God-Breathed

knowing this first, that no prophecy of the Scripture comes of private interpretation, for prophecy never came by [the] will of a person, _but_ holy men of God spoke being moved along by [the] Holy Spirit.
(2Pe 1:20-21) ALT

knowing this first, that no prophecy of scripture is of private interpretation. For no prophecy ever came by the will of man: but men spake from God, being moved by the Holy Spirit.
(2Pe 1:20-21) ASV

knowing this first of all, that no prophecy of Scripture comes from someone's own interpretation. For no prophecy was ever produced by the will of man, but men spoke from God as they were carried along by the Holy Spirit.
(2Pe 1:20-21) ESV

First of all, you must understand this: No prophecy in Scripture is a matter of one's own interpretation, because no prophecy ever originated through a human decision. Instead, men spoke from God as they were carried along by the Holy Spirit.
(2Pe 1:20-21) ISV

Knowing this first, that no prophecy of the Scripture is of any private interpretation. For the prophecy came not in old time by the will of man: but holy men of God spake as they were moved by the Holy Ghost.
(2Pe 1:20-21) KJV

knowing this first, that every prophecy of Scripture did not come into being of its own interpretation; for prophecy was not at any time borne by the will of man, but being borne along by the Holy Spirit, holy men of God spoke.
(2Pe 1:20-21) LITV

Something I heard on White Horse Inn, that made my day.
Ever met a Roman Catholic using those verses in defence of his infallible church and its right, the only valid right, to interpret Bible?
Well, I saw these verses in their real meaning today. I think the LITV renders it beautifully:

knowing this first, that every prophecy of Scripture did not come into being of its own interpretation; for prophecy was not at any time borne by the will of man, but being borne along by the Holy Spirit, holy men of God spoke.

Meaning: no writer wrote what he thought was correct, but what God breathed to be written. So the whole catholic argument is dissolved, because these verses are not about "who is to interpret", but rather, who is the Author.

Comments?