Date: Mon, 10 Aug 1998 06:38:43 GMT
From:  (Nigel B. Mitchell)
Subject: Prophecy and Inspiration
Newsgroups: aus.religion.christian


(2 Peter 1:20-21 NRSV)  ... 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.

When Christian people read the Bible, we usually ascribe some
sort of label to it, like "This is the word of the Lord", "God's
Holy word", even the "Word of God" (with capital letters just to
make the point really clear). But what do we mean by this?

There is a tradition of reading the Bible as literally "God's
word to us" - like the bumper sticker that says "God said it, I
believe it, that settles it". This way of reading scripture,
sometimes called ëfundamentalismí or ëliteralismí, assumes that
the text of the Bible was given to the Biblical authors as a
perfect and complete text which contains no errors or
contradictions, requires no interpretation, and allows for no
deviation. 

Of course, for those who read the Bible in this way, there is no
question that the laws of scripture are all binding, the stories
of scripture are all true accounts of what actually happened, and
the prophecies contained in scripture all validate what has
already happened, or predict without error what will happen in
the future, or sometimes both. 

If a simple reader, theologian, Bible scholar, or scientist finds
a contradiction or an error within the Scriptures, or a
discrepancy between what we observe in the world and what is
written in the text of Scriptures, then it is clear that those
people are wrong, and they need to study the Scriptures more
closely, and forget about all that other stuff they have learnt,
if they really want to find the truth. So the fundamentalist or
literalist tradition of reading the Bible would have us believe.

The words of 2 Peter, that no prophecy of scripture is a matter
of one's own interpretation, but the work of ìmen and women moved
by the Holy Spirit [to speak] from Godî, are sometimes quoted in
support of this view. Another text that is often used is
(2 Timothy 3:16 NRSV)  All scripture is inspired by God and is
useful for teaching, for reproof, for correction, and for
training in righteousness,

But is being inspired or moved by the Holy Spirit to speak from
God the same as writing an infallible account of eternal truth?
Most people would say ënoí - in fact most people would not even
ask the question. 

I would like to tackle this topic by looking at two words that
appear often in the Bible, and are inescapable in any discussion
of how Christians should read, use and understand the Scriptures.
Those words are ìInspirationî and ìProphecyî.

I suspect that the fundamentalist/literalist tradition of reading
the Bible is about the only context in which the word
ìinspirationî is taken to imply a fixed, literal, one-to-one
correlation between the source of the inspiration and the output
of the inspired person. But that is a very unusual use of the
word ëinspirationí. There are two common uses of the word
ëinspirationí in the English language, and given that these two
uses are paralleled in the meaning of the corresponding Greek
word, it is appropriate for us to use them both in regard to the
inspiration of scripture.

The most common use of the word ìinspirationî is in relation to
ideas, structures, and works of art. John Howard our Prime
Minister says that his inspiration comes from his predecessor,
Robert Gordon Menzies. The Architect of the Sydney Opera House
was inspired by the sails of boats on the Sydney Harbour. Art
students spend hours in galleries, looking at the work of the
great masters, and seeking inspiration for their own work. 

But John Howard is not Bob Menzies, you need a fair bit of
imagination to see the sailing boats in the Sydney Opera House
(well, I do, anyway), and it is generally considered undesirable
for art students to produce exact copies of the works of the
great masters in their own work. ìInspirationî means influence,
and it can involve the recycling of ideas and images and ways of
approaching a problem, but it does and should not imply an exact
copy; nor does it involve removing the personality, creativity
and experience of the person who is inspired. 

The other use of the word ìInspirationî is in relation to
breathing. Inspiration and expiration is what keeps us all alive.
>From the first book of Genesis, through to the ministry of Jesus
and beyond, the Bible sustains a deliberate play on words which
relies on the fact that the Greek and Hebrew words for ìSpiritî
can also mean ìwindî and ìBreathî. The wind (or Spirit) of God
moves over the waters in Genesis 1. The Breath (or Spirit) of God
is breathed into the man created n Genesis 2. Jesus breathed on
his disciples and said ìReceive the Holy Spiritî in John 20, the
author of the second letter to Timothy tells us that all
scripture is inspired (or Breathed) by God, and the author of the
second letter of Peter tells us that the work of prophecy is
moved by the Spirit (or breath) of God. 

