CHAPTER III

1) The prophecy presented here is the same as that written in 1 Tim. 4:1–3, but it is fuller in every way. In both passages, as in 2 Thess. 2:3, etc., Paul speaks by revelation and does not offer deductions of his own. Paul’s prophecy agrees with that spoken by Jesus in Matt. 24:11, 12 and yet it is not a mere repetition. There has been repeated fulfillment, and it is now in progress of fulfillment.

Paul prepares and fortifies Timothy. Paul now knows that his own life shall end soon. How much Timothy may have to face is not revealed, nor how long “the last days” until the Lord’s Parousia will continue. The one thing revealed is the grievousness of what is in store. During Paul’s own time errorists had arisen in the churches of his founding, foolish fanatics were disturbing the Christians in the province of Asia where Timothy was stationed. Worse times are impending, within the church and without it. The revelations Paul has received are God’s advance warnings to fortify his ministers and their churches. Paul, approaching his end, is passing these warnings on.

Now this realize, that in the last days there shall be present grievous seasons. For there shall be men (who are) self-lovers, money-lovers, boasters, haughty, blasphemers, disobedient to parents, ungrateful, impious, devoid of natural affection, held by no truce, slanderers, uncontrolled, untamed, no lovers of good, traitors, headstrong, puffed up, pleasure-lovers rather than God-lovers, having a formation of godliness but having denied the power thereof: and from these turn thyself away!

Δέ is merely transitional. Paul does not use the verb οἶδα which means to know intellectually but employs γινώσκω which means to know as something that affects Timothy and toward which he must assume a personal attitude; see 1:12, 18 regarding the difference. The present imperative bids Timothy ever to realize what Paul states here. Note that Paul says: “In the last days there shall be present seasons grievous,” i.e., within the longer period denominated “the last days” (no article is needed in the Greek) various short periods (καιροί) shall occur, and these shall be “grievous” or hard to be endured. “The last days” refer to the whole time from the completion of Christ’s redemptive work until his Parousia; that a part of these days was already past when Paul wrote is, of course, self-evident. Within the rest of these last days of the world the grievous seasons shall appear. The last days are not those few that occur immediately before the end. In 1 Tim. 4:1 “the later seasons” are quite the same as the grievous seasons of our passage. A καιρός always bears a special stamp, something that differentiates it as a “season.” Here it is the grievousness, the painfulness for Christians. Ἐνίστημι means “to stand right there”; in 2 Thess. 2:2 this precise meaning is important, see the discussion.

2) The seasons will be so grievous because of “the people” that live in them, οἱ ἄνθρωποι; their presence causes all this grievousness. By calling them “human beings” Paul refers to the people generally; the world is full of these vicious people, the church is surrounded by them, often invaded by them, and has a hard time of it because of them (note v. 6–8). The description is couched in predicative terms throughout, yet it is certainly not a jumble to resemble the motley mass, as has been thought, but an orderly survey. Paul is not dividing these people into so many groups, for these groups would always run together like liquids. The sins indicated appear in the men who are living during these seasons, in some men some of these sins are outstanding, in others, others of these sins; it is so in Rom. 1:29–31, which list is similar.

We count eighteen specifications, five at the beginning, three at the end, twelve (three fours) between. One may debate about the division, yet we think that “disobedient to parents” begins a new group, that the first five thus belong together, and that the next twelve may be divided into three fours, which leaves the last three that evidently belong together. Rhetorically five represents half of what might be said in the way of entire completeness (ten). The floodgates then open and three fours are poured out, each four being a minor completeness; the final three (if we call them three) are the climax of the whole list, which at the end deals with God.

“Self-lovers” properly heads the list and is balanced at the end by “pleasure-lovers rather than God-lovers.” Self—not God; the whole chain swings between these two. “Self-lovers, silver (money)-lovers” constitute a pair. Selfishness, which is evidenced by love of money, the means for gratifying what self wants, this is the mark of people, but it is developed to huge proportions.

Thus “boasters” (noun), bragging about self, and, companion to this, “haughty” (adjective), overbearing toward others. These two pairs are topped by “blasphemers” (adjective), not “railers” (R. V.) against men; they are so haughty as to rail against God and against men. With this fifth item a sort of climax is reached. These five are also broad characterizations so that Paul halts and then continues with more specific terms.

