To Whom did Jesus Promise Direct Revelation from the Holy Spirit?

[Jon777]

I read a recent article online quoting John 16:12-13 as a promise that we are still to expect direct revelation from the Holy Spirit. But to whom is this promise being made? Isn’t it the 12 Apostles, and we receive the revelation indirectly as the apostles wrote the revelations for us. He, the Holy Spirit, gives us understanding of the revelation given to the 12, and Luke as a careful historian also relayed truth given to the Apostles for our learning. Luke was also a frequent companion of the Apostle Paul. 1 Cor. 2:9-14 promises to the believers the Holy Spirit the understanding of these gifts, the writings of the Apostles:

"But when the Counselor comes, whom I shall send to you from the Father, even the Spirit of truth, who proceeds from the Father, he will bear witness to me; and you also are witnesses, because you have been with me from the beginning. “I have said all this to you to keep you from falling away. They will put you out of the synagogues; indeed, the hour is coming when whoever kills you will think he is offering service to God. And they will do this because they have not known the Father, nor me. But I have said these things to you, that when their hour comes you may remember that I told you of them. “I did not say these things to you from the beginning, because I was with you. But now I am going to him who sent me; yet none of you asks me, ‘Where are you going?’ But because I have said these things to you, sorrow has filled your hearts. Nevertheless I tell you the truth: it is to your advantage that I go away, for if I do not go away, the Counselor will not come to you; but if I go, I will send him to you. And when he comes, he will convince the world concerning sin and righteousness and judgment: concerning sin, because they do not believe in me; concerning righteousness, because I go to the Father, and you will see me no more; concerning judgment, because the ruler of this world is judged. “I have yet many things to say to you, but you cannot bear them now. When the Spirit of truth comes, he will guide you into all the truth; for he will not speak on his own authority, but whatever he hears he will speak, and he will declare to you the things that are to come. He will glorify me, for he will take what is mine and declare it to you. All that the Father has is mine; therefore I said that he will take what is mine and declare it to you." (John 15:26-16:15, RSV)

"But, as it is written, “What no eye has seen, nor ear heard, nor the heart of man conceived, what God has prepared for those who love him,” God has revealed to us through the Spirit. For the Spirit searches everything, even the depths of God. For what person knows a man’s thoughts except the spirit of the man which is in him? So also no one comprehends the thoughts of God except the Spirit of God. Now we have received not the spirit of the world, but the Spirit which is from God, that we might understand the gifts bestowed on us by God. And we impart this in words not taught by human wisdom but taught by the Spirit, interpreting spiritual truths to those who possess the Spirit. The unspiritual man does not receive the gifts of the Spirit of God, for they are folly to him, and he is not able to understand them because they are spiritually discerned." (1Cor 2:9-14, RSV)

The Holy Spirit inspired the writings of the men of God, and we can't interpret these writings unless the original author, the Holy Spirit gives the understanding of what was written.

"First of all you must understand this, that no prophecy of scripture is a matter of one’s own interpretation, because no prophecy ever came by the impulse of man, but men moved by the Holy Spirit spoke from God." (2Pet 1:20-21, RSV)

 

[Dino246]

The Holy Spirit inspired the writings of the men of God, and we can't interpret these writings unless the original author, the Holy Spirit gives the understanding of what was written.

"First of all you must understand this, that no prophecy of scripture is a matter of one’s own interpretation, because no prophecy ever came by the impulse of man, but men moved by the Holy Spirit spoke from God." (2Pet 1:20-21, RSV)

You have correctly understood that the Scriptures are inspired by the Holy Spirit, but you have misunderstood the first part of the verse. It means that prophecy does not originate from human interpretation of events. It does not mean that humans are incapable of understanding and interpreting Scripture.

 

[Jon777]

Dino, I'm not really sure how the end result changes between the two ideas. The scriptures come not from the prophet's own interpretation, but from the Holy Spirit; therefore, how can one individual understand it if not by illumination of the Holy Spirit. I stay with my original understanding, and my reasons are as follow:

The NRSV & NRSVue are academic translations, not interested in theological viewpoints, so I often refer to them on such questions as on v20.

“First of all you must understand this, that no prophecy of scripture is a matter of one’s own interpretation, because no prophecy ever came by human will, but men and women moved by the Holy Spirit spoke from God.” (2Pe 1:20-21 NRSVue of 2021) *The NRSVue and NRSV are identical, the scholarship of 2021 did not change the translation from that of the 1989 NRSV

