 |  |
something "more sure" than the sublimest experience. We have the "Word of prophecy".
The human element and agency is subservient; all is of God.
"Knowing this first, that no prophecy of the Scripture is of any private interpretation,
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" (II Pet. 1: 20, 21).
"Private Interpretation", Private is idios "own". "Interpretation" is epilusis and occurs
nowhere else in Scripture. The word means "letting loose", "breaking open",
"unfolding". "Is" is here ginomai "to come into being". Peter does not here speak of
systems of interpretation, but of the trustworthiness of Scripture itself. "No prophecy of
the Scriptures came into being of its own unfolding." He then goes on to explain. "For
prophecy was not brought (phero) at any time by the will of man, but holy men of God
spake being borne along (phero) by the Holy Ghost."
In Acts 27: 15 and 17 we may see the force of this word phero. "We let her
drive", "strake sail and so were driven". Just as the sailors were helpless in the grip of
the storm, so the prophets had no control in the matter and moment of inspiration,
although this did not blot out their personal style. The subject matter of the Scriptures
demands revelation. The wisest are baffled in their attempt to solve the riddle of the
universe, the nature and being of God, the plan of the ages. The R.V. translates
II Tim. 3: 16 thus:
"Every scripture inspired of God is also profitable."
Did Paul intend Timothy to understand that "Some Scriptures are not inspired?"
When translating I Tim. 4: 4, another text by the same author, the R.V. keeps to the
accepted rules of grammar, and so rule their peculiar translation of II Tim. 3: 16 out of
court.
"Every creature of God IS good, and nothing IS to be rejected", etc.
Here, as in II Tim. 3: 16 there is no verb "IS" in the original, it has to be supplied to
make good English. Why did they not render I Tim. 4: 4.
"Every creature of God, if it is good, is also nothing to be rejected.
Why? Simply because it is foolish, false and a violation of Greek syntax.
The Greek writers Chrysostom, Origen, Basil, Athanasius, who knew their own
tongues, render II Tim. 3: 16 as the A.V.
"And God spake all these words"
While Paul teaches us that all Scripture is "God-breathed" and Peter teaches us that
"Holy men of God spake as they were borne along by the Holy Ghost", there is no formal
statement in Scripture as to the precise mode of inspiration. It does not follow moreover,
that because all Scripture is "God-breathed", that every writer was inspired in the same