Men start young to be “to parents disobedient” (Rom. 1:30), to parents, whom God has placed over their children, whose very flesh and blood the children are, from whom the children receive countless benefactions. This is the frightful signature of our present time. “Ungrateful” for kindness and benefits received pairs well with disobedience. Ἀνόσιοι are “impious,” who respect and revere nothing that is sacred.

3) “Without natural affection” (Rom. 1:31). The Greek word is derived from “love” in the sense of natural attachment which is seen even in brutes. Even this has disappeared. Hence ἄσπονδοι, “making no truce” to end a state of war (Trench), thus “implacable.” Five terms in a series, all with α privativum. Next in line in this viciousness are “slanderers” who spread evil reports and invent them: then “uncontrolled,” nothing holding them in check; “untamed” and fierce like wild beasts, restrained by nothing; and a third α term: “non-lovers of good,” without love of anything good (beneficial) to others. But this term introduces the third quartet although its form links it to the second.

4) Without love for anything beneficially good; we see also the extreme of this, namely “traitors,” betrayers, who repeat the act of Judas. Next, “headstrong” (literally, such as fall forward), rash, plunging ahead without thought. “Puffed up” (perfect participle with present continuousness) as knowing it all (see 1 Tim. 3:6). This rounds out the quartet.

5) As was the case in v. 2, we now at the end have two “lover” terms, but they are not companions as they were in v. 2; these are opposites and thus form a unit as ending the list. The two are tied together: “pleasure-lovers rather than God-lovers,” the participle stating what their religion is. “Rather” means that in place of a love and liking for God, a love and liking for pleasure, their own pleasure as they want it, wholly control them. Beyond all question that is the mark of the world of men today. How it invades the membership of the church we see on every hand.

“Having the formation (μόρφωσις) of godliness,” a formation that looks as though it corresponds to the essence, “but the power thereof having denied,” concludes the picture of the people living during these periods. Some think that these people are Christians and thus refer the entire list to the people in the church despite the great difficulties that then ensue. For a church that is composed of such people would certainly be no church in any sense of the term. This is a description of people generally, but these strongly affect the church and contaminate its membership. Today we see this formation of godliness (an expression like that used in Rom. 2:20) in many churches, in Catholicism, modernism, the heretical sects like Christian Science, Russellism, etc. In so-called Christian lands the world, too, adopts many Christian forms in its lodgism, in having prayers offered on all sorts of occasions, in talking about God, religion, morality. But where is “the power thereof,” the divine, spiritual, regenerating, renewing, saving power of Christ and the true gospel? Totally absent. And this emptiness of power threatens the true churches and their members on all sides. Note the perfect tense: “having denied” and still continuing their denial. “When the Son of man cometh shall he find faith on the earth?” Luke 18:8.

6) “Keep turning away from these!” means when these appear in the future regarding which Paul is warning Timothy. This injunction cannot be separated from v. 1, etc., which deals with the future, nor can v. 6, etc., and the particular kind of people here described be placed into the present as though they were already at work in the neighborhood of Timothy. Paul’s prophetic description does not come to a conclusion immediately before this injunction, for this itself points back to “these,” the ἄνθρωποι just described; and v. 6 adds a further description of some who belong to “these,” namely the ones who are most dangerous for Christians in the time periods to come. And this description plainly marks them in advance for Timothy. “For” is frequently used to specify by introducing an. example after a summary statement. In v. 2–5 we have all of them, now we have a particular kind. The astonishing thing is that to this day we see Paul’s prophecy being fulfilled over and over again.

To these belong those sneaking into the houses and leading captive silly women heaped with sins, led by motley lusts, ever learning and never able to come to truth’s realization; in what manner, moreover, Jannes and Jambres withstood Moses. Thus also these withstand on their part the truth, men corrupted as to their minds, not standing the test in regard to the faith.

“Of these are” is the Greek idiom for “to these belong,” or “some of these are they who,” etc. In Paul’s time the Roman world was full of religious charlatans and quacks, but these attached themselves to prominent men and did not operate with a following of female dupes. Thus Elymas had duped Sergius Paulus (Acts 13:7); Simon had a large following in Samaria (Acts 8:9); we may, perhaps, also mention the sons of Sceva (Acts 19:13, 14). The future charlatans make women their specialty. “They insinuate themselves into houses and lead captive little women, γυναικάρια, Weiblein,” the neuter diminutive being used in a contemptuous way, which is expressed in our versions by the addition of the word “silly.”

