[B-Greek] 2 Peter 1:20 Most contradicted translation in NT

Linda Harris ljoharris at ckt.net
Thu Jan 5 14:07:36 EST 2006


The MOST contradicted translation of any verse in the New 
Testament 

I hope this comes out printed OK, I seem to be having a 
hard time with cut and paste. Also I hope this is not too 
long, and that I have not gone over the line on anything, 
as I have tried not to, and just to state the facts as I 
have seen them.

2 PETER 1:20 

TOUTO PRONTON GENOSKONTES OTI PASA PROPHETIA GRAPHES IDIAS 
EPILUSEOS OU GINETAI, 

It was in using the interlinear and reading this verse 
over 10 years ago that set me on a course to learn Greek. 
This was because I saw the following contradiction. 

KJV
2 Peter 1:20
Knowing this first, that no prophecy of scripture is of 
any PRIVATE interpretation. 

IDIAS translated private and referring to a "person", as 
in you or I or a "person" dose not give their own private 
interpretation to the scriptures. 

Englishman's Greek N.T. Interlinear Translation and 
Interlinear-Greek (same in both)

this first knowing, that any prophecy of scripture ITS OWN 
interpretation is not, 

Its own, as in referring back to the scriptures themselves 
a "thing", in that this "thing" the scriptures do not 
interpret themselves.. 

So what is this word translated PRIVATE in the KJV and ITS 
OWN in the Interlinear actually referring to a PERSON, 
place or THING? Translators can't seem to get it figured 
out as you will see by the following translations. Not 
only 
are there contradictions on who or what this verse is 
referring to, but also as to weather it refers to how we 
got the scriptures or what we do with 
them after we got them. 

But know this first of all, that no prophecy of Scripture 
is a matter of one's own interpretation, (NASB) 

[person i.e you or I, what we do with it] 

[Yet] first [you must] understand this, that no prophecy 
of Scripture is [a matter] of any personal or private or 
special interpretation (loosening, 
solving). (AMPLIFIED BIBLE) 

[person, you or I, what we do with it] 

knowing this first, that every prophecy of Scripture did 
not come into being of its own interpretation; (GREENS 
LITERAL INT.) 

[thing, and how it came to be] 

Above all, you must understand that no prophecy of 
Scripture came about by the prophet's own interpretation. 
(NIV) 

[person i.e. prophet, how originated] 

First of all, you should know this: no prophecy of 
Scripture comes from one's own interpretation, (CSB) 

[person, any person, i.e. confusing use of language since 
interpretation is what's done after you have prophecy or 
scripture, and everyone knows it dose not come by 
interpretation.] 

Above all, you must understand that no prophecy in 
Scripture ever came from the prophets themselves (NLT) 

[person, i.e. the prophet, and how it originated.] 

knowing this first of all, that no prophecy of Scripture 
comes from someone's own interpretation (ESB 

[person, any person, and how it originated.] 

But you need to realize that no one alone can understand 
any of the prophecies in the Scriptures. (CEV) 

[person, and referring to a person reading the scriptures 
by themselves and trying to understand them.] 

Most of all, you must understand this: No prophecy in the 
Scriptures ever comes from the prophet's own 
interpretation. (NCV) 

[person, in this case the prophet and how the scripture 
came to be.] 

Understand this first: No part of the Holy Writings was 
ever made up by any man. (NLB) 

[person, any person and what is "contained" in scripture. 
Not referring to how we got it or how we interpret it 
after we got it, but rather that whatever is in it is not 
made up. It seems as if they are seaching the context in 
all these for some help.] 

The main thing to keep in mind here is that no prophecy of 
Scripture is a matter of private opinion. (THE MESSAGE) 

[unless that is, you are Eugene Peterson who wrote the 
Message. Here referring to a "person" and what that person 
dose with scripture. Dose he mean that it's not a matter 
of private opinion in that you can't have a private 
opinion. Or dose he mean that if you have an opinion you 
can't keep it private you have to share it.] 

First of all you must understand this, that no prophecy of 
scripture is a matter of one's own interpretation, (RSV) 

[Person and what that person dose with scripture. Here 
again this word "matter" "It's not a matter of this, it's 
not a matter of that, what's it a matter of? And for that 
matter where did they come up with this word?]

Understanding this first: That no prophecy of scripture is 
made by private interpretation. (D-RB) 

[...not sure, but again how scripture came, however again 
confusing usage of the word "interpretation".] 

Most important, you must understand this: No prophecy in 
the Scriptures ever comes from a person's own
interpretation. (Easy to Read Version) 

If not Easy to UNDERSTAND Version, and again a whacked 
out usage of the word "interpretation", and referring to 
how scripture came may have come to be.] 