From the 18th Century Methodist, Joseph Benson This explains the verse best to my mind
“Knowing this first — That you may not rashly or ignorantly put a sense upon any part of the prophetic writings, not intended by the Divine Spirit which dictated them; that no prophecy of the Scripture — No prediction contained therein; is of any private interpretation — Greek, ιδιας επιλυσεως, an expression of which various interpretations have been given, but only two of them shall be here noticed; namely, Doddridge’s, who renders it, of private impulse, or original; and Macknight’s, who reads, of private invention. But certainly no such sense can, with propriety, be forced upon the words: and why should it? Why should not the literal signification of them be acquiesced in? namely, that given in our translation[KJV]. For surely no prophecy of Scripture, and hardly any doctrine, precept, or promise thereof, will or can be properly or fully understood by any man, let his natural abilities be what they may, without supernatural light from God, without the Spirit of wisdom and revelation, Eph_1:17. For, as the apostle argues, 1Co_2:11; 1Co_2:14, (where see the notes,) as a man could not understand the things that belong to human nature, if he had not a human spirit in him, so the things of God, divine things, knoweth no man, clearly and fully, but by the illumination of the Spirit of God, which must be sought by sincere, fervent, importunate, persevering prayer. In other words, No man’s private natural reason will enable him to understand the Scriptures, and the truths which they contain, properly and fully, and especially to relish, love, and delight in them, without the guidance of that Spirit which dictated them. And if this be true respecting the Scriptures in general, it is particularly so with regard to the prophetic writings; for prophecy especially came not of old by the will of man — Of any man’s own will or pleasure. No true prophet either prophesied when he pleased or what he pleased. But holy men of God — The penmen of the sacred Scriptures; spake — Uttered their predictions or recorded them; as they were moved by the Holy Ghost — By an extraordinary impulse of the Divine Spirit, whose organs only they were in declaring what he was pleased to suggest to them; and what he moved, and enabled them to communicate, he must enable us to understand and profit by.”

From the Jamieson-Fausset-Brown Commentary Does the alternate proposed change anything?
“The words of the prophetical (and so of all) Scripture writers were not mere words of the individuals, and therefore to be interpreted by them, but of "the Holy Ghost" by whom they were "moved." "Private" is explained, 2Pe 1:21, "by the will of man" (namely, the individual writer). In a secondary sense the text teaches also, as the word is the Holy Spirit's, it cannot be interpreted by its readers (any more than by its writers) by their mere private human powers, but by the teaching of the Holy Ghost (Joh 16:14). "He who is the author of Scripture is its supreme interpreter" [GERHARD]. ALFORD translates, "springs not out of human interpretation," that is, is not a prognostication made by a man knowing what he means when he utters it, but," &c. (Joh 11:49-52). Rightly: except that the verb is rather, doth become, or prove to be. It not being of private interpretation, you must "give heed" to it, looking for the Spirit's illumination "in your hearts" (compare Note, see on 2Pe 1:19).” The bold points to what little difference there is

**Even though I'm a Calvinist, I can still learn from an Arminian Methodist such as Joseph Benson who I quoted above."

 

[Jon777]

Dino, I'm not really sure how the end result changes between the two ideas. The scriptures come not from the prophet's own interpretation, but from the Holy Spirit; therefore, how can one individual understand it if not by illumination of the Holy Spirit. I stay with my original understanding, and my reasons are as follow:

The NRSV & NRSVue are academic translations, not interested in theological viewpoints, so I often refer to them on such questions as on v20.

“First of all you must understand this, that no prophecy of scripture is a matter of one’s own interpretation, because no prophecy ever came by human will, but men and women moved by the Holy Spirit spoke from God.” (2Pe 1:20-21 NRSVue of 2021) *The NRSVue and NRSV are identical, the scholarship of 2021 did not change the translation from that of the 1989 NRSV

From the 18th Century Methodist, Joseph Benson This explains the verse best to my mind
“Knowing this first — That you may not rashly or ignorantly put a sense upon any part of the prophetic writings, not intended by the Divine Spirit which dictated them; that no prophecy of the Scripture — No prediction contained therein; is of any private interpretation — Greek, ιδιας επιλυσεως, an expression of which various interpretations have been given, but only two of them shall be here noticed; namely, Doddridge’s, who renders it, of private impulse, or original; and Macknight’s, who reads, of private invention. But certainly no such sense can, with propriety, be forced upon the words: and why should it? Why should not the literal signification of them be acquiesced in? namely, that given in our translation[KJV]. For surely no prophecy of Scripture, and hardly any doctrine, precept, or promise thereof, will or can be properly or fully understood by any man, let his natural abilities be what they may, without supernatural light from God, without the Spirit of wisdom and revelation, Eph_1:17. For, as the apostle argues, 1Co_2:11; 1Co_2:14, (where see the notes,) as a man could not understand the things that belong to human nature, if he had not a human spirit in him, so the things of God, divine things, knoweth no man, clearly and fully, but by the illumination of the Spirit of God, which must be sought by sincere, fervent, importunate, persevering prayer. In other words, No man’s private natural reason will enable him to understand the Scriptures, and the truths which they contain, properly and fully, and especially to relish, love, and delight in them, without the guidance of that Spirit which dictated them. And if this be true respecting the Scriptures in general, it is particularly so with regard to the prophetic writings; for prophecy especially came not of old by the will of man — Of any man’s own will or pleasure. No true prophet either prophesied when he pleased or what he pleased. But holy men of God — The penmen of the sacred Scriptures; spake — Uttered their predictions or recorded them; as they were moved by the Holy Ghost — By an extraordinary impulse of the Divine Spirit, whose organs only they were in declaring what he was pleased to suggest to them; and what he moved, and enabled them to communicate, he must enable us to understand and profit by.”

