Biblical Inspiration in 2 Timothy 3:16

By H. Wayne House

[H. Wayne House, Assistant Professor of Biblical Studies and Greek, LeTourneau College, Longview, Texas]

To the evangelical community the doctrine of Scripture is one of the most important truths, since transgression at this point leaves all other doctrines in the nebulous sea of uncertainty. In order to demonstrate the accuracy of this position many evangelicals turn to various passages of God’s Word which aver this precious truth. One of these passages is 2 Timothy 3:16. This text is considered crucial as an internal argument for the inspiration of the Bible.[1] However, before one can make a value judgment as to the benefit of 2 Timothy 3:16 to the doctrine of Scripture, one must have an accurate translation from the original text. Unfortunately this is the very problem of 2 Timothy 3:16—opinions differ as to its proper translation. Many scattered references have been made about this passage in numerous theological works but few adequately discuss the difficult grammatical, syntactical, and lexicographical problems the passage poses. This writer’s intention is to discuss the most probable translation and to note the implications of that translation for the doctrine of inspiration.

Second Timothy 3:16 reads in the Authorized Version, “All Scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness.” Whether this is an absolutely accurate rendition of the Greek is a point of disagreement.

The Translation of Πᾶσα

The first point that needs to be examined is whether πᾶσα should be translated “all” or “every.” The New American Standard Bible, The New Testament: A Translation in the Language of the People (Williams), The New Testament in Modern English (Phillips), The New Testament in the Language of Today (Beck), and the Revised Standard Version follow the Authorized Version in its translation of the word as “all.” The American Revised Version as well as The New English Bible translate it “every.”

Bernard is quite persuaded that this word should be rendered “every.” “The absence of the article assures us that we must render ‘every Scripture’ and not (with the Authorized Version) ‘all Scripture’; the thought is not of the Old Testament regarded as an organic whole, but of every individual ‘Scripture’ therein.”[2]

Referring to Bernard’s statement, Guthrie, who leaves room for question, states the following:

Bernard decides emphatically for “every” on the basis of the absence of the article, but Simpson points out analogous cases where pas is used in a semi-technical phrase and where the meaning “every” is ruled out, e.g. Acts 2:36 where “all the house of Israel” is clearly demanded (see also Eph 2:21; 3:15; Col 4:12). Yet it may well be in all these exceptions the pas draws attention to the partitive aspect of the expression, and, if that is so, the present phrase may mean Scripture as viewed in each separate part of it.[3]

In concurrence with the observation of Guthrie, πᾶς when used with an anarthrous noun is translated “every” in order to call attention to the individual members of the class denoted by the noun.[4] However, when the noun accompanying πᾶς is a proper noun or collective term,[5] the adjective may be translated “the whole” or “all.”[6] In agreement with the foregoing, Moule says that the translation “every inspired Scripture” is most unlikely, and he suggests that the proper meaning is that “the whole of Scripture is inspired.”[7]

Although the American Revised Version and The New English Bible translated πᾶσα “every” in 2 Timothy 3:16, they did not always translate it that way. In Matthew 3:15; Acts 2:36; 7:22 they translate it “all.” An examination of γραφή in its more than fifty occurrences in the Greek New Testament reveals that it was considered a technical term or proper noun.[8] Thus when it occurred with πᾶς it did not need the article and therefore was translated “all” or “the whole.”[9] Hendriksen summarizes this point well.

It is not true that the absence of the article compels us to adopt the translation of the A.R.V, “every scripture.” The word Scripture can be definite even without the article (I Peter 2:6; II Peter 1:20). Similarly πᾶς =Λσραήλ means “all Israel” (Rom 11:26)…. But even if the rendering “every scripture” be accepted, the resultant meaning would not differ greatly, for if “every scripture” is inspired, “all scripture” must be inspired also.[10]

Thus it is concluded that when πᾶς is used with a technical noun it is better to render it “all” rather than “every.”