Of this first, taking note- that, no prophecy of 
scripture, becometh, self-solving; (Emphasized Bible) 

[thing, referring back to scripture its self, and what 
scripture would do with scripture, or NOT do.] 

First, you must understand this: No prophecy in Scripture 
is a matter of one's own interpretation (God's Word Trans) 

[person, and what a person dose with scripture.] 


Being conscious in the first place that no man by himself 
may give a special sense to the words of the prophets. 
(Bible in Basic English) 

[person, not just in general but "by himself" without a 
"group", and what that person may NOT do with scripture 
when alone at 3 am. is my interpretation of what they are 
trying to say here.] 

knowing this first, that [the scope of] no prophecy of 
scripture is had from its own particular interpretation 
(Darby) 

[...not sure here, but he is referring to the scripture or 
a person or something.] 

this first knowing, that no prophecy of the Writing doth 
come of private exposition, (Young's Literal) 

[........?] 

First of all, you must understand this: No prophecy in 
Scripture is a matter of one's own interpretation, (ISV) 

[person and what they do with it.] 

But, above all, remember that no prophecy in Scripture 
will be found to have come from the prophet's own 
prompting. (Weymouth's) 

[person, a prophet and how they came to do it.] 

Knowing this first, that not every prophetic writing is 
made clear in its own book. (Peshitta - Lamsa Trans.) 

[thing, scripture and what scripture dose not do.]
  
All the early translations were pretty much like the KJV 
using the word "private" referring to a "person", except 
for Coverdale and Wycliff 

And this shal ye knowe first, that no prophecie in the 
scripture is done of eny priuate interpretacion (Coverdale 
1535) 

[thing, the scripture and how it came about. But again a 
confusing usage of the word interpretation.] 

And firste vndurstonde ye this thing, that ech prophesie 
of scripture is not maad bi propre interpretacioun; 
(Wycliff 1395) 

[thing, and how scripture came to be, i.e not by propere 
interpretation, sill a confusing usage of this word.] 

A few more English Translations 

2 Peter 1:20 Of this, first, taking note--that, no 
prophecy of scripture, becometh, self-solving; (Rotherham) 

[thing, scripture its self] 

First of all, you should know this: no prophecy of 
Scripture comes from one's own interpretation (Holman) 

[person and how it came about.] 

knowing this first, that NO prophecy of the Scripture came 
into being of its own private interpretation. (MKJV , 
Green)

[thing, and how scripture did not originate by the 
scripture its self.] 

knowing this first, that EVERY prophecy of Scripture did 
not come into being of its own interpretation; (LITV, 
Green) 

Does anyone out there see what I mean here?

Besides the fact that they can't seem to agree on weather 
or not it's referring to a peron and what that person dose 
with the scriptures. They also cannot agree on just WHAT 
person it's referring to, or how many people it's 
referring to, the prophet or prophets, or the person or 
"persons" who may be reading the prophecy after the fact. 

They cannot agree on the action being or not to be taken 
and by whom or by how many. Some translate it as it is not 
how we got the scriptures, while others indicate it's what 
we do with the scriptures after we've got them, and some 
what the scriptures may do to one another. Some to the 
prophet, some to the scriptures themselves, and some to 
whoever may be reading it. While others say that whatever 
it is you are doing don't do it ALONE or BY YOURSELF. 

The experts on this just cannot seem to agree what it is 
you should know first when taking heed to the scriptures. 

They also cannot agree on what to do with the word GENETAI 
or exactly what to put that negative OU. 

There is one thing they agree on, and that is there is 
something we ought to know. Even though they may use 
different words the idia comes accross clear as a bell.

"Knowing this first..., this first knowing..., But know 
this first of all..., [Yet] first [you must] understand 
this,..., Above all, you must understand that..., knowing 
first of all..., But you must understand this..., But you 
need to realize....., Most of all you must understand 
this..., Understand this first..., The main thing to keep 
in mind here..., Most important you must understand 
this..., Of this first taking note..., First you must 
understand..., Being conscious in the first place...," 



Another thing that is for certain here is that the words 
"GRAPHES IDIAS EPILUSEOS" is all 

in the Genitive Case making one noun limit upon another 
and that these three words are basically all to be
understood together and since the time they were written 
have in fact become their very own phrase in Latin first 
and then in English. 

"GRAPHES IDIAS EPILUSEOS" 

"Scriptura sacra sui ipsiu interpres." 

"Scripture is its own interpreter" 

However in Peter's version he added OU GINETAI to the 
phrase. Which if added to the Greek and Latin phrases then 
pan out as: 

"GRAPHES IDIAS EPILUSEOS OU GINETAI" 

"Scriptura sacra sui ipsiu interpres.NON FIT" 

"Scripture is OU its own interpreter," 


IF this is actually what Peter was trying to say or saying 
out right, then it would have serious implications. Even 
in some of the translations above they tried to indicate 
this 
without going all the way into the literal meaning of the 
words, simply because of these very "implications". For 
the reason, that practically every person above would have 
been taught "Scripture interprets Scripture", and it dose 
so by such and such a "system". 