Four descriptive participles picture this type of women: “having been heaped with sins” (this verb is found also in Rom. 12:20) and thus now being in this condition. We should not be hasty in accusing these women of sexual sins. These women are uneasy about many kinds of sins; they have a religious bent and are thus susceptible to quacks who come to them with their panacea. Nor are these Christian women. For the most part they are not Christian; some may be attached to Christian congregations, but these gentlemen browse in wide pastures. Women of this kind do not feel comfortable in churches where true repentance is preached as the cure for sins.

Moreover, these women are described as “being led by motley lusts,” varicolored sinful desires from which they do not care to free themselves. Again we should not restrict this to sexual desires. Some of them are rich and prominent; they also run after these deceivers and lionize them. Paul says that they are literally being taken as war-captives, are being held in thrall. The fact that a certain class of men is also captured goes without saying, but the notable thing is that these charlatans secure silly women as their dupes.

7) Ever learning, they are yet never able to come to realization of truth. Although they meet with the real gospel truth they find it unpalatable. Yet they are avid for learning. The fancied wisdom of “new truth,” odd and pretentious inner wisdom and all the stock-in-trade of spurious religionists, attract them. So they are ever learning and never learn anything real in the way of truth.

We quote Jerome: “Simon Magus founded his heresy aided by the help of the strumpet Helena; Nicolaus Antiochenus, founder of all impurities, led a feminine bevy; Marcion also sent a woman ahead for greater excess; Apelles had Philomone as a companion; Montanus corrupted Prisca and Maximilla at first with gold, then polluted them with heresy; Arius, when he deceived the world, first deceived the sister of the ruler; Donatus was aided by the resources of Lucilla; blind Agape led blind Elpidius; Priscillianus was joined by Galla.” We are unable to say how much dependence can be placed on this rather startling list. It can be put into the shade by modern instances. R., W. P., points to only two: the notorious Schweinfurth of some forty years ago with his “heavenly harem” in Illinois and the “House of David” exposed in the courts of Michigan. He might have added Brigham Young with his Mormon polygamy.

These are, however, the extreme cases. Much more to the point are the “religious cults” that purvey East Indian and other mysterious mysteries of the mystic order that are so attractive to wealthy ladies who lionize their leaders, and the proselyting heretical sects who make a specialty of creeping especially into Christian houses to make converts chiefly among religiously inclined women and actually winning so many. Kretzmann pictures them as smooth, slick-talking religious agents with ingratiating, clinging methods, insidiously introducing themselves, often as fatherly confessor brothers with a high-grade spirituality and great sanctity, actually taking such women captive body and soul. Women are their special prey. Paul certainly prophesied truly. Such periods have come only too often.

8) In ὅν τρόπον, the adverbial accusative, the antecedent is combined with the relative: “in what manner,” and δέ = “moreover.” These two Egyptian charlatans are not mentioned because of their pretended miracles, nor because they, too, were surrounded with silly women but because of their “withstanding” Moses, the verb even being repeated: “they withstood Moses, thus also these withstand on their part (middle voice) the truth”; it is the same verb that is used in Acts 13:8 when Elymas “withstood” Paul.

The fact that Paul mentions the names of these Egyptian sorcerers deflects some commentators into a discussion as to how Paul knew these names. The point is the fact that these two men illustrate the enormity of the crime that all these deceivers commit. Jannes and Jambres withstood God’s own servant Moses when they helped to harden Pharaoh’s heart against the voice of God; οὕτως καὶ οὗτοι, “thus also these,” in exactly the same way oppose themselves to the truth by hardening the hearts of their perverts against the blessed saving truth. For this reason all of these belong in the same class with these two Egyptians.

They do the same kind of work, and they are of the same character: “men corrupted as to the mind,” etc. The perfect participle indicates that the corruption began in the past and extends into the present; the passive points to the devil as having corrupted them. We need not supplement Paul’s psychology and let “the mind” include the heart; the mind is the one avenue through which the truth reaches the heart (the inner personality, the ἐγώ, the will). If that avenue is corrupted, the truth cannot get through, cannot even reach the heart to cleanse and to free it. Whoever has dealt with such minds knows that they react to the truth with the most pernicious objections to every part of it; they often also become blasphemous. The passive retains the accusative which was found in the active.

Ἀδόκιμοι means that, when they are tested in regard to the faith, they are found to be coins of base metal that must be discarded. Here, too, “the faith” is objective, quae creditur. They pretend to bring the true doctrine, “the truth,” claim that they have the pure gold to offer, that the church and its true ministers have falsified the doctrine. In this way they win adherents and prove dangerous to Christians. This is the great reason for Paul’s prophetic warning.

