2 Peter 1:20-21
Bill Wenstrom
Inspiration • Sermon • Submitted • 47:59
0 ratings
· 622 views2 Peter 1:20-21 Lesson # 4
Files
Notes
Transcript
2 Peter 1:20 But know this first of all, that no prophecy of Scripture is a matter of one’s own interpretation, 21 for no prophecy was ever made an act of human will, but men moved by the Holy Spirit spoke from God. (NASB95)
“Interpretation” is the genitive feminine singular noun epilysis (ἐπίλυσις), which is a hapax legomenon meaning it appears only once in the New Testament.
The basic idea behind the word is that of an “unfolding” which can indicate either an “explanation” or a “creation.”
It is sometimes used in extra-biblical Greek for an “interpretation.”
Other times it has the idea of “solution” or even “spell.”
Here the context would indicate the word means “imagination” referring to an Old Testament prophet communicating a prophecy which is found in the Old Testament that is the product of his own imagination.
Peter’s statement in verse 21 would indicate this since in this verse he is emphasizing the divine origin of Old Testament prophecy.
Verse 20 is variously interpreted. There are three key terms here that help decide both the interpretation and the translation. As well, the relation to v. 21 informs the meaning of this verse. (1) The term “comes about” (γίνεται [ginetai]) is often translated “is a matter” as in “is a matter of one’s own interpretation.” But the progressive force for this verb is far more common. (2) The adjective ἰδίας (idias) has been understood to mean (a) one’s own (i.e., the reader’s own), (b) its own (i.e., the particular prophecy’s own), or (c) the prophet’s own. Catholic scholarship has tended to see the reference to the reader (in the sense that no individual reader can understand scripture, but needs the interpretations handed down by the Church), while older Protestant scholarship has tended to see the reference to the individual passage being prophesied (and hence the Reformation doctrine of analogia fidei [analogy of faith], or scripture interpreting scripture). But neither of these views satisfactorily addresses the relationship of v. 20 to v. 21, nor do they do full justice to the meaning of γίνεται. (3) The meaning of ἐπίλυσις (epilusis) is difficult to determine, since it is a biblical hapax legomenon. Though it is sometimes used in the sense of interpretation in extra-biblical Greek, this is by no means a necessary sense. The basic idea of the word is unfolding, which can either indicate an explanation or a creation. It sometimes has the force of solution or even spell, both of which meanings could easily accommodate a prophetic utterance of some sort. Further, even the meaning explanation or interpretation easily fits a prophetic utterance, for prophets often, if not usually, explained visions and dreams. There is no instance of this word referring to the interpretation of scripture, however, suggesting that if interpretation is the meaning, it is the prophet’s interpretation of his own vision. (4) The γάρ (gar) at the beginning of v. 21 gives the basis for the truth of the proposition in v. 20. The connection that makes the most satisfactory sense is that prophets did not invent their own prophecies (v. 20), for their impulse for prophesying came from God (v. 21).[1]
“Moved” is the nominative masculine plural present passive participle form of the verb pherō (φέρω), which means “to be moved, to be influenced, to be driven” since it pertains to causing one to follow a certain course in direction or conduct.
Webster’s New Universal Unabridged Dictionary defines the word influence: (1) Capacity or power of persons or things to produce effects on others by intangible or indirect means. (2) Action or process of producing effects on others by intangible or indirect means. (3) A person or thing that exerts influence.
If we were to paraphrase Webster’s definition of the word, Peter is telling his readers that the Old Testament prophets were influenced by the omnipotence (intangible means) of the Holy Spirit’s (Person) which enabled them to communicate in writing with perfect accuracy (effects), God the Father’s sovereign will.
The present tense of the verb pherō can be interpreted as a gnomic present which is used to make a statement of a general, timeless fact.
Thus it would indicate that Peter is saying that the prophets of Israel “as an eternal spiritual truth” were influenced or moved by the Holy Spirit from God.
The present tense could also be interpreted as a customary or stative present indicating that the prophets of Israel existed in the state of being influenced or moved by the Holy Spirit from God.
The passive voice of the verb pherō means that the subject receives the action of the verb from either an expressed or unexpressed agency.
Here the subject is of course the prophets of Israel.
The agency is expressed and is the Holy Spirit.
Therefore, the passive voice indicates that the Old Testament prophets as the subject, received the action of being influenced by the Holy Spirit when they communicated their prophecies in writing.
The participle form of the verb could be interpreted as a temporal participle since in relation to its controlling verb laleō, “spoke” it answers the question “when?”
This would indicate that the prophets spoke “while” being influenced or moved by the Holy Spirit from God.