The Significance of Γραφή

The Greek word used for “Scripture” in 2 Timothy 3:16 is γραφή. In extra-biblical Greek it simply meant “a writing” or “letter.”[11] Usually this word is articular, but even when it is anarthrous the meaning is not changed.[12] It is never used anarthrously in the New Testament for a single book, though this occurs elsewhere in Hellenistic Judaism.[13] In the New Testament it exclusively means “Scripture,”[14] as an examination of its occurrences in the New Testament reveals.[15]

The rendering “writing” or “passage” for γραφή is thus inappropriate and inaccurate. If γραφή were translated “writing” and if θεόπνευστος is a predicate adjective, then the phrase could be rendered “All writing is God-breathed.” This of course would be disastrous to the doctrine of inspiration. However, if θεόπνευστος is an attributive adjective, then γραφή could be translated “writing” and the phrase would be rendered “All God-breathed writing.”

If γραφή means “Scripture,” to what Scripture does it refer? Lock says, “Wohlenberg would include any Christian writing which had become so recognized by this time…but this is scarcely consistent with [verse] 15, γραφή defining more exactly the γράμματα in which Timothy had been trained from childhood.”[16] Beegle concurs with Lock on this point. “The word ‘scripture’ (Greek, ‘graphe’) seems to refer back to the previous sentence in vs. 14–15 .”[17]

It may be that γραφή in 2 Timothy 3:16 extends beyond the γράμμα under which Timothy was reared. It is agreed that for Paul, the former meant at least the Old Testament. Cook states that in “this context the word ‘scripture’ probably refers to the Old Testament plus that portion of the New Testament which had been put into writing at this point.”[18]

Hendriksen proceeds a step further to allow γραφή to mean everything that was Scripture then, as well as that which would later be written. In other words it “means everything which, through the testimony of the Holy Spirit in the church, is recognized by the church as canonical, that is, authoritative.”[19] In summation γραφή may refer to the Word of God accepted by the Apostle Paul, and probably by the church, at the time of the writing of 2 Timothy and also that which was expected to come later under the inspiration of God.

The Meaning and Position of Θεόπνευστος

Two problems pertaining to this word call for discussion: the translation of the word, and its function in relationship to the word γραφή.

The Meaning of Θεοπνευστος

The problem posed in the translation of this word is whether it is a passive verbal form or an active verbal form. If it is a passive form, the word is emphasizing that Scripture’s source is the breath of God, that is, it originates in and comes from God. If the word has an active meaning, the emphasis is that the Scripture is filled with the breath of God, that is, it is inspiring.

Cremer at one time believed that θεόπνευστος is a passive form, but in later editions of his lexicon he argued that it is active.

A transference of meaning to inspired by God, given by God, can hardly be explained or vindicated; this meaning might, without straining the context, suit Ps.-Phocyl. 121, but certainly is inadmissible as an epithet of γραφή…. The signification, spirit-filled, breathing the Spirit of God, is in keeping with [the context]….[20]

Cremer recognizes that θεόπνευστος was originally passive in meaning. He simply says that the sense is “God-filled” rather than “God-breathed” which, he argues, readily passed into the active sense of “God-breathing” after the analogy of such words as ἄπνευστος or εὔπνευστος, which from “ill-or well-breathed” came to mean “breathing forth good or ill.”[21]

Barth allows this Greek word to have a passive meaning but believes that it also has an active meaning: “Scripture is given and filled and ruled by the Spirit of God and it is actively outbreathing and spreading abroad and making known the Spirit of God.”[22] However, one must realize that all words having a -πνευστος ending in compound form originally had the passive sense and that the active sense always is a derived one.[23] Such a compound may have both an original passive sense and a derived active sense, but not at the same time in a particular context as Barth is suggesting.

Some evangelicals have either not understood the meaning of this compound word or they have been careless in their definitions. For example, Moore states that inspiration “in the sense of Scripture literally means ‘God-breathed.’ The writers of the Holy Writ were thus ‘breathed upon and in’ by the Spirit of God.”[24] What Moore has missed is that 2 Timothy 3:16 does not say the writers were inspired but that Scripture is inspired (“Godbreathed” or “spirated”).