From the Jamieson-Fausset-Brown Commentary Does the alternate proposed change anything?
“The words of the prophetical (and so of all) Scripture writers were not mere words of the individuals, and therefore to be interpreted by them, but of "the Holy Ghost" by whom they were "moved." "Private" is explained, 2Pe 1:21, "by the will of man" (namely, the individual writer). In a secondary sense the text teaches also, as the word is the Holy Spirit's, it cannot be interpreted by its readers (any more than by its writers) by their mere private human powers, but by the teaching of the Holy Ghost (Joh 16:14). "He who is the author of Scripture is its supreme interpreter" [GERHARD]. ALFORD translates, "springs not out of human interpretation," that is, is not a prognostication made by a man knowing what he means when he utters it, but," &c. (Joh 11:49-52). Rightly: except that the verb is rather, doth become, or prove to be. It not being of private interpretation, you must "give heed" to it, looking for the Spirit's illumination "in your hearts" (compare Note, see on 2Pe 1:19).” The bold points to what little difference there is

**Even though I'm a Calvinist, I can still learn from an Arminian Methodist such as Joseph Benson who I quoted above."

It seems that even with disagreements on certain verses, most, if not all Christians realize it takes the illumination of the Holy Spirit to truly understand the scriptures, and have the ability to apply them spiritually and practically. The scriptures are clear believers are indwelt by the Holy Spirit, and it is also clear that the called-out assembly of God, the church is likewise the temple of God.

“So then you are no longer strangers and sojourners, but you are fellow citizens with the saints and members of the household of God, built upon the foundation of the apostles and prophets, Christ Jesus himself being the cornerstone, in whom the whole structure is joined together and grows into a holy temple in the Lord; in whom you also are built into it for a dwelling place of God in the Spirit.” (Eph 2:19-22 RSV)

“Do you not know that you are God's temple and that God's Spirit dwells in you?” (1Co 3:16 RSV) *The “you’ is plural in this verse, meaning the assembly of believers in Corinth.

“What agreement has the temple of God with idols? For we are the temple of the living God; as God said, ‘I will live in them and move among them, and I will be their God, and they shall be my people.’” (2Co 6:16 RSV)

If we individually are indwelt with the Spirit, and the church is likewise, how can you have major and key differences in each believer’s profession that varies from the body of Christ, as below. Yet, Paul in Romans 14 allowed some type of differences.

“…if I am delayed, you may know how one ought to behave in the household of God, which is the church (Lit. assembly) of the living God, the pillar and bulwark of the truth.” (1Ti 3:15 RSV)

“Beloved, being very eager to write to you of our common salvation, I found it necessary to write appealing to you to contend for the faith which was once for all delivered to the saints.” (Jude 1:3, RSV)

“…eager to maintain the unity of the Spirit in the bond of peace. There is one body and one Spirit, just as you were called to the one hope that belongs to your call, one Lord, one faith, one baptism, one God and Father of us all, who is above all and through all and in all.” (Eph 4:3-6, RSV)

Jesus said, “I will build my church, and the powers of death shall not prevail against it.” If so, how can you end up with any true church system of beliefs today that was not held through church history by the body of Christ, ignoring the flaky fringe groups. I’m NOT speaking of the Roman Catholic Church, they can’t decide what is truth and have been evolving over the centuries, so for me, that is obviously out of consideration. As I view the “one Lord, one faith, one baptism”, I see it splintering in major ways in the latter 19th century. You have the obvious cults, Mormons, the Watchtower, Christian Science, some Pentecostalists, the Adventists, etc. Then you have a certain twist on the beliefs on the body of Christ coming in the early part of the 20th century, as dispensationalism, while that is often found with sound preaching of the gospel.

When I post authorities, my quotes are almost always prior to the 20th century. I see no modern authorities in the faith that have found anything new that is true in the Christian faith. If it was true in the day of Christ, is there any way it can be only found as new truth in the last couple of centuries? The Protestant Reformation and those in the following centuries brought the church back to the biblical faith of Jesus Christ. Yet, that began splintering with cults and new ideas in the 19th C.

 

[memberofthebride]

It seems that even with disagreements on certain verses, most, if not all Christians realize it takes the illumination of the Holy Spirit to truly understand the scriptures, and have the ability to apply them spiritually and practically. The scriptures are clear believers are indwelt by the Holy Spirit, and it is also clear that the called-out assembly of God, the church is likewise the temple of God.

“So then you are no longer strangers and sojourners, but you are fellow citizens with the saints and members of the household of God, built upon the foundation of the apostles and prophets, Christ Jesus himself being the cornerstone, in whom the whole structure is joined together and grows into a holy temple in the Lord; in whom you also are built into it for a dwelling place of God in the Spirit.” (Eph 2:19-22 RSV)

“Do you not know that you are God's temple and that God's Spirit dwells in you?” (1Co 3:16 RSV) *The “you’ is plural in this verse, meaning the assembly of believers in Corinth.

“What agreement has the temple of God with idols? For we are the temple of the living God; as God said, ‘I will live in them and move among them, and I will be their God, and they shall be my people.’” (2Co 6:16 RSV)

If we individually are indwelt with the Spirit, and the church is likewise, how can you have major and key differences in each believer’s profession that varies from the body of Christ, as below. Yet, Paul in Romans 14 allowed some type of differences.