As far as I can understand it, the fundamentalist/ literalist way
of understanding inspiration is that God breathed his Holy Spirit
into the authors of scripture, filling them up with exactly
everything that God wanted them to put in their various books,
and the authors ëbreathed outí, as it were, by writing down
exactly what the Spirit had given them, no more, no less, and no
room for error.

But I think that such a view misses something very important.
Breathing is not something you do just once. It is not an event -
it is a process. When God put the spirit of life in the first
creatures, and the first human beings, they did not just breathe
once - they started breathing, and continued doing so until they
died. 

When Jesus breathed on his disciples and said ìreceive the Holy
Spiritî, he was not giving a once- and- for- all gift to those
particular disciples gathered there in the upper room; he was
fulfilling his promise that the Spirit of God would come upon the
Church as comforter and guide, and be with us forever. 

When the Holy Spirit inspired the authors of the Bible, both the
ancient Jewish prophets and the apostles and other authors of the
New Testament, he began a process of writing, authorising,
promulgating and interpreting the Scriptures which continues to
this day. The authors wrote about what they had experienced, and
their understanding of God. The Priests of the Temple, Jewish
Rabbis, and councils of the Church, decided which books should be
regarded as ìscriptureî, and the work of interpreting the
Scriptures goes on in Churches, Synagogues, classrooms, lecture
theatres, across dining room tables, on the internet, and in the
private study and prayers of people of faith to this day. 

The inspiration - the breath of God - was not a single event
experienced solely by the Biblical authors; rather it is
something which goes on, like breathing, and keeps the faith of
those who read the Scriptures alive to this day.

If inspiration is the source of our Scriptures, prophecy is the
word we use for a significant part of what is contained in the
various books of the Bible. In common English the word ìprophecyî
is usually understood as meaning the same thing as ìpredicting
the futureî, but in the Bible the word refers to proclaiming the
words and will of God. Sometimes Prophecy involves promises and
warnings in relation to future events, but it is never a
straight-out, non- negotiable ìthis is what is going to happenî.
An easy way of remembering the distinction is to say that
Prophecy is not so much FORE-telling as FORTH-telling.

When the author of the second letter of Peter wrote about
prophecy, s/he was not referring to the source of prophecy, but
rather to the way that it should be interpreted.

We are reminded (verse 19) that prophecy is like a lamp shining
in a dark place - it is given to us by God to lead us home. But
the crucial thing is that no-one can hear or read the words of
prophecy and claim that they have a full and perfect
understanding. One personís interpretation is just that; one
personís interpretation. 

It is not the interpretation of one person that matters, but that
of _people_ (note the plural - men in the original Greek, men and
women in the politically correct NRSV) moved by the Holy Spirit
which proceeds from God. (some of the oldest surviving
manuscripts have ìHoly men of God spokeî in verse 21). 

In other words, it is the church, the community of faith, the
holy ones of God, who interpret and expound scripture, and
forthtell the words of God to the world. This is what happened in
history - once the authors of the New testament had written their
letters and books, it took nearly 400 years for the Church to
reach a consensus on which books should be included, and which
books should be excluded from the Bible. 

Prophecy is not something that stopped in the Hebrew Scriptures,
nor did it stop after the ministry of Jesus or the writing of the
book of revelation. The work of prophecy - forthtelling the words
and will of God - is the vocation of every Christian. Prophecy is
proclaiming the word of God - Jesus Christ to the world. The
written text of the Bible is one of the most important tools and
resources in this proclamation, but the community of faith and
the ongoing breathing of the Holy Spirit in the Church are also
essential to make prophecy real in the world today. 




----------------------

This is the draft of a sermon I will be preaching at Solemn
Evensong on Sunday 16 August at 5:00 pm in St George's Cathedral,
Perth. If you are in Perth and you want to come along and see me
sing, wave incense about, and preach, you would be very welcome.

I will also be using this material as the basis of a talk on "The
Ancient Vocation of Prophecy" with the UWA branch of the
Australian Student Christian Movement at 1pm, on Tuesday 18
August in the  New Prayer Room, 2nd floor, Guild Building, UWA. 
I am assuming that the meeting will follow the usual ASCM pattern
of talk, discussion, and further discussion over a few drinks at
the Uni Tavern. 