Some regard this as a reference to subjective faith and say that this is absent from the hearts of these men. But the Lord has not called us to look into men’s hearts, he has not supplied us with a touchstone that may be applied to their hearts. He has supplied us with his Word, thereby to test all that men offer as “the faith” or doctrine. When they oppose this truth and this true doctrine they stand ἀδόκιμοι, “rejected,” which completely settles their case. It is easy to apply this test; every test of the heart is impossible and is based entirely on inference. When a man is unsound as to the doctrine, we need no further witness. The fact that he cannot in his own heart be a believer is evident; yet this judgment we are ever to leave with the Heart-knower (καρδιογνώστης, Acts 1:24; 15:8) who has reserved this matter for his own judgment.

Where did Paul get the names “Jannes and Jambres”? From Jewish tradition; from the same source from which Stephen had obtained certain items of his address. This tradition preserved a number of correct facts that were not embodied in the Old Testament record. Certain sections of the genealogies recorded in Matthew and in Luke were obtained from this source. This question presents no difficulty. But this should be added: the Holy Spirit governed the New Testament writers and Stephen (who was filled with the Holy Spirit, Acts 6:5, 8, 15) so that they took only facts from this source and no fictions.

Additional information is given about these sorcerers in Jewish tradition, but whether it is correct or not does not concern us, for Paul did not use it, he recorded only the names. This shows the working of divine inspiration. We should not confuse this with revelation and say that the Spirit gave these names to Paul by direct revelation. In thousands of matters (take the genealogies) the knowledge of these was obtained in the natural way, but inspiration controlled the amount of information to be used, the manner of using it, and guarded against using anything wrong or mistaken.

Linguists study these names in order to arrive at their possible Egyptian etymology, etc. Whether this can be traced or not is problematic; nothing worthwhile has thus far been discovered. We do not know whether Jannes and Jambres (the form in which Paul has these names) were native Egyptians or foreigners; if they were the latter, it is wholly unlikely that they were Israelites or bore Jewish names as some have conjectured.

9) But they shall not proceed farther, namely farther than the success already indicated by their insinuating themselves into the houses, etc. Their vogue lasts only for one of the grievous “seasons” mentioned in v. 1 although such seasons will follow each other “in the last days” (the New Testament times). Why these men have only their season and then play out is added: For their folly shall be fully manifest (ἔκδηλος) to all even also as that of those got to be, namely that of Jannes and Jambres. They deceived Pharaoh and the Egyptians for a long time, but when Moses came, they were fully exposed. Elymas had deceived Sergius Paulus perhaps for years, then his deceit was exposed. Acts 8:11 mentions the “long time” during which Simon played his role in Samaria, but it, too, ended. They have their day. It is often only a brief one, at times it continues for a rather long time. Their ἄνοια, lack of mind and good sense, will sooner or later become apparent “to all”—which means not merely “to all who are especially concerned,” namely true Christians, but to men generally even as the senselessness of Jannes and Jambres got to be (historical aorist, ingressive) fully apparent, not only to the Israelites, but to the Egyptians as well.

Even the two future tenses show that this is prophecy. Why, then, advance the idea that Paul is speaking only about deceivers who were working at that time? The main object of this statement is not comfort for Timothy and the Christians. This exposure of folly exposes in advance, by prophecy, what these deceivers really are, namely men who deal only in folly. Many, often all, of their dupes will eventually see that they have allowed themselves to be fooled. Paul’s chief object is to fortify in advance.

10) Paul will soon be dead. In this testament of his to Timothy he thus reminds Timothy of the past. Thou, however, thou didst follow my teaching, my conduct, my purpose, my faith, my long-suffering, my love, my perseverance, my persecutions, my sufferings; what kind of things occurred to me in Antioch, in Iconium, in Lystra; what kind of persecutions I bore (up) under—and out of them all the Lord rescued me.

By no means let the profound feeling underlying these words escape the calm reader of today. The heart that wrote these lines, and the heart that first read them were stirred with repressed tears. Just a few lines, but oh, how much they call to mind! They present practically all of Paul’s labor as an apostle and all that was intertwined with it, namely Timothy’s labor and life as the apostle’s disciple and more than a disciple. We are gripped when we read this today. Paul is a master in concentration, and here it is that of restraint; the effect is to grip as with one strong grasp.