The participle form of this verb could also be interpreted as a causal participle meaning it indicates the cause or reason or ground of the action of the finite verb which is laleō, “spoke.”
This would indicate that the Old Testament prophets of Israel spoke from God because of being influenced by the Holy Spirit.
The latter would appear to be the better interpretation because it is more explicit than the former in that it presents to the reader the explicit reason why the Old Testament prophets spoke from God.
They spoke from God because of being influenced by the Holy Spirit.
The apostle Peter’s statement in verse 20 means that the prophecies that were written by the prophets of Israel that appear in the Old Testament did not originate with them.
Wiersbe writes “In 2 Peter 1:20, Peter was not prohibiting the private study of the Bible. Some religious groups have taught that only the ‘spiritual leaders’ may interpret Scripture, and they have used this verse as their defense. But Peter was not writing primarily about the interpretation of Scripture, but the origin of Scripture: it came by the Holy Spirit through holy men of God. And since it came by the Spirit, it must be taught by the Spirit. The word translated ‘private’ simply means ‘one’s own’ or ‘its own.’ The suggestion is, since all Scripture is inspired by the Spirit it must all ‘hang together’ and no one Scripture should be divorced from the others. You can use the Bible to prove almost anything if you isolate verses from their proper context, which is exactly the approach the false teachers use. Peter stated that the witness of the Apostles confirmed the witness of the prophetic Word; there is one message with no contradiction. Therefore, the only way these false teachers can ‘prove’ their heretical doctrines is by misusing the Word of God. Isolated texts, apart from contexts, become pretexts. The Word of God was written to common people, not to theological professors. The writers assumed that common people could read it, understand it, and apply it, led by the same Holy Spirit who inspired it. The humble individual believer can learn about God as he reads and meditates on the Word of God; he does not need the ‘experts’ to show him truth. However, this does not deny the ministry of teachers in the church (Eph. 4:11), special people who have a gift for explaining and applying the Scriptures. Nor does it deny the ‘collective wisdom’ of the church as, over the ages, these doctrines have been defined and refined. Teachers and creeds have their place, but they must not usurp the authority of the Word over the conscience of the individual believer.[2]
In 2 Peter 1:20-21, the apostle Peter is emphatically denying that Old Testament prophecy originates from human initiative.
He also equally emphatically asserts that Old Testament prophetic literature originates with God.
Peter is teaching his readers that the Old Testament prophets were influenced by the omnipotence of the person of the Holy Spirit, which enabled them to communicate in writing with perfect accuracy, God the Father’s sovereign will.
The Old Testament prophets received the action of being influenced by the Holy Spirit when they communicated their prophecies in writing.
The Old Testament prophets of Israel spoke from God because of being influenced by the Holy Spirit.
Therefore, we can see that like Paul’s statement in 2 Timothy 3:16, here in 2 Peter 1:20-21, Peter is asserting the divine origin of the Old Testament canon.
Not only this, but both men are teaching that God spoke to mankind through the instrumentality of men.
The Old Testament prophets distinguish themselves in their writings and public speeches that they were God’s spokesmen.
They were of the conviction that they were speaking about God and His works as well as His sovereign will.
They declared that the commands and prohibitions which they issued to Israel originated from God Himself. The fulfillment of prophecy demonstrated this fact.
The Old Testament contains many references to individual instances of inspiration, and some of these seem to imply direct dictation.
The book of Exodus and Deuteronomy record Moses receiving the tablets of stone inscribed “by the finger of God” (Exodus 31:18; 24:4; compare Deuteronomy 31:9; 31:22).
The prophets of Israel who followed Moses as covenant enforcers state that they spoke the word of God: “the word of Yahweh came to Samuel” (1 Samuel 15:10); “the word of Yahweh came to the prophet Gad” (2 Samuel 24:11); “the word of Yahweh came to Solomon” (1 Kings 6:11); “the word of Yahweh came to Elijah” (1 Kings 18:1; 21:17, 28), “the word of Yahweh came to Isaiah” (Isa 38:4).
There are many passages which refer to prophets writing down the words they received from God (compare 1 Samuel 10:25; Jeremiah 36; Isaiah 8:1; and Ecclesiastes 12:12).
Therefore, these passages imply that the original authors saw at least some instances of inspiration as being by direct dictation regardless of whether they viewed canonical works as a whole as having been dictated.
hapax legomenon A Greek phrase meaning “a thing said once,” referring to words used only one time in the Greek NT
[1] Biblical Studies Press. (2006). The NET Bible First Edition; Bible. English. NET Bible.; The NET Bible. Biblical Studies Press.
[2] Wiersbe, W. W. (1996). The Bible exposition commentary (Vol. 2, pp. 445–446). Wheaton, IL: Victor Books.