Constructive comments are welcome. Deconstruction, cries of
"rationalistic liberal rubbish", mouse-pouncing, etc. are welcome
too (as if I had any choice).

Cheers

N+

Nigel B. Mitchell

From:  (Nigel B. Mitchell)
Newsgroups: aus.religion.christian
Subject: Re: Prophecy and Inspiration
Date: Tue, 11 Aug 1998 03:55:58 GMT

By way of some supporting evidence to my post on 2 Peter 1:20-21:

The main commentaries I consulted were:
CEB Cranfield in the Torch Bible Commentaries series (SCM, 1960)
JND Jelly in the Blacks New Testament Commentaries series (1969)
Bo Reicke in the Anchor Bible Series (Doubleday, 1980)

All of these are widely published and respected Biblical
scholars. None are generally regarded as 'liberal' - in fact,
Cranfield and Kelly would usually be considered rather
conservative.

All three commentators record similar information about the
authorship of 2 Peter, and the reliance of the epistle upon the
letter of Jude. The fact that 2 Peter omits Jude's references to
pseudepigraphal material, the marked difference in style between
1 Peter and 2 Peter, and the fact that early commentators like
Eusebius and Origen questioned both the Petrine authorship and
the canonicity of the letter, all are listed as indications that
the letter is most likely to be a product of the hellenistic
church in the second century. According to Kelly, the debate
about the canonicity and usefulness of the letter persevered into
the reformation, where Luther is reported to have said of both
Jude and 2 Peter that "the Gospel light does not shine very
luminously through them". (page 225).

On the specific passage of 2 Peter 1:20-21;

---

Reicke says that the author wishes to stress that Prophecy is the
most reliable source of our faith. It takes the place of
apostolic eyewitness, as a guarantee of God's love for us, the
Holy Spirit's action in us, and God's will for all the world.

Prophecy is never a matter of private interpretation- it belongs
in the context of the community of faith, under the guidance of
the Holy Spirit. False prophets are those who take the teachings
of holy Scripture and try to use them against the faithful. 

The implications are that for a true prophecy (forthtelling of
the word of God), three things are essential:
1. Guidance of the Holy Spirit.
2. Acknowledged leadership in the Church (2 Timothy 3:17)
3. Consensus of the faithful (verse 19 - _we_ have the prophetic
word). 

---

Kelly writes:
Much the most natural meaning, and the one which suits the
context best as well as agreeing with the lexical evidence... is
the one implied by the printed translations, viz. that no
individual is entitled to interpret prophecy, or scripture
generally, according to his personal whim. It is precisely this,
... that the trouble makers are guilty of, and it leads in the
writer's view to disaster. Bui it _one's own interpretation_ is
excluded, what is the approved alternative with which 'Peter'
contrasts it? ...it is the interpretation intended by the Holy
Spirit, whose inspiration lies behind the prophecy. 
...there can be little doubt that he is not thinking of the
Spirit- endowed individual or prophet in the community, but
rather of apostolic authority as embodied in the recognised
ministers and charismatic teachers of local churches who, as he
understands it, bear the Spirit's commission. The notion of the
official Church as the appointed custodian of scripture is
evidently taking shape. (page 324)

---

Cranfield writes:

...readers are to attend to the Old Testament scriptures, but in
doing so they will need to be on their guard against the false
interpretations of those who interpret the Scriptures according
to their own personal caprice and by mere human ingenuity,
instead of by the help of the Holy Spirit and within the
fellowship of the faithful. The futility of such PRIVATE
INTERPRETATION (Cranfield's caps) is obvious, when one considers
the origin of Scripture.

---

(2 Timothy 2:11-14 NRSV)  The saying is sure: If we have died
with him, we will also live with him;  if we endure, we will also
reign with him; if we deny him, he will also deny us;  if we are
faithless, he remains faithful-- for he cannot deny himself.
Remind them of this, and warn them before God that they are to
avoid wrangling over words, which does no good but only ruins
those who are listening.

Cheers


N+

Nigel B. Mitchell