They may not have all been indoctrinated into the same 
"system" but they each had one. 

The phrase GRAPHES IDIAS EPILUSEOS" was in fact the main 
arguing point of the Reformation, though it was not argued 
in Greek but in English and Latin by the Reformers and the 
Catholic Church. 

Baker's Theological Dictionary under Hermeneutics states: 

d. The Self-Interpretation of Scripture. 

At the time of the Reformation the Roman Catholic Church 
insisted that it was gifted with the grace of 
interpretation and therefore it knew instinctively the 
intention of Scripture The Reformers reject this claim and 
set in its place the rule that Scripture is its own 
interpreter (Scriptura sacra sui ipsius interpres). That 
which raised this issue was the problem created by the 
darker or more difficult passages of Scripture. 
...."Scripture interprets Scripture" has also been called 
the hermeneutical circle. 

Excuse me, but when did going in circles become a "good" 
thing?

Historically the Roman Catholic Church jumped on the same 
band wagon and started coming up with their own "circles" 
using the same rule as set forth by the Reformers, 
"Scriptura sacra sui ipsiu interpres." Baker's Theological 
Dictionary states: 

"It had become fashionable to study the Bible and attend 
public lectures on the Scripture. All over Europe by 1540 
[hum only 5 years after the burning of William Tyndale for 
translating the thing to begin with.] Catholic as well as 
Protestant commentaries multiplied as people searched for 
an answer to the question raised by the Reformation." 

Which was if you remember WHO had the AUTHORITY to 
interpret scriture. 

Who has the authority to tell "you" what the Bible means. 
And obviously according to most of the translations above 
of 2 Peter 1:20, YOU are the last person to decide. 
Baker's goes on to state: 

"Parallel to Protestant Biblical study there is also a 
Catholic fascination for the new hermeneutic and theology. 
A crisis not only of vocabulary but of authority 
resulted." 

It became not only a question of WHO had the authority to 
interpret scripture for "you", but "what" or "who's system 
or circle" you should apply when you read the scripture. 
Which reminds me I didn't even think of giving the 
Catholic Bible translation of this verse. Called "The New 
American Bible" you can check out the verse at 
http://www.catholic.org/phpframedirect/out.php?url=http://www.nccbuscc.org/nab/bible/index.htm 
, since they say you cannot even copy a "part" of it 
without permission. However in this translation it uses 
the word "personal", referring to a "person",namely you or 
I. 

So list members "TOUTO PRONTON GENOSKONTES OTI PASA 
PROPHETIA GRAPHES IDIAS EPILUSEOS OU GINETAI,". What is 
this actually saying in basic Greek and English? What dose 
the word "idias" refer to a "person" or a "thing"? I have 
found two places in the N.T. text where the word "idias" 
is used in referring to a "thing" and not a "person". 

Luke 6:44 
For every tree is known by his own (idias) fruit. 

Could just as easily be translated "its own fruit", since 
it is referring to a "thing", a "tree", even though it is 
parabolic for the "fruit" in a persons life, Jesus is 
still referring to a literal tree. 

Luke 15:19 

If ye were of the world, the world would love his own 
(idias): 

The "world" is a "thing", could just as easily been 
translated "its own". 

Besides not knowing exactly how to handle this word 
"IDIAS" in 2 Peter 2:20 the translators also had a hard 
time with the word "OU GINETAI". 

Though Greek and English differ because Greek is basically 
based on inflection and English on "word order", in 
English translations they placed that word OU (NO) all 
over the place. 

no prophecy is....(KJV and most others.)

interpretation is not...(Greek -English INT)

Scripture did not come into being...(Green's INT)

no prophecy of Scripture comes....CSB

no one alone....(CEV)

No part of the Holy Writing..(NLB)

no man by himself...(Bible in Basic English)

not every prophetic writing is made 
clear....(Pshitta-Lamsa)

prophesie of scripture not maad (made).....(Wycliff)

Translators did often not know what to do with the word 
GINETAI, translating it into such forms as "comes, 
becomes, is, come into being, came from, comes from, came 
about, made up or just trying to leave out any reference 
to it whatsoever. And as with the word "OU" they cannot 
agree on which word to attach GINEATI to, the prophet, a 
person, the interpretation et. On top of that often 
separating OU GINETAI, making OU refer to one word which 
making GINETIA refer to another.

The only thing they do agree on is there is "something" 
that needs to be known and it's pretty important (whatever 
it is). 

Any IDIAS?

Linda Harris



More information about the B-Greek mailing list