching in the NC Scriptures.

 

What is interstoing on this issue would be that BOTH those holding to CT and Dispy way to view prophecy have condemned full preterism as being heresy!

 

Lets be specific -

What did Jesus & his Apostles teach about the fulfilment of OC prophecy with regard to the unbelieving Jews as distinct from the many thousands of Jews who welcomed the Gospel & formed the church, comprising all God's redeemed people, both Jew & Gentile?

What OC prophecy is yet to be fulfilled regarding the nation of Israel?