“…if I am delayed, you may know how one ought to behave in the household of God, which is the church (Lit. assembly) of the living God, the pillar and bulwark of the truth.” (1Ti 3:15 RSV)

“Beloved, being very eager to write to you of our common salvation, I found it necessary to write appealing to you to contend for the faith which was once for all delivered to the saints.” (Jude 1:3, RSV)

“…eager to maintain the unity of the Spirit in the bond of peace. There is one body and one Spirit, just as you were called to the one hope that belongs to your call, one Lord, one faith, one baptism, one God and Father of us all, who is above all and through all and in all.” (Eph 4:3-6, RSV)

Jesus said, “I will build my church, and the powers of death shall not prevail against it.” If so, how can you end up with any true church system of beliefs today that was not held through church history by the body of Christ, ignoring the flaky fringe groups. I’m NOT speaking of the Roman Catholic Church, they can’t decide what is truth and have been evolving over the centuries, so for me, that is obviously out of consideration. As I view the “one Lord, one faith, one baptism”, I see it splintering in major ways in the latter 19th century. You have the obvious cults, Mormons, the Watchtower, Christian Science, some Pentecostalists, the Adventists, etc. Then you have a certain twist on the beliefs on the body of Christ coming in the early part of the 20th century, as dispensationalism, while that is often found with sound preaching of the gospel.

When I post authorities, my quotes are almost always prior to the 20th century. I see no modern authorities in the faith that have found anything new that is true in the Christian faith. If it was true in the day of Christ, is there any way it can be only found as new truth in the last couple of centuries? The Protestant Reformation and those in the following centuries brought the church back to the biblical faith of Jesus Christ. Yet, that began splintering with cults and new ideas in the 19th C.

One question:

Jesus said, “I will build my church,
ekklésia: Church, assembly, congregation

the word is not plural. ONE Congregation, ONE church
Why are there tens of thousands?
Are they all correctly following Christ?
If not, how is a person to determine which is which?

I personally hate confusion, The God I follow is order.

not attacking you -- Just asking the obvious question, that few so far on this site seem to care about.

What are your thoughts?

 

[Jon777]

One question:

Jesus said, “I will build my church,
ekklésia: Church, assembly, congregation

the word is not plural. ONE Congregation, ONE church
Why are there tens of thousands?
Are they all correctly following Christ?
If not, how is a person to determine which is which?

I personally hate confusion, The God I follow is order.

not attacking you -- Just asking the obvious question, that few so far on this site seem to care about.

What are your thoughts?

Hello M! I will try to answer your question by relating my experience, since God is surely not a God of confusion as you state. I was in independent, fundamentalist dispensationalism in my early days, up into my latter 20s. I encountered 2 or 3 challenges to my belief system that were based squarely on the scriptures. It worried me to the point I wondered who was right and where can I go for order in the faith once for all given to the saints.

I chose one method which was: The USA was certainly blessed by God, so who were the major denominations at our founding? Just what did they believe? I began purchasing the standards of the various churches: Westminster Confession and Catechism of the Presbyterians, the 39 Articles of the Anglicans, the 1689 Confession of the Baptists, and some writings from Martin Luther. In spite of variations in methods of baptism, church organization and liturgical along with the informal I began to see the great similarity in the gospel in each one and I was amazed. I'm 84, and over the years I evolved and tried various churches and theological approaches. I ended up Calvinistic, holding to New Covenant theology and embracing the 1646 First London Confession of Faith. Yet, in recent years I've attended comfortably, Presbyterian, Lutheran, Anglican and Baptists and felt myself among brothers in Christ. I of course am referring to what may be called the 'confessional' churches, the ones holding to their founding documents.

Now, not everyone will approach this the same way, but I have related my experience. Yet, I have not been acceptable to membership in churches in which I have major theological agreement, because I have never married and have a male "buddy for life" who I've been with now for 30 years. Now, trying to find my way in the faith of Jesus Christ, this is not easy and on the two major social issues of the day, I hold to the KJV! Now, I know that this paragraph is going to enrage some but so be it. If I try to defend my squarely Biblical beliefs on my situation on forums, I am soon banned.

 

[memberofthebride]

Hello M! I will try to answer your question by relating my experience, since God is surely not a God of confusion as you state. I was in independent, fundamentalist dispensationalism in my early days, up into my latter 20s. I encountered 2 or 3 challenges to my belief system that were based squarely on the scriptures. It worried me to the point I wondered who was right and where can I go for order in the faith once for all given to the saints.

I chose one method which was: The USA was certainly blessed by God, so who were the major denominations at our founding? Just what did they believe? I began purchasing the standards of the various churches: Westminster Confession and Catechism of the Presbyterians, the 39 Articles of the Anglicans, the 1689 Confession of the Baptists, and some writings from Martin Luther. In spite of variations in methods of baptism, church organization and liturgical along with the informal I began to see the great similarity in the gospel in each one and I was amazed. I'm 84, and over the years I evolved and tried various churches and theological approaches. I ended up Calvinistic, holding to New Covenant theology and embracing the 1646 First London Confession of Faith. Yet, in recent years I've attended comfortably, Presbyterian, Lutheran, Anglican and Baptists and felt myself among brothers in Christ. I of course am referring to what may be called the 'confessional' churches, the ones holding to their founding documents.

Now, not everyone will approach this the same way, but I have related my experience. Yet, I have not been acceptable to membership in churches in which I have major theological agreement, because I have never married and have a male "buddy for life" who I've been with now for 30 years. Now, trying to find my way in the faith of Jesus Christ, this is not easy and on the two major social issues of the day, I hold to the KJV! Now, I know that this paragraph is going to enrage some but so be it. If I try to defend my squarely Biblical beliefs on my situation on forums, I am soon banned.

thank you

I am 86

I knew zero when I was called at 28,
I has zero interest at that time in God.
I read the Word Forwards and then backwards eight times.
At that point I saw how main stream was off course.
I saw what little I knew growing up was not what the Word actually taught.
I was shown a Body that matched the Doctrines I had found in the Word, I have been here since then.