Σὺ δέ, and again σὺ δέ in v. 14, are always emphatic, and here they occur twice at the beginning of two sentences; “Thou, however, thou didst follow” in extreme contrast to the people mentioned in v. 2–8. “Follow” is the only proper word. Paul led, Timothy followed: apostle and disciple—father and child beloved (1:1)—leader and companion, associate, assistant—head and guide to inspire, direct, and lend courage—example and friend with whom ever to clasp hands—foremost to bear the brunt and never flinching or uttering complaint, ever noble, true, unconquered, and Timothy ever at his side. Yes, “thou, thou didst follow!”

The aorist is the proper tense because it presents the great historical past and that alone. Some texts substitute the perfect because they think that the present connotation should be added. All four aorists look back to the past only even as Paul knows that he is now close to the end. This is a constative aorist: it includes all of Timothy’s following during the entire past and it stops with that as constituting one grand, unalterable fact: “thou didst follow.” Why should anyone regard this as an ingressive aorist: “thou didst start to follow”? Look at the nine dative objects which cover the whole of Paul’s career and not only the first part of it. Credit and honor to Timothy, not for making a beginning, but for his entire past noble following.

The nine items are in proper order, each item just where it belongs: teaching, conduct, purpose—faith, longsuffering—love, perseverance—persecutions, sufferings; two threes; the second three being a pair each; the second three emphasizing the first three. On the “teaching” rest Paul’s “faith and longsuffering”—on his “conduct” rest his “love and perseverance”—on his “purpose” all that resulted from putting it into effect, all the “persecutions and sufferings,” and these are necessarily plurals. All have their articles so that “my” is to be repeated with each one in turn, so that each one stands out by itself (this touch is lost in our versions).

“My teaching” is the basis and ground of all else for Paul and for Timothy. Teaching is done by word of mouth, hence next in order is “my conduct”; Timothy followed Paul’s conduct in his own conduct. Basic in the case of both teaching and conduct is “my purpose” which Timothy also followed. In a way the purpose controlled, in another it crowned the teaching and the conduct.

“My teaching” was intended to engender faith in others, this being “my purpose”; but “my faith” refers to Paul’s own faith in his own teaching. What he taught others to believe he himself believed, and Timothy followed him in this respect. In order to indicate that “my faith” is linked with “my teaching,” “my faith” is paired with “my longsuffering,” for this is the quality needed when teaching others to believe: the mind must hold out long until the fruit comes. Some foreign missionaries taught and taught for years until the ice was finally broken. In this, too, Timothy had followed Paul. So “my faith, my longsuffering” build on “my teaching.”

“My love” builds on “my conduct,” for intelligent, purposeful ἀγάπη animated all Paul’s conduct. With it goes “my perseverance,” ὑπομονή, the brave patience which “remains under” all difficulties undismayed, not giving up, making “love” so strong for gaining its object. These two accompanied Paul’s “conduct,” and Timothy followed both.

Equally “my persecution, my sufferings” rest on “my purpose,” for the prosecution and attainment of Paul’s apostolic “purpose” involved for him so much persecution, so much personal suffering, and, crown of nobility, Timothy followed also these. So on each of the first three are built a pair of the next three which are pairs. “Thou didst follow” credits all nine also to Pauls beloved Timothy.

11) Two qualitative clauses follow: “what kind of things occurred to me (again constative historical aorist) in Antioch, in Iconium, in Lystra,” and specifying still more closely: “what kind of persecutions I bore (up) under.” Read Acts 13:50; 14:5, 6; 14:19, 20. Neither the first nor the last nor the two clauses together are exclamatory. This is evident from their relation, for οἷα, “what kind of things occurred” is indefinite, and οἵους διωγμούς, “what kind of persecutions I bore up under” adds definiteness. Both clauses amplify “my persecutions, my sufferings” by first referring to definite places and then to the persecutions here endured. Yet the qualitative relatives convey the thought that these were “of a kind” with many others that followed elsewhere and later. Paul mentions these three places because they were located in Timothy’s home province Galatia, Lystra being Timothy’s home town. The masculine οἵους has this gender only because of διωγμούς. Because these two clauses might be questions if they stood alone is not sufficient reason to suppose that they are indirect questions; cf., R. 731. If they stood alone they might also be exclamatory. But they do not appear separate and alone, for they continue verse 10.

