2 Peter - Verse-by-Verse Biblical Exegesis

as they were borne on by the Holy Spirit ... Therefore the prophetic books of Holy
Scripture are sacred and precious, and we do well in giving heed to them … Prophecy is
not its own interpreter; the guidance of the Spirit is necessary. Or, prophecy is not a
matter for the private interpretation of the readers; only the Holy Spirit can explain it. (B.
Caffin) It is the prophet’s grasp of the prophecy, not that of the readers, that is here
presented, as the next verse shows. (A. Robertson) No prophecy is of any private
interpretation, so far as the writer of the prophecy is concerned. (K. Wuest) The Holy
Spirit so superintended their work that even the words they chose were directed by the
Holy Spirit. The result is that the books they penned bear their genuine imprint and at the
same time are God’s Word. (T. Schreiner)
The prophets themselves did not always know the import of their predictions. Now,
however, that the Word of God is complete, and some have been fulfilled, and each
intimation may be sorted and compared with all of like tenor, the whole outline of
prophecy may be readily perceived. (A. Knoch) This is not meant to affirm that no
private individual can interpret prophecy. The idea intended by the apostle is that no
prophecy of the Word is to be interpreted solely with reference to itself, but all other
portions of the prophetic revelation are to be taken into account and considered. Every
prophecy is part of a wonderful scheme of revelation; for the true significance of any
prophecy, the whole prophetic scheme must be kept in mind and the interrelationship
between the parts in the plan as well. (C. Feinberg) The Greek word translated
“interpretation” in this verse is epilyseos, which literally is “unloosing.” The thought is
that no prophecy of Scripture has come about by a prophet’s own origin. (R. Zuck)
It simply means that no prophecy is to be interpreted by itself, but in the light of all that
God has spoken on the subject. Compare prophecy with prophecy. (C. Ryrie) The whole
scope of this passage is, not the interpretation of Scripture, but its origin: it does not
speak of what the Scripture means, but of whence it comes … There is not one word
about the meaning, but a great deal about the origin of prophecy; not a word about its
interpretation, but about its source. (E. Bullinger) Peter is not here warning against
personal interpretation of prophecy as the Roman Catholics say, but against the folly of
upstart prophets with no impulse from God. (G. Cramer) The Holy Spirit, not human
volition, is the originating power in prophecy. (D. Hiebert) It springs not out of human
interpretation. (Alford)
This is exactly private interpretation: It is a fixing down the meaning to the private
thoughts, and narrow sphere, of David and Isaiah. It offends, too, precisely, against that
broader principle, which the apostle immediately subjoins. This is a continual fault with
those who deny prophecy. “The cannot see afar off.” They pin down the prediction to the
days of the writers who penned the prophecy. The Babylonish captivity, and the return
from it, are the farthest horizon which they can admit in the accomplishement of the
prophecy. Now such a principle destroys to us the significance and utility of prophecy. If
all the OT prophecies have been fulfilled at the return to the captivity, they are to us “an
old almanac.” This low estimate of prophecy arises from low views of inspiration ...
These inspired men did not pen their own personal and private thoughts. They are not the
mere memoranda of what they expected, or wished. No: to them were suggested the