 

[Jon777]

thank you

I am 86

I knew zero when I was called at 28,
I has zero interest at that time in God.
I read the Word Forwards and then backwards eight times.
At that point I saw how main stream was off course.
I saw what little I knew growing up was not what the Word actually taught.
I was shown a Body that matched the Doctrines I had found in the Word, I have been here since then.

Let me clarify on something. I professed my faith in Jesus Christ and was baptized on Easter 1951. I was in a Scofield Bible family church, and I was just as truly saved then as I am now.

When you wrote "main stream", I suppose you refer to the mainline churches like the Presbyterian USA, Episcopal in the USA, the liberal churches. I think of Jesus' words on that:

“And to the angel of the church in Sardis write: ‘The words of him who has the seven spirits of God and the seven stars. “‘I know your works; you have the name of being alive, and you are dead. (Rev 3:1, RSV)

Let me also clarify my statement on translations. I use the NRSV Updated Edition as well as other "academic" translations that generally do not read any Christian doctrine into the translation. But on modern social issues, I stay with the KJV, which is agreed to by the ERV, ASV and Young's Literal translation. Translations are influenced by the culture in which they are produced and the philosophy in the translation

 

[Aaron56]

I read a recent article online quoting John 16:12-13 as a promise that we are still to expect direct revelation from the Holy Spirit. But to whom is this promise being made? Isn’t it the 12 Apostles, and we receive the revelation indirectly as the apostles wrote the revelations for us. He, the Holy Spirit, gives us understanding of the revelation given to the 12, and Luke as a careful historian also relayed truth given to the Apostles for our learning. Luke was also a frequent companion of the Apostle Paul. 1 Cor. 2:9-14 promises to the believers the Holy Spirit the understanding of these gifts, the writings of the Apostles:

Here is an example of direct revelation given to someone not among the people in John 16:

"Saul, Saul, why are you persecuting me?"

"Now in the church that was at Antioch there were certain prophets and teachers: Barnabas, Simeon who was called Niger, Lucius of Cyrene, Manaen who had been brought up with Herod the tetrarch, and Saul. 2As they ministered to the Lord and fasted, the Holy Spirit said, “Now separate to Me Barnabas and Saul for the work to which I have called them.”"

Here are two apostles not present in John 16:
"Which when the apostles, Barnabas and Paul, heard of, they rent their clothes..."

Also, 1 Thessalonians is written by Paul, Silvanus and Timothy. This is in the letter:

"Nor did we (Paul, Silvanus, Timothy) seek glory from men, either from you or from others, when we (Paul, Silvanus, Timothy) might have made demands as apostles of Christ."

And to your assertion:
"..as the apostles wrote the revelations for us..."

Consider this: There are only 9 authors of the New testament. Matt, Mark, Luke, John, Paul, Peter, James, Jude, and the writer of Hebrews. The writer of James was not the Apostle James, James died before it was written. Mark was an associate of Peter and Paul and not among the 12. So now we're left with 7 authors. Even if we include Paul among the Twelve (which he is not) and assume Hebrews was written by an unnamed Apostle, 5 Apostles of the Lamb wrote nothing of the New Testament. So "writing part of the Bible" is not a qualifier for apostleship.

I wholeheartedly agree with your claim here: "The Holy Spirit inspired the writings of the men of God, and we can't interpret these writings unless the original author, the Holy Spirit gives the understanding of what was written." Spiritual things are spiritually discerned. Otherwise, theologians, not faithful and mature saints, would be our leaders.

 

[Dino246]

One question:

Jesus said, “I will build my church,
ekklésia: Church, assembly, congregation

the word is not plural. ONE Congregation, ONE church
Why are there tens of thousands?

There are tens of thousands of individual local congregations for the simple reason of geography. As for belief, there is one Church in dozens (not thousands) of flavours. Most of the differences are in emphasis on secondary matters rather than core beliefs.

 

[Dino246]

Dino, I'm not really sure how the end result changes between the two ideas. The scriptures come not from the prophet's own interpretation, but from the Holy Spirit; therefore, how can one individual understand it if not by illumination of the Holy Spirit. I stay with my original understanding, and my reasons are as follow:

The NRSV & NRSVue are academic translations, not interested in theological viewpoints, so I often refer to them on such questions as on v20.

“First of all you must understand this, that no prophecy of scripture is a matter of one’s own interpretation, because no prophecy ever came by human will, but men and women moved by the Holy Spirit spoke from God.” (2Pe 1:20-21 NRSVue of 2021) *The NRSVue and NRSV are identical, the scholarship of 2021 did not change the translation from that of the 1989 NRSV

