The word "interpretation" can mean "explanation," but it can also mean "loosening," "release," or "discharge." In the New Testament, the noun is used only here, whereas the verb appears in Mark 4:34 and Acts 19:39. In Mark 4, the verb means "to expound" or "to explain," and in Acts 19, it means "to decide." Its meaning in our verse should be determined by the context.

The immediate context has to do with how "Scripture came about" (v. 20), and Peter insists that "prophecy never had its origin in the will of man" (v. 21). The issue is the origin of Scripture and its relation to the will of man, and not the interpretation of the product of inspiration. Therefore, the "interpretation" is referring to the writers of Scripture and not the readers of Scripture.

As for the broader context, Peter asserts in verse 16, "We did not follow cleverly invented stories when we told you about the power and coming of our Lord Jesus Christ." He is contrasting his own preaching and the words of the prophets in Scripture against the "false prophets" and "false teachers" (2:1) who would exploit people "with stories they have made up" (2:3).

With the above in mind, we may paraphrase Peter (1:20) as follows: "The false prophets and false teachers would exploit you with stories that they made up, but we did not invent what we told you about Christ's transfiguration and God's voice from heaven. Likewise, nothing in Scripture came from man's personal decision or understanding. Scripture was produced in a very different way than how these false prophets and teachers operate, since they made up their doctrines and stories, but everything in Scripture came from God."

A. T. Robertson writes, "No prophecy of Scripture comes out of private disclosure,' not 'of private interpretation."⁸ Gordon Clark suggests the translation, "No written prophecy ever came into being by any individual's setting it free [or, more literally] by private release."⁹ The emphasis would be that Scripture did not come by man's decision ("never had its origin in the will of man," v. 21), or just because a person "wanted to prophesy" (NLT).

I should add that even if the word "interpretation" takes on the meaning of "explanation" here, it would make no essential difference. The emphasis would shift slightly to the fact that Scripture did not come from human understanding about historical events and current affairs, or human speculation about the future. Wuest takes this perspective and translates, "every prophecy of scripture does not originate from any private interpretation [held by the writer]."¹⁰

Both ideas are found in verse 21, which says that "prophesy never had its origin in the will of man" (not by human initiation) but that "men spoke from God as they were carried along by the Holy Spirit" (not by human interpretation).

 

Notes

⁸ A. T. Robertson, Word Pictures in the New Testament, Vol. 6 (Broadman Press, 1960), p. 158.

⁹ Gordon H. Clark, New Heavens, New Earth: A Commentary on First and Second Peter (The Trinity Foundation, 1993), p. 192-193. Brackets in original.

¹⁰ Kenneth S. Wuest, The New Testament: An Expanded Translation. Brackets in original.

(to be continued)

Posted in Theology, Expositions, Spirituality, Ministry | Permanent Link