This word is defined by the lexicon as “inspired by God.”[25] The word is a compound of θεός and πνέω. Cremer states that the word cannot be traced to πνέω but only to ἐμπνέω since, as he says, the simple verb is never used of divine activity.[26] However, this is disproved in the Septuagint where examples contrary to his view may be found (see, e.g., Ps 147:18 and Isa 4:24).[27]

Words that are compounded with -πνευστος are called verbal adjectives and are formed from verb stems. In the broadest sense, they are participles, since they partake of both verbal and adjectival qualities and their basic idea is passive.[28] To understand how θεόπνευστος was formed, one must observe that verbal adjectives have the ending -τος added to the verb stem of the first or second aorist passive.[29] Then -τος is joined to πνευ-, which is the first aorist stem of πνέω.[30] Since πνέω has an epsilon as a short final vowel, a sigma is united to the aorist passive stem, forming πνευσ.[31] Then -τος is added to the first aorist passive stem and compounded with θεός. Very definitely this word is passive in its original sense. Other words with the same ending are primarily passive in meaning (though a few nonpassive meanings may be found in lexicons). Liddell and Scott give several examples of verbal adjectives with the passive sense.[32] There is then no morphological or lexicographical reason why the Greek word in 2 Timothy 3:16 should not be translated with the passive “God-breathed,” especially in view of the context.

The Position of Θεοπνευστος

The most difficult problem in 2 Timothy 3:16 is whether this word is in the attributive position or the predicate position. Either one is grammatically permissible, so the decision ultimately must be made by determining how this word relates to its context.

In the Greek construction πᾶσα γραφὴ θεόπνευστος καὶ ωηφέλιμος, the word “is” may be understood immediately before θεόπνευστος thus making it a predicate adjective (with the clause translated “All Scripture is God-breathed and also profitable”), or immediately after θεόπνευστος thus making it an attributive adjective (with the clause translated, “All God-breathed Scripture is also profitable”). However, a copula or verb is not necessary for an adjective to be classified as a predicate adjective.[33]

Cook says, “If the translation were to be ‘all God-breathed Scripture is also profitable,’ the word order would normally be pasa theopneustos graphe.”[34] In other words Cook is saying that θεόπνευστος normally would be identified as an attributive adjective if it precedes its noun. However, anarthrous adjectives are not so easy to distinguish as to whether they are predicate or attributive adjectives; they may be either. An articular attributive adjective occurs before the noun and directly after the article, but this is not always true concerning the anarthrous adjective. Although an articular attributive normally precedes the noun, the “rule is that an anarthrous adjectival attributive usually follows its substantive.”[35] Robertson gives several examples of constructions in which the anarthrous adjectives follow the nouns they modify.[36]

In a study of the construction, πας + noun + adjective, Roberts has convincingly demonstrated that usually in this exact sequence the adjective has the attributive sense. In all twenty-one exact parallels to 2 Timothy 3:16 the adjective is attributive, except 1 Timothy 4:4 in which there are intervening words between the adjectives and the noun.[37] Roberts also lists several examples from the Septuagint translation of the Pentateuch (Gen 1:21, 30; Exod 12:6; 18:26; Deut 1:39; 17:1) which have the same order and in which the adjectives are predominantly attributive.

In view of Roberts’s study one might assume that the question of whether the Greek word under discussion is a predicate adjective or an attributive adjective is a closed case. This is not true, however, for in 2 Timothy the noun has a technical meaning, which puts it in a classification different from those examples given above. The previous discussion on γραφή showed that it has the same force as a noun with an article, allowing the predicate adjective to follow. Thus although a predicate adjective would normally precede the noun, this is not a necessary requirement. Winer wisely states that one should not insist on any invariable rule in the Greek sentence except that of spontaneity.[38]

Many have condemned the American Revised Version and The New English Bible for translating θεοπνευστος as an attributive adjective. Several verses that have the same construction and yet are still translated predicatively (e.g., Rom 7:12; 1 Cor 11:30; 2 Cor 10:10) are sometimes cited in order to default the two above translations. An examination of these passages, though, reveals that they would be awkward in their contexts as attributives. In addition they do not have the same construction as that found in 2 Timothy 3:16. Thus defaulting the American Revised Version and The New English Bible by comparing them with texts having a similar construction must at least not be pressed.