We do not regard καί as the “and” of contrast: “and yet.” This “and” is richer: “—and (as normal, as was to be expected, as thus properly completing this kind of a thing) out of them all rescue me did the Lord.” The subject and the predicate are transposed, and thus both are emphatic: this is what the Lord did, this is, indeed, what he did. Timothy saw and knew all of it at the time, and such things in Paul’s past life and work he followed.

12) All this has not been strange and exceptional. Also all, moreover, who intend to live godly in Christ Jesus shall be persecuted even though they are not apostles or assistants of an apostle. See what Paul said to those in Lystra, Iconium, and Antioch immediately after he had had these experiences, Acts 14:22. The emphasis is to be placed on “all” (not only Paul and Timothy) and on the verb: “shall be persecuted.” Θέλω is often used with reference to the will which intends, βούλομαι even more so. Some regard the adverb as being emphatic: “who will to live godly in Christ Jesus,” and refer to others who only persuade themselves that they are living in Christ Jesus. This emphasis is misplaced, and the implied contrast unlikely; for “to live godly in connection with Christ Jesus” is one concept.

13) Wicked men, however, and imposters shall progress to the worse, deceiving and being deceived. There is a contrast in δέ. “Wicked men and imposters” are the opposite of “all those who intend to live in a godly way in Christ Jesus,” and while the latter are bound to be persecuted and in this way have much to endure, the former are bound to progress to what is worse than their wickedness, a million times worse than that which the godly experience in the way of persecution. “Wicked men” are those described in v. 2–5, and “imposters” those described in v. 6–9. They are aptly called γόητες, “sorceres,” in allusion to Jannes and Jambres who were both sorcerers and imposters. Incidentally, we see that what they did before Pharaoh was nothing supernatural. The Germans have retained the word Goët as a synonym for Gaukler.

In v. 9 the imposters “shall not proceed farther,” i.e., get very far before they are exposed. There Paul refers to the success of their methods. Now Paul says they “shall proceed to the worse,” but he means shall proceed inwardly; they shall degenerate more and more. To say that they shall succeed in getting an ever greater following “but” to the worse, is to give Paul’s thought a direction that he did not intend. Wickedness grows and grows and ever tends toward the worse; imposture, too, grows through what it feeds upon and also tends to the worse. To the double subject: “wicked men and imposters,” both of whom are bound to progress toward the worse, a double predication is added: “deceiving and being deceived.” This is placed chiastically: on the outside “wicked men—being deceived”; on the inside “imposters—deceiving.” Because this rhetorical placement of the terms is overlooked some have difficulty in understanding what Paul means.

14) Once more, as in v. 10, Paul writes σὺ δέ, but now not with an indicative aorist to indicate the definite historical past but with a present imperative that reaches from the present into the far future. Thou, however, do thou (ever) remain in the things thou didst learn and wast assured of, knowing from whom thou didst learn them, namely that from a babe thou dost know sacred letters, those able to make thee wise for salvation through faith, that in Christ Jesus.

Like one who is parting from his beloved disciple, Paul says: “be remaining, be abiding in the things thou didst learn,” and didst not only learn so as to become acquainted with—more than that: “and wast assured of,” wast made inwardly certain of. The English would prefer to use perfect tenses; the Greek aorists intend to state the past facts simply as facts: Timothy did learn these things, he did become fully convinced of the truth of these things. He was, of course, brought to believe them and in them (πιστεύω); but Paul uses the word πιστόω, “to make firm, trustworthy,” and puts it into the passive: “in which things thou didst get conviction and firm assurance as to their being altogether true and reliable.”

This second thought is the main point. One may learn things and yet know that they are not really true or that they are at least doubtful. Although they have been studied and learned, one is not convinced in regard to such things, is not brought to firm personal assurance and certainty; he places a question mark after them, does not build on them. Timothy was convinced, was certain of the truth of what he had learned. The two aorists state historical past facts, both are constative; they do not, however, state how far back this constative force reaches and how much past time it covers. These points are made clear by the context which extends back to Timothy’s earliest childhood and reaches to the present moment in which he is asked ever to remain in these things since he knows even at this moment from whom he received these things. Timothy knows their source; this source has produced his personal conviction and assurance in the past. Since he knows this source now (εἰδώς, second perfect participle, which is always used in the present sense), Paul asks Timothy ever to abide in these things with firm assurance.

