The phrase “a matter of one’s interpretation” (idias
epilyseōs) may refer to either the prophet’s interpretation or the reader’s
interpretation. In either case, the emphasis is that there is an objective and
correct meaning of the prophecy because it originates in the activity of the Holy
Spirit and so has a God-given meaning. (William Lane Craig, Systematic Philosophical
Theology [Croydon: Wiley Blackwell, 2025], 1:90-91)
Now, technically speaking, the fact that God speaks via
the OT prophets authorizes only prophetic statements as God’s Word, not all of
Jewish Scripture. Such direct statements by God himself attest to his own
authority, not to the authority of Scripture. Similarly, in the OT the law is
presented as just as much direct divine discourse as prophecy; indeed, Moses
was characterized as a prophet. But in speaking of “the prophetic word” in v.
19, the author may well employ synecdoche to refer to all of the OT. As used
elsewhere, the phrase ton prophētikon logon is basically synonymous to “Scripture,”
an equivalence that Bauckham says came about because in the Jewish
understanding all inspired Scripture was prophecy. The problem is that the
phrase “the prophetic word,” like the English word “Scripture,” is used to
designate either single passages or several passages or the OT generally. In II
Pet. 1.20-21 the author seems to be singling out specifically prophetic
activity instigated by God’s Spirit. (William Lane Craig, Systematic Philosophical
Theology [Croydon: Wiley Blackwell, 2025], 1:91-92)
To Support this Blog:
Email for Amazon Gift
card: ScripturalMormonism@gmail.com
Email for Logos.com Gift
Card: IrishLDS87@gmail.com