One of the main objections to the word being translated as a qualifying adjective is that the καὶ which follows it in the sentence would not be needed. Some have tried to solve this difficulty by not translating καὶ. This is done by The New English Bible: “All God-breathed Scripture is profitable.” But it “is just as arbitrary to leave out καὶ as it is to translate it here by also…. That an inspired composition was also useful, was intelligible of itself indeed.”[39]

Alford, however, believes the adjunctive or ascensive use of this conjunction is perfectly permissible. Yet he does admit that the construction, as in 2 Timothy 3:16, is an awkward one. He cites Luke 1:36; Acts 26:26; Romans 8:29; and Galatians 4:7 as New Testament examples of the ascensive use of the word.[40] These examples are acceptable evidence that καὶ might be used as an ascensive in 2 Timothy 3:16 without doing injustice to the construction. Alford believes that to accept it as a connecting word deprives the sentence of symmetry. In addition, he says that if it is a connective, the following words must be understood as the purposed result of the God-breathing as well as the ὠφέλεια of the Scriptures, which is hardly natural.[41]

However, both views under discussion are acceptable. The main flaw among the two is not the ἵνα clause with καὶ as a connective of θεόπνευστος and ὠφέλιμος, but καὶ as an ascensive. The ἵνα is probably in this context introducing a result clause,[42] which can go smoothly with a phrase such as θεόπνευστος καὶ ὠφέλιμος; thus the sense is “All Scripture is God-breathed and all Scripture is profitable.”

From this discussion one may see that from a grammatical standpoint “God-breathed” may be considered as either an attributive adjective or a predicate adjective. Both views have their weak and strong points and neither one is conclusive grammatically. How then is one to know which to choose? Robertson clarifies the difference between these two kinds of adjectives: “The distinction between the attributive adjective and the predicate adjective lies in just this, that the predicate presents an additional statement, is indeed the main point, while the attributive is an incidental description of the substantive about which the statement is made.”[43]

Is “God-breathed” in 2 Timothy 3:16 to be considered as incidental and thus attributive? This writer thinks not! Θεόπνευστος is as much a main point as ὠφέλιμος. Paul had used πᾶσα γραφὴ in verse 16 in contrast to ἵερα γράμματα in verse 15 to show the additional value of apostolic Scripture. A “reminder of its divine origin is perfectly appropriate in a passage intended to impress on his disciple its value both as authenticating the Christian message and as a pastoral instrumental.”[44] The term θεόπνευστος is not just an incidental description of γραφή; it is also a focal point of the passage. Paul first shows Scripture’s origin and then he shows its practicality. Scripture’s main attestation is that it is God-breathed, that is, it originates in God. So “the emphasis is that Scripture partakes of the quality of the creative breath of God,”[45] and Scripture is profitable. This results in the (Christian) man being “perfect, thoroughly furnished unto all good works.” If Scripture is not God-breathed, the believer has no equipment for the spiritual battles of life; and if all Scripture is not God-breathed, the Christian cannot be sure as to which portion of Scripture he may hold as infallible truth.

The Authorized Version declares inspiration in 2 Timothy 3:16, whereas the American Revised Version implies it. One cannot be dogmatic in deciding the correct translation of πᾶσα γραφὴ θεόπνευστος, but with all things taken into consideration (syntax, word formation, and context) the balance of the argument is that 2 Timothy 3:16 should be translated, “All Scripture is God-breathed and is profitable….”

