# Interpreting Prophecy



## C. Matthew McMahon (Aug 5, 2005)

Under the guidance of the Holy Spirit, and with understanding that Christ is the center subject matter, we have certain principles to follow:

Literal Interpretation 
Context
Scripture Interprets Scripture 
Progressive Revelation 
Accommodation 
One Interpretation 
Harmony of Scripture 
Genre 
Grammar & Syntax 
Historical Background 

Give the obvious principles we have, what are the basic principles for interpreting _prophecy_? And since we have takne so much time in talking about the Psalms (with EP) what are some of the principles of interpreting the Psalms?

[Edited on 8-5-2005 by webmaster]


----------



## Contra_Mundum (Aug 5, 2005)

When I am interpreting the Psalms, I try to understand the composition as a single piece, to see where the poet is going himself, in order to be led there. I try to understand his frame of mind, to see his vision, to grasp the historic moment that put pen to paper. I think it is a bit of "artistry" itself, this sharing with the author his own art (however dimly and fleetingly), in order to grasp its full significance.

I find the prophets are my biggest challenge in preaching. For it is a bit similar to the art of interpreting poetry (much of it is poetry). In this case, at least in part if not in the main, one is _preaching on or about other men's preaching._ In other words, its not simply a matter of interpreting that _to which_ they are prophesying, but understanding the _form_ as indispensible to the presentation (harking back to the "medium is the message" formulation). I have found that my later attempts (incorporating this concept in my thinking) have greatly improved my earlier, rather awkward handling, without claiming that I have reached maturity here.

The other piece that I think is truly crucial to a proper interpretation of prophecy is that we adopt the true perspective. The prophet is not so much one who stands on a higher bit of ground and sees a little farther (or has his eye to the telescope and relays the data to those below. The prophet is one taken to God's throne to receive his message and returns to men to proclaim it. The prophet has seen with God's eyes, from the eternal perspective, the details and affairs of men, with special reference to Redemptive history. Without impuning the verbal plenary inspiration of his words, it is not too much to claim that he labors to put into human language that which he has seen and been told. Then he too goes back to study it for himself (1 Pet 1:10-11).

(and by this expression I am SO FAR from meaning to say (for example) that John saw helicopters and tanks and tried to describe them to his first century readers!--that caricature is more akin to the "telescope" seer than someone "caught up to the third heaven," or taken bodily or in a vision to the throne of God)


Perhaps I can add here that I think the concept of "double fulfillment" of prophecy is, at best, a very poor choice of language by those who advocate it; and really, if pressed, I have to say I doubt that there is truly such a thing. "Partial fulfilments" are in truth simply pre-cursors, foreshadowings of the genuine article. They in no way fill up the prophetic Word. But the subject does mean an additional challenge to interpretation of prophecy. A prophet may begin in one way _and end in a different way._ I mean, he may begin speaking of temporal events and even predictions, and launch from there into messianic raptures. Or he may speak first to God's ultimate purposes, and transition into a present or immediate future relation (to himself and his hearers). Understanding "where he's been" (heaven) and "what he's doing" (preaching) helps us to comprehend his presentation.


----------