From the 18th Century Methodist, Joseph Benson This explains the verse best to my mind
“Knowing this first — That you may not rashly or ignorantly put a sense upon any part of the prophetic writings, not intended by the Divine Spirit which dictated them; that no prophecy of the Scripture — No prediction contained therein; is of any private interpretation — Greek, ιδιας επιλυσεως, an expression of which various interpretations have been given, but only two of them shall be here noticed; namely, Doddridge’s, who renders it, of private impulse, or original; and Macknight’s, who reads, of private invention. But certainly no such sense can, with propriety, be forced upon the words: and why should it? Why should not the literal signification of them be acquiesced in? namely, that given in our translation[KJV]. For surely no prophecy of Scripture, and hardly any doctrine, precept, or promise thereof, will or can be properly or fully understood by any man, let his natural abilities be what they may, without supernatural light from God, without the Spirit of wisdom and revelation, Eph_1:17. For, as the apostle argues, 1Co_2:11; 1Co_2:14, (where see the notes,) as a man could not understand the things that belong to human nature, if he had not a human spirit in him, so the things of God, divine things, knoweth no man, clearly and fully, but by the illumination of the Spirit of God, which must be sought by sincere, fervent, importunate, persevering prayer. In other words, No man’s private natural reason will enable him to understand the Scriptures, and the truths which they contain, properly and fully, and especially to relish, love, and delight in them, without the guidance of that Spirit which dictated them. And if this be true respecting the Scriptures in general, it is particularly so with regard to the prophetic writings; for prophecy especially came not of old by the will of man — Of any man’s own will or pleasure. No true prophet either prophesied when he pleased or what he pleased. But holy men of God — The penmen of the sacred Scriptures; spake — Uttered their predictions or recorded them; as they were moved by the Holy Ghost — By an extraordinary impulse of the Divine Spirit, whose organs only they were in declaring what he was pleased to suggest to them; and what he moved, and enabled them to communicate, he must enable us to understand and profit by.”

From the Jamieson-Fausset-Brown Commentary Does the alternate proposed change anything?
“The words of the prophetical (and so of all) Scripture writers were not mere words of the individuals, and therefore to be interpreted by them, but of "the Holy Ghost" by whom they were "moved." "Private" is explained, 2Pe 1:21, "by the will of man" (namely, the individual writer). In a secondary sense the text teaches also, as the word is the Holy Spirit's, it cannot be interpreted by its readers (any more than by its writers) by their mere private human powers, but by the teaching of the Holy Ghost (Joh 16:14). "He who is the author of Scripture is its supreme interpreter" [GERHARD]. ALFORD translates, "springs not out of human interpretation," that is, is not a prognostication made by a man knowing what he means when he utters it, but," &c. (Joh 11:49-52). Rightly: except that the verb is rather, doth become, or prove to be. It not being of private interpretation, you must "give heed" to it, looking for the Spirit's illumination "in your hearts" (compare Note, see on 2Pe 1:19).” The bold points to what little difference there is

**Even though I'm a Calvinist, I can still learn from an Arminian Methodist such as Joseph Benson who I quoted above."

The commentaries you quote have the same error that most readers have: they don’t properly parse the statement before interpreting it and thereby end with a hypocritical conclusion.

Let’s start by putting the verse in very simple terms:

“Scripture does not come from human interpretation, but from the Holy Spirit.”

The verse says nothing at all about the interpretation of Scripture (though most people incorrectly believe it does).

Both you and your sources apparently think it does. You (and they) have inserted some circular reasoning without realizing it. This results in an interpretation of Scripture that precludes the interpretation of Scripture… clearly silly!

 

[Aaron56]

One question:

Jesus said, “I will build my church,
ekklésia: Church, assembly, congregation

the word is not plural. ONE Congregation, ONE church
Why are there tens of thousands?
Are they all correctly following Christ?
If not, how is a person to determine which is which?

I personally hate confusion, The God I follow is order.

not attacking you -- Just asking the obvious question, that few so far on this site seem to care about.

What are your thoughts?

The church in Ephesus...
The church in Philadelphia...
The church in Smyrna...
The church in Laodicea...
etc...

Letters to the seven churches... not singular "church". What you have is a group (singular) and within that group you have another group (singular) and another group (singular), etc. There are many words like this in the English language: "company" is singular but it is made up of many individuals; "family" is singular but many individuals are included in it. While it is true there is one group called "the called out" that is comprised of all who receive Christ, there are many groups of those people who are similarly called "a church".

When the Lord builds the house, the foundation is the apostles and prophets, and Christ is the standard by which all are assembled.

Note: from my Biblical study, the Lord only permits geography as a reason for a distinct church.

 

[Roger316]

I read a recent article online quoting John 16:12-13 as a promise that we are still to expect direct revelation from the Holy Spirit. But to whom is this promise being made?

Jesus is speaking directly to the 11 Apostles about his promise that the Holy Spirit would help them in their mission to spread the Gospel. Paul came later and he also claims that Jesus spoke directly to him.

Isn’t it the 12 Apostles, and we receive the revelation indirectly as the apostles wrote the revelations for us. He, the Holy Spirit, gives us understanding of the revelation given to the 12, and Luke as a careful historian also relayed truth given to the Apostles for our learning. Luke was also a frequent companion of the Apostle Paul.

We have the benefit of their writings, which Peter called scripture.

1 Cor. 2:9-14 promises to the believers the Holy Spirit the understanding of these gifts, the writings of the Apostles:

Yes, the Holy Spirit helps with our understanding. He opens our eyes and softens our hearts so that we are prepared to believe and accept what we hear from the Apostles.

The Holy Spirit inspired the writings of the men of God, and we can't interpret these writings unless the original author, the Holy Spirit gives the understanding of what was written.