Notes

1. The doctrine of verbal plenary inspiration does not depend entirely on the interpretation of this passage. God has secured this doctrine in the very fabric and framework of His Word. See N. B. Stonehouse and Paul Woolley, eds., The Infallible Word: A Symposium, 3d ed. (Philadelphia: Presbyterian & Reformed Publishing Co., 1967); Benjamin B. Warfield, The Inspiration and Authority of the Bible (Philadelphia: Presbyterian & Reformed Publishing Co., 1970); and Clark Pinnock, Biblical Revelation: The Foundation of Christian Theology (Chicago: Moody Press, 1971).
2. J. H. Bernard, The Pastoral Epistles, Cambridge Greek Testament for Schools and Colleges (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1899), pp. 136-37.
3. Donald Guthrie, The Pastoral Epistles, Tyndale Bible Commentaries (Grand Rapids: Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Co., 1957), pp. 163-64.
4. William F. Arndt and F. Wilbur Gingrich, A Greek-English Lexicon of the New Testament and Other Early Christian Literature (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1957), p. 636. There are twenty-one examples of πᾶς in the construction found in 2 Timothy 3:16, i.e., πᾶς + the noun + the adjective. Examples include Matthew 7:17 (“every good tree”); Matthew 12:36 (“every idle word”); and Ephesians 1:3 (“every spiritual blessing”). The other examples are Acts 23:1; 2 Corinthians 9:8; Ephesians 4:29; Colossians 1:10; 2 Thessalonians 2:17; 2 Timothy 2:21; 4:18; Titus 1:16; 2:10; 3:1; Hebrews 4:12; James 1:17; 3:16; and Revelation 8:7; 18:2, 12; 21:19 (J. W. Roberts, “Note on the Adjective after πᾶς in 2 Timothy 3:16, ” Expository Times 76 [August 1965]: 359). While all these examples translate πᾶς by “every,” none has a noun with the technical meaning as seen in γραφή as mentioned in the main discussion above.
5. Joseph Henry Thayer, A Greek-English Lexicon of the New Testament (Grand Rapids: Zondervan Publishing House, 1962), p. 491.
6. Arndt and Gingrich, A Greek-English Lexicon, p. 637.
7. C. F. D. Moule, An Idiom Book of New Testament Greek (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1968), p. 95.
8. John Peter Lange, A Commentary on the Holy Scriptures, vol. 23: Thessalonians-Hebrews (Grand Rapids: Zondervan Publishing House, n.d.), p. 109. Referring to 2 Timothy 3:16 Lange writes, “Although the article is wanting here, nevertheless, by virtue of the connection, it is not to be doubted a moment that the Apostle is speaking decidedly and exclusively of the γραφή of the Old Covenant, as of a well-completed whole…. In no case can the absence of the article in a word so frequently used as γραφή surprise us, since it is employed, in fact, almost as a proper name” (ibid.).
9. Herbert Weir Smyth, Greek Grammar (Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 1920), p. 296. The usual construction would be ὁ πᾶς but “the article is not used with πᾶς if the noun, standing alone, would have no article.”
10. William Hendriksen, I-II Timothy , Titus, New Testament Commentary (Grand Rapids: Baker Book House, 1957), p. 301.
11. Henry George Liddell and Robert Scott, An Intermediate Greek-English Lexicon (Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1968), pp. 168-69.
12. A. T. Robertson, A Grammar of the Greek New Testament In the Light of Historical Research (Nashville: Broadman Press, 1934), p. 791.
13. Theological Dictionary of the New Testament, s.v. “γραφή,” by Gottlob Schrenk, 1:754.
14. Arndt and Gingrich, A Greek-English Lexicon, p. 165.
15. W. F. Moulton and A. S. Geden, A Concordance to the Greek Testament (Edinburgh: T. & T. Clark, 1967), p. 176.
