Private Interpretation faux pas

[garee]

Scripture should be understood for what it is saying to us - and, never the other direction.

The other direction? Not understood by what it says? Or did you mean literally, historically and not according the the spiritual understand that can be hid in the parables ?

 

[Dino246]

If you do not know how to define the word look it up .Its what Peter clearly performed . He was forgiven .Today blasphemy against the Holy Spirit not seen it is not forgivable

I know what the word means. I knew what it meant long before this thread was started. I'm not asking for a definition.

 

[Dino246]

The other direction? Not understood by what it says? Or did you mean literally, historically and not according the the spiritual understand that can be hid in the parables ?

The other direction: what we are saying to it.

That is clear in GaryA's post.

 

[UnoiAmarah]

We now return to the thread topic...

Okay since I missed the point if a prophesy of the scripture isn't the interpretation a person claims that the LORD revealed unto them whereas a private interpretation is what a person concludes based upon their own understanding of the scriptures then lets us an actual scripture.

It is written in Genesis 6:1
Now it came to pass, when men began to multiply on the face of the earth, and daughters were born to them,

Scripture should be understood for what it is saying to us - and, never the other direction.

I think that it should be understood for what it was written to mean, and if there is no objective truth to the meaning of scripture then of course there would be no reason to discern whether any teaching of the scripture contained a principle or an opinion.

So what was being referred unto "Now it came to pass' in Genesis 6:1? I would say the prophesy of Genesis 6:3.

 

[Blade]

Well praise GOD... yet its still true. The interpretation here is not that of the student of scripture but of the inspirited prophet or writer of the scriptures himself. since verse 20 speaks of the method by which the prophecies came with relation to the writhes, They were not puppets it was the holy spirit was the divine author. On and on.

So just which one of us are going to tell others what GOD was really saying by that prophet or writer? you and me still have no right what so ever to tell anyone "what that verse really means, What the holy Spirit was really saying through Peter, James, Paul, Moshe"

So I personally believe.. nmw

 

[UnitedWithChrist]

2 Peter 1:

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.

For all of you who have been using these verses to make accusation against other CC members --- did you know that you were doing so entirely out-of-context?

These verses are not referring to how someone who reads Bible prophecy interprets it.

It is talking about the writers of Bible prophecy not applying any private interpretation to what they wrote.

I agree that many, many self-professed bible exegetes here use this verse, and then they go on to claim that their private interpretation of Scripture is the right one

All of a sudden their interpretation becomes the correct interpretation, and they discount everyone else.

I find this characteristic a lot in weird, oddball lone ranger Christians who hold weird theologies and claim their diligent, self-professed, autonomous studies have yielded their odd opinions, even though they are not in alignment with other diligent brothers in Christ and their positions throughout the ages.

And, I think you are correct in your interpretation of this verse. The writers of prophecy interpreted the Old Testament and prophesied based on this understanding, which was not their own undestanding but came directly from the Holy Spirit.

Is this your basic understanding?

 

[GaryA]

Why is the OP so difficult to understand?????

I thought I worded it in a simple and straight-forward manner.

It is not about those who read it; it is about those who wrote it.

Why is the meaning not crystal-clear?????

It came from the Holy Spirit and was not manipulated by the writer.

It is an incorrect interpretation of those verses by the reader that suggests that the context of those verses has anything to do with the interpretation of the reader.

 

[crossnote]

2 Peter 1:

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.

For all of you who have been using these verses to make accusation against other CC members --- did you know that you were doing so entirely out-of-context?

These verses are not referring to how someone who reads Bible prophecy interprets it.

It is talking about the writers of Bible prophecy not applying any private interpretation to what they wrote.

The way I take that verse (my private interpretation LOL) is that it has little to do with the writer or reader of prophecy but rather with it's inspiration from the Holy Spirit. Since the Author of Scripture is the Holy Spirit, His original intent for conveying the prophetic message is not up for grabs but has one intent i.e. His intent.
We should never throw our hands up in the air in resignation to 'whatever it means to you' type attitude but rather diligently seek the Spirit's intent for including a certain passage in Scripture.

 

[UnoiAmarah]

So you are saying that 2 Peter 3:8 is or is not a prophesy of scripture since it is written in Psalms 90:4

For a thousand years in thy sight are but as yesterday when it is past, and as a watch in the night.

So in 2 Peter 3:8, the writer who is Peter, is prophesying his interpretation of the scripture written in
Psalms 90:4, which is evident by the context. The writer isn't saying that a day with with the LORD is a thousands years, which would be the case if the words were written by the LORD in either scripture.

But, beloved, be not ignorant of this one thing, that one day is with the Lord as a thousand years, and a thousand years as one day.

But Psalms 90 is referring unto man learning to number his days, in specific, Genesis 6:3 which sets the number of days of man in the flesh upon earth. However, the son of David also wrote in Ecclesiastes the following ;

Yea, though he live a thousand years twice told, yet hath he seen no good: do not all go to one place?

But in conclusion, as written in Jer 23:28, "The prophet that hath a dream, let him tell a dream; and he that hath my word, let him speak my word faithfully. What is the chaff to the wheat? saith the LORD."

 

[GaryA]

So in 2 Peter 3:8, the writer who is Peter, is prophesying his interpretation of the scripture written in
Psalms 90:4, which is evident by the context.

I do not believe this to be the case.