"First of all you must understand this, that no prophecy of scripture is a matter of one’s own interpretation, because no prophecy ever came by the impulse of man, but men moved by the Holy Spirit spoke from God." (2Pet 1:20-21, RSV)

Peter isn’t throwing out good hermeneutics or pretending the human authors didn’t matter. The prophets really did write in Hebrew or Greek, with their own vocabulary, personalities, and life experiences shaping how the message came out. But Peter wants us to remember that even though the human writers were fully involved, they weren’t the source of what they wrote. The Spirit was. So when we interpret Scripture, we take the human side seriously, but we ultimately read it as a message God spoke through real people. That’s the balance Peter is after — real human authors, but a divine Author behind them.

 

[rewriter]

I read a recent article online quoting John 16:12-13 as a promise that we are still to expect direct revelation from the Holy Spirit. But to whom is this promise being made? Isn’t it the 12 Apostles, and we receive the revelation indirectly as the apostles wrote the revelations for us. He, the Holy Spirit, gives us understanding of the revelation given to the 12, and Luke as a careful historian also relayed truth given to the Apostles for our learning. Luke was also a frequent companion of the Apostle Paul. 1 Cor. 2:9-14 promises to the believers the Holy Spirit the understanding of these gifts, the writings of the Apostles:

"But when the Counselor comes, whom I shall send to you from the Father, even the Spirit of truth, who proceeds from the Father, he will bear witness to me; and you also are witnesses, because you have been with me from the beginning. “I have said all this to you to keep you from falling away. They will put you out of the synagogues; indeed, the hour is coming when whoever kills you will think he is offering service to God. And they will do this because they have not known the Father, nor me. But I have said these things to you, that when their hour comes you may remember that I told you of them. “I did not say these things to you from the beginning, because I was with you. But now I am going to him who sent me; yet none of you asks me, ‘Where are you going?’ But because I have said these things to you, sorrow has filled your hearts. Nevertheless I tell you the truth: it is to your advantage that I go away, for if I do not go away, the Counselor will not come to you; but if I go, I will send him to you. And when he comes, he will convince the world concerning sin and righteousness and judgment: concerning sin, because they do not believe in me; concerning righteousness, because I go to the Father, and you will see me no more; concerning judgment, because the ruler of this world is judged. “I have yet many things to say to you, but you cannot bear them now. When the Spirit of truth comes, he will guide you into all the truth; for he will not speak on his own authority, but whatever he hears he will speak, and he will declare to you the things that are to come. He will glorify me, for he will take what is mine and declare it to you. All that the Father has is mine; therefore I said that he will take what is mine and declare it to you." (John 15:26-16:15, RSV)

"But, as it is written, “What no eye has seen, nor ear heard, nor the heart of man conceived, what God has prepared for those who love him,” God has revealed to us through the Spirit. For the Spirit searches everything, even the depths of God. For what person knows a man’s thoughts except the spirit of the man which is in him? So also no one comprehends the thoughts of God except the Spirit of God. Now we have received not the spirit of the world, but the Spirit which is from God, that we might understand the gifts bestowed on us by God. And we impart this in words not taught by human wisdom but taught by the Spirit, interpreting spiritual truths to those who possess the Spirit. The unspiritual man does not receive the gifts of the Spirit of God, for they are folly to him, and he is not able to understand them because they are spiritually discerned." (1Cor 2:9-14, RSV)

The Holy Spirit inspired the writings of the men of God, and we can't interpret these writings unless the original author, the Holy Spirit gives the understanding of what was written.

"First of all you must understand this, that no prophecy of scripture is a matter of one’s own interpretation, because no prophecy ever came by the impulse of man, but men moved by the Holy Spirit spoke from God." (2Pet 1:20-21, RSV)

You have touched on one of the major issues in the church. During OT times there were many prophets proclaiming what God said, often the ones actually doing what they claimed were shouted down by those who were not actually proclaiming God's word. Today we like to proclaim that we have gotten past such problems, yet different denominations proclaim different truths and there are some passages in the NT that have multiple interpretations depending on who you listen to, and it is hard to find anyone who preaches a consistent message all across the scriptures, lots of people claim to, but most are viewed as failures despite their claims.

To my mind, the problem lies in traditional assumptions and in my studies, I think I have found the earliest erroneous assumptions dating back to the 1st century, within the time when the apostles were active. Then tradition took over and insisted that there were no misunderstandings and begins to rework interpretations to eliminate any possible misunderstandings and project a perfect church rather than a church full of forgiven/redeemed sinners who were doing their best to understand what God had said and done. But if you know your history well enough, you can spot ancient propaganda preserved in the OT as prophesy from God (and it was NOT fulfilled as it was described as inevitable).

 

[memberofthebride]

Let me clarify on something. I professed my faith in Jesus Christ and was baptized on Easter 1951. I was in a Scofield Bible family church, and I was just as truly saved then as I am now.

When you wrote "main stream", I suppose you refer to the mainline churches like the Presbyterian USA, Episcopal in the USA, the liberal churches. I think of Jesus' words on that:

“And to the angel of the church in Sardis write: ‘The words of him who has the seven spirits of God and the seven stars. “‘I know your works; you have the name of being alive, and you are dead. (Rev 3:1, RSV)

Let me also clarify my statement on translations. I use the NRSV Updated Edition as well as other "academic" translations that generally do not read any Christian doctrine into the translation. But on modern social issues, I stay with the KJV, which is agreed to by the ERV, ASV and Young's Literal translation. Translations are influenced by the culture in which they are produced and the philosophy in the translation

I totally agree, all translations will be influenced by the translators culture and their body of beliefs.
Passover was changed to easter and spirit was changed to ghost
When ever I have a problem with difficult scripture, I ask our Father how I am to understand it.