16. Walter Lock, The Pastoral Epistles, The International Critical Commentary (New York: Charles Scribner & Sons, 1924), p. 110.
17. Dewey M. Beegle, The Inspiration of Scripture (Philadelphia: Westminster Press, 1963), p. 20.
18. W. Robert Cook, Systematic Theology in Outline Form (Portland, OR: Western Conservative Baptist Seminary, 1970), p. 36.
19. Hendriksen, I-II Timothy, Titus, p. 301. Simon Kistemaker, who kindly read this paper and made helpful comments, suggested that Paul’s use of γραφγ́ in 1 Timothy 5:18, in which he quotes from Deuteronomy 25:4 and Luke 10:7, may give evidence that Luke’s Gospel was considered canonical by Paul, or on the same level with the Torah. If Paul is quoting Luke, then that writing was in circulation much earlier than many have supposed. For example, F. W. Danker suggested the late 70s or early 80s (Jesus and the New Age according to St. Luke [St. Louis: Clayton Publishing House, 1972]), and W. G. Kummel suggested A.D. 70-90 (Introduction to the New Testament [Nashville: Abingdon Press, 1975]). Cf. J. A. T.Robinson, Redating the New Testament (Philadelphia: Westminster Press, 1976), for arguments concerning a date in the 60s. On the other hand it may be that Paul, being in close contact with Luke, was familiar with an Ur-Lukan document.
20. Hermann Cremer, Biblico-Theological Lexicon of New Testament Greek, 4th ed., trans. William Urwick (Edinburgh: T. & T. Clark, 1895), p. 731. See Benjamin B. Warfield, The Inspiration and Authority of the Bible, pp. 245-348, for a fuller discussion of γραφή and related material.
21. Cremer, Biblico-Theological Lexicon, p. 731.
22. Cited from Klaas Runia, Karl Barth’s Doctrine of Holy Scripture (Grand Rapids: Wm. B. Eerdmans Pubishing Co., 1962), p. 131.
23. Warfield, The Inspiration and Authority of the Bible, p. 280.
24. H. L. Moore, Eternal Questions (Cleveland, TN: White Wing Publishing House, 1968), p. 12.
25. Arndt and Gingrich, A Greek-English Lexicon, p. 357.
26. Cremer, Biblico-Theological Lexicon, p. 731.
27. Cf. Warfield, The Inspiration and Authority of the Bible, pp. 281-87.
28. Robertson, A Grammar, pp. 157, 1095.
29. William Watson Goodwin and Charles Burton Gulick, Greek Grammar (Waltham, MA: Blaisdell Publishing Co., 1958), p. 147.
30. Ibid., p. 153.
31. Smyth, Greek Grammar, p. 160.
32. Henry George Liddell and Robert Scott, comps., A Greek-Engish Lexicon, rev. Henry Stuart Jones and Roderick McKenzie (Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1940), p. 790-92. Also see Warfield, The Inspiration and Authority of the Bible, pp. 281-82.
33. Robertson, A Grammar, p. 656.
34. Cook, Systematic Theology, p. 36.
35. F. Blass and A. Debrunner, A Greek Grammar of the New Testament and Other Early Christian Literature, trans. and ed. Robert W. Funk (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1961), p. 251.
36. Robertson, A Grammar, p. 418.
37. Matthew 7:17; 12:36; Acts 23:1; 2 Corinthians 9:8; Ephesians 1:3; 4:29; Colossians 1:10; 2 Thessalonians 2:17; 2 Timothy 2:21; 4:18; Titus 1:16; 2:10; 3:1; Hebrews 4:12; James 1:17; 3:16; Revelation 8:7; 17:2; 18:2, 12; 21:19 .
38. Cited from Robertson, A Grammar, p. 417.
39. Lange, Thessalonians-Hebrews, p. 109.
40. Henry Alford, The Greek Testament, 4 vols. (Chicago: Moody Press, 1958), 4:397.
41. Ibid., p. 396.
42. Robertson, A Grammar, pp. 991-94.
43. Ibid., p. 656.
44. J. N. D. Kelley, Pastoral Epistles, Harper’s New Testament Commentaries (New York: Harper & Row, 1963), p. 203.
45. Cook, Systematic Theology, pp. 36-37.