Private Interpretation : 2 Peter 1:20

  • Thread starter Thread starter tyson
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
Which one is the correct interpretation, Newbie??

**Is it **

A. "the prophecy in scripture is inspired by the Holy Spirit."

or

B. "all prophecy is from the Holy Spirit."

Thanks anyway for the duplicitous, forked-tongue, meaning, but I’ll stick to the “Catholic” interpretation.

It is common sensical and doesn’t “read” anything into scripture.
It is the prophecy of scripture as you know if you read the passage.I did leave out a few words in that other post and I am sorry. You see I was leaving it up to you to open your bible and look at the passage yourself and come to your own conclusion. I did not realize that you would immediate take my word as infallible and then try to disprove it by the difference in the two posts. I am NOT infallible. So I do make mistakes. But after reading 2pet1:19-21 I don’t think anyone with a basic knowledge of English can mistake what it is saying. The origin of prophecy in scripture is from the Holy Spirit. Now I am not speaking ‘ex cathadra’, because that is not one of my powers. I am just having a conversation. So please allow some latitude for spelling errors and such.
 
This is a much bigger group of people that we realize at first. After all, how many of us are not ignorant of scripture in some ways? How many of us can read the original Hebrew or Greek or understand the Aramaic idioms that were used by the Jewish people in the first century? How many of us have degrees in scripture study, and even if we did, would that alone bring us to any better understanding of what the Bible is trying to tell us? Not likely – even those with advanced degrees, who have studied scripture for most of their lives, do not agree on what certain passages mean. How then can the ordinary person understand what the Bible really says about the truth?

Still, we tend to give ourselves the benefit of the doubt, don’t we? Surely, Peter could not have been referring to us? Well, consider this: do you think any of the people Peter was referring to ever said to themselves, “Hey, I’m ignorant and unstable. I think I’ll twist the scriptures to my own destruction”? No! These people were ignorant of the true meaning of scripture, but they didn’t realize it. They were ignorant of the fact that they were ignorant!

However, they were not ignorant of the words of scripture – what it says – they were just ignorant of what it really means. The truth is they thought they had the most accurate interpretation of scripture – that’s why they were distorting and twisting it to their own destruction. They didn’t need anyone to tell them what Paul’s letters or other scriptures really meant – they were sure they already knew because they thought they could interpret scripture for themselves!

This ought to cause some serious reflection among some people in our own day and age. But some will ask, “Is this really true? Are we not able to come to some personal understanding of the Bible when we read it?” Well, what more does the Word of God have to say about personal interpretation of scripture? In the same letter, Peter, writing under the inspiration of the Holy Spirit, had this to say:

“Know this first of all that there is no prophecy of scripture that is a matter of one’s own interpretation.” (2 Peter 1:20)

From all of these passages, we see that the idea that everyone can read and interpret scripture for themselves – that everyone can decide for themselves what is and is not truth or what are and are not correct doctrines – is not scriptural. Nowhere in scripture does it say that we can simply pick it up and read it on our own and be guaranteed that we will understand what we read correctly. Nowhere does the Bible tell us that the Holy Spirit will guide every individual into an infallible understanding of each and every verse.

Of course, Protestants don’t *really *believe that all you need to do is read scripture and pray for guidance from the Holy Spirit, either. Otherwise, why would they send so many of their pastors to study at seminary? Can a seminary teach them anything that the Holy Spirit can’t? No. They recognize, however, that personal interpretation of the Bible can lead to misunderstanding of the Word of God – even to destruction. Therefore, guidance is necessary. So, where do we find a guide that can teach us the accurate interpretation of scripture regarding truth?

The Bible is very clear: we need truth to be saved, but the Bible is also very clear that we cannot get this truth from reading the Bible alone. We need someone to instruct us or to guide us to understand what the Bible says about the truth.
So you Randy, being of sound mind, read 2pet1:19-21, and come to the conclusion that it is saying that no one can interpret prophecy in scripture privately?
Isn’t it more accurately saying that the ORIGEN of prophecy in scripture is not from man but from the Holy Spirit?
Do you see the difference?
 
Is there a “catholic” interpretation of this passage?

I don’t think this is one of those few passages of scripture where your church has defined the meaning and made it binding upon you guys.
Reformed 1;

The Church doesn’t tell us how to read scripture. There are different translations (in English for example) of the same passage from different manuscripts. The Church takes this all together and summarizes what it MEANS to a Christian.

That is why the Catechism is put together the way it is: it breaks down the Creeds (for example) showing the scriptural references and conciliar (Synods, Councils) comments on these articles of Faith.

There is nothing “binding” on us that is against our will. We choose to follow Christ and His teachings. The Church preserved those documents that BEST presented those teachings (we call it the NT) and against other spurious ‘gospels’ and ‘letters’ it was collected with those Jewish Septuagint scriptures (Jesus quoted overwhelmingly from the Septuagint) into the OT. Bible comes from ‘biblios,’ or ‘books.’

To think that it miraculously appeared after the death and resurrection of our Lord and that ‘scripture’ in the NT refers to the NT is wrong.

There is no magic code to the Bible. It was not compiled to be a Boy Scout Handbook for checking off tasks to earn merit badges.

It is the best we have of what was written which conformed to what the early Church knew and taught about the ‘good news.’

There is too much of the “If it ain’t the King James Version, it ain’t the Bible” kind of mentality out there. (I didn’t make that quote up, I see it on vehicle bumpers up here in rural California)
 
Sorry, Reformed 1

I forgot to clarify something.

believers called my reading, what the passage actually says, not what it infers, my “catholic” interpretation.

That is why I used the word in parentheses.

That’s like saying “Congress shall make no law prohibiting freedom of speech,” really means Congress can make laws.
Hhhmmm, I might have stumbled across something here…
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top