The participle is causal: “since thou knowest”; it is present and states the reason for the present imperative, for Timothy’s ever remaining in these things. What is meant by “these things” is stated fully in the following. These things are themselves such as produce the firmest conviction as to their truth and their reliability. Here this is not, however, yet touched upon; here the main point is the fact that the source of these things makes them reliable and assured. Where did Timothy learn them? Does he know now, today, that the source is wholly reliable? It certainly is. Παρὰ τίνων ἔμαθες is an indirect question. Note the interrogatory word τίνων; Paul does not write the relative ὧν.

A few texts have the singular παρὰ τίνος. This singular is an emendation that was made on the supposition that Timothy learned “these things” from Paul. How incorrect this is the very next clause shows which states that Timothy knows the source of these things from his early childhood. Nor is Paul repeating what he has already said in v. 10: “thou didst follow my teaching.” Paul is advancing beyond that, to a time long before Timothy ever saw Paul.

If παρά with the genitive were not almost universally used with reference to persons, we should regard τίνων as the neuter plural interrogative pronoun, neuter because of the following neuter ἱερὰ γράμματα. But B.-D. 971 knows of only one instance where παρά is followed by a neuter. Timothy learned these things from his mother and his grandmother, but the next clause brings out the fact that not these beloved persons but “the sacred letters” were the authority that made Timothy so certain of “these things.”

15) This is the inner reason that καὶ ὅτι is epexegetical and not causal. Some regard ὅτι as causal: “and because thou knowest.” This makes the clause parallel to and coordinate with the causal εἰδώς clause, i.e., it is the second reason that Timothy should remain in these things which he did learn. It is usually said that Paul does not continue with a second participle because he wants to make this statement stronger. He does indeed, but in a different way. Timothy’s remaining in what he has learned is by no means to be caused by his knowing that he learned these things from his mother and his grandmother and then secondly because he knows the Scriptures. Why were Timothy’s mother and his grandmother such great authorities? Where does Paul ever make human beings the authority for our assurance? If Lois and Eunice are to be reduced to minor authorities, how does it come that a man like Paul gives the first, the major place to this participial minor authority? Children do receive the Word from and on the authority of parents, but intelligent parents always lead their children to rest their faith independently upon the Word and not upon them as parents.

Our versions are correct. They correct Luther’s weil and translate: “and that thou knowest,” which is epexegetical: “namely that,” etc. Timothy learned these things from his mother and his grandmother and knew who they were; but the main point is that from early childhood these dear persons led him to know sacred letters, the divine source of all spiritual wisdom.

No greater mistake can be made than to ground any child’s faith on parents. Soon they grow up and reason: Jewish children are Jews only because they believe what their parents taught them; Mohammedans likewise; and so the world over—we, too. If we had had other parents, our faith would be according. For this reason so many Christian young people lose their childhood faith. Not so does Paul point to Timothy’s mother and his grandmother. Not so does he ever point to his own person. Look at Acts 17:11, at the Bereans who go to the Scriptures to see whether the things Paul is offering them are true. “Namely that from a babe thou knowest (extensive present) sacred letters.” In these Timothy was taught by Lois and by Eunice, in these his assurance was made to rest with all firmness. Well may Paul say: “Ever remain in the things thou hast thus learned from thy mother and thy grandmother.”

As is well known, βρέφος denotes even a child in the womb (Luke 1:41, with plenty of examples in B.-P. 231); it next denotes a suckling (papyri, etc.); next, a tiny child; here, “from a babe or infant.” The textual authority for and against the article with ἱερὰ γράμματα is about equal, and no inner reason decides either way. If it is allowed, the article makes the sacred letters definite; if it is omitted, their quality is stressed. The claim that the presence of the article assures us that only the canonical writings are referred to, cannot be upheld if it is thought that its omission would mean that the Old Testament apocrypha are also to be included. The current LXX included the apocrypha. But at this time Timothy was a little boy. He learned the main things, he did not master the whole Old Testament canon.

Purposely Paul does not say Ἅγιαι γραφαί, “Holy Scriptures,” but γράμματα, “letters,” “script.” Little Timothy learned his ABC’s from the Bible, learned to read from the Bible, and thus from earliest childhood spelled out “sacred letters.” As he spelled out this and that word, mother and grandmother told the story. Soon he could read a little, ask questions, hear more. A lovely picture indeed! I like it better than our method of today which supplies secular matter for the primers and holds back the sacred letters until later years. Gramma is just a written character; the plural, many of them as they make written words and thus convey sense.

Paul makes them definite enough when he adds the article with the attributive participle: “those able to make thee wise for salvation through faith,” and then adds another article: “that (faith which is) in connection with Christ Jesus,” a connection we all know, namely faith’s receiving Christ and then trustfully embracing him. Not because Jews as Jews considered these writings “sacred” does Paul praise what Timothy learned out of them from infancy; but because, apart from Jews, these writings as such contain the power to make one who knows them wise, etc. Note that the intellectual apprehension (οἶδα, see 1:12) is not already saving wisdom but the avenue to such wisdom, which is inner spiritual apprehension, saving knowledge put to saving use for actual salvation. Little Timothy was a half-Jew, but let us not forget John 5:39 and the fact that through the Scriptures the true Jewish believers believed in the promised Messiah and were thus saved. On this subject see the remarks on 1:5. Paul uses the New Testament wording: “for salvation through faith, the (faith) in Christ Jesus” (we read this as a unit), for he says “thou knowest” and speaks to Timothy whose knowledge and whose faith have been advanced by the New Testament gospel that revealed Jesus as the Messiah.

16) To the subjective statements that are appended to the admonition occurring in v. 15 Paul adds an objective statement. Apart from Timothy and what the Scriptures are able to do for him, as divinely inspired writings they are also eo ipso profitable in all spiritual directions. This is the objective fact that underlies what is said with regard to Timothy’s abiding in the Scripture knowledge for his salvation by faith. Here we have another sample of how Paul always penetrates clear through with his thought. Many a writer would have stopped at the end of v. 15; Paul adds what is really the main thing.

All Scripture inspired of God (is) also profitable for teaching, for refutation, for restoration, for education, the (education) in righteousness, so that the man of God may be fit as having been fully fitted for every good work. We may, however, just as well translate: Every Scripture is inspired of God and (is) profitable, etc. The one is just as correct as the other as far as the Greek is concerned; and the meaning is exactly the same save for the insignificant shifting of the copula. This is insignificant because θεόπνευστος is predicative even when the copula is placed after it. Wherever the copula is placed, the thought is that, because the Scripture is God-inspired, therefore it is profitable for all that is said. In v. 15 we have only the making wise for salvation (effective aorist infinitive); now all this wisdom is spread out in four great phrases.

The Scripture is thus absolutely incomparable; no other book, library, or anything else in the world is able to make a lost sinner wise for salvation; no other Scripture, since it lacks inspiration of God whatever profit it may otherwise afford, is profitable for these ends: teaching us the true saving facts—refuting the lies and the delusions that deny these facts—restoring the sinner or fallen Christian to an upright position—educating, training, disciplining one in genuine righteousness. The character of the source (God-inspired) is matched by the profit produced; the profit attests the character of the source.

The assertion that the Greek compels us to translate πᾶσα γραφή “every Scripture” is untenable. The rule cited in support of this translation does not apply to abstract terms: “With the abstract word ‘every’ and ‘all’ amount practically to the same thing” (R. 772). Whatever difference the Greek felt is not expressed by our “every” and “all.” If γραφή is not considered an abstract but a concrete term that denotes the well-known canon called “Scripture,” then this singular is a collective, and we may translate πᾶσα either “every” or “all,” the former indicating every single part of the whole, the latter just the whole as such. But expressions such as “whole or all Israel,” “all or whole Jerusalem,” etc., point rather to “all Scripture” (A. V.) and less to “every Scripture” (R. V.). One thing is true: this is not ἡ πᾶσα γραφή and cannot be translated “the whole Scripture.” The New Testament uses “the Scriptures,” “the Scripture,” and just “Scripture” as we, too, use these three expressions.

The major question is one regarding the predicative θεόπνευστος, or call it the predicate if you prefer the translation “is inspired.” Is this verbal adjective passive or is it active? So assured is the passive sense that Wohlenberg is right when he says that this needs no proof. B.-P. 556 devotes only four short lines to establish the undoubted meaning: von Gott eingegeben, inspiriert.

The claim is often made that θεόπνευστος is active, “breathing God,” at least that it may be active and must not be passive. Why is this verbal passive beyond the shadow of a doubt? Stoeckhardt and Kretzmann collect examples of compound verbal adjectives in τος and think the passive is assured when the antepenult has the accent. Yet the passive form is not a matter of the accent. This proof is not conclusive. In such compounds the accent naturally shifts forward: τος is also naturally passive and