 

[memberofthebride]

There are tens of thousands of individual local congregations for the simple reason of geography. As for belief, there is one Church in dozens (not thousands) of flavours. Most of the differences are in emphasis on secondary matters rather than core beliefs.

I disagree,

The Church that God the Father began on Pentecost was of one mind, one accord.
by the time John was given his Revelation by Christ the Church was a mess and from there we are now here,
Rapture, born again, going to heaven, speaking in tongues, what ever one wants to believe or to get there is a church that will offer it.

 

[memberofthebride]

The church in Ephesus...
The church in Philadelphia...
The church in Smyrna...
The church in Laodicea...
etc...

Letters to the seven churches... not singular "church". What you have is a group (singular) and within that group you have another group (singular) and another group (singular), etc. There are many words like this in the English language: "company" is singular but it is made up of many individuals; "family" is singular but many individuals are included in it. While it is true there is one group called "the called out" that is comprised of all who receive Christ, there are many groups of those people who are similarly called "a church".

When the Lord builds the house, the foundation is the apostles and prophets, and Christ is the standard by which all are assembled.

Note: from my Biblical study, the Lord only permits geography as a reason for a distinct church.

I almost answered from a wrong perspective. I re read

I believe you are saying The Church of God the Father, is ONE Church, one body of doctrines and one set of beliefs, but can be located in different locations.

if so, I agree.

 

[Dino246]

I disagree,

The Church that God the Father began on Pentecost was of one mind, one accord.
by the time John was given his Revelation by Christ the Church was a mess and from there we are now here,
Rapture, born again, going to heaven, speaking in tongues, what ever one wants to believe or to get there is a church that will offer it.

Okay, believe what you want, but whining about it resolves nothing beyond your conscience. Do something meaningful.

 

[GWH]

I read a recent article online quoting John 16:12-13 as a promise that we are still to expect direct revelation from the Holy Spirit. But to whom is this promise being made? Isn’t it the 12 Apostles, and we receive the revelation indirectly as the apostles wrote the revelations for us. He, the Holy Spirit, gives us understanding of the revelation given to the 12, and Luke as a careful historian also relayed truth given to the Apostles for our learning. Luke was also a frequent companion of the Apostle Paul. 1 Cor. 2:9-14 promises to the believers the Holy Spirit the understanding of these gifts, the writings of the Apostles:

"But when the Counselor comes, whom I shall send to you from the Father, even the Spirit of truth, who proceeds from the Father, he will bear witness to me; and you also are witnesses, because you have been with me from the beginning. “I have said all this to you to keep you from falling away. They will put you out of the synagogues; indeed, the hour is coming when whoever kills you will think he is offering service to God. And they will do this because they have not known the Father, nor me. But I have said these things to you, that when their hour comes you may remember that I told you of them. “I did not say these things to you from the beginning, because I was with you. But now I am going to him who sent me; yet none of you asks me, ‘Where are you going?’ But because I have said these things to you, sorrow has filled your hearts. Nevertheless I tell you the truth: it is to your advantage that I go away, for if I do not go away, the Counselor will not come to you; but if I go, I will send him to you. And when he comes, he will convince the world concerning sin and righteousness and judgment: concerning sin, because they do not believe in me; concerning righteousness, because I go to the Father, and you will see me no more; concerning judgment, because the ruler of this world is judged. “I have yet many things to say to you, but you cannot bear them now. When the Spirit of truth comes, he will guide you into all the truth; for he will not speak on his own authority, but whatever he hears he will speak, and he will declare to you the things that are to come. He will glorify me, for he will take what is mine and declare it to you. All that the Father has is mine; therefore I said that he will take what is mine and declare it to you." (John 15:26-16:15, RSV)

"But, as it is written, “What no eye has seen, nor ear heard, nor the heart of man conceived, what God has prepared for those who love him,” God has revealed to us through the Spirit. For the Spirit searches everything, even the depths of God. For what person knows a man’s thoughts except the spirit of the man which is in him? So also no one comprehends the thoughts of God except the Spirit of God. Now we have received not the spirit of the world, but the Spirit which is from God, that we might understand the gifts bestowed on us by God. And we impart this in words not taught by human wisdom but taught by the Spirit, interpreting spiritual truths to those who possess the Spirit. The unspiritual man does not receive the gifts of the Spirit of God, for they are folly to him, and he is not able to understand them because they are spiritually discerned." (1Cor 2:9-14, RSV)

The Holy Spirit inspired the writings of the men of God, and we can't interpret these writings unless the original author, the Holy Spirit gives the understanding of what was written.

"First of all you must understand this, that no prophecy of scripture is a matter of one’s own interpretation, because no prophecy ever came by the impulse of man, but men moved by the Holy Spirit spoke from God." (2Pet 1:20-21, RSV)

Read the NT and learn that Jesus indwells all believers as the HS, who cannot be divorced from GW.

 

[memberofthebride]

Okay, believe what you want, but whining about it resolves nothing beyond your conscience. Do something meaningful.

I do not need to do a thing --- The Plan exist that restores all things that are broken.
I am just an old human, no authority, no power -- but the ONE that Has the Power is coming soon to restore law and order and remove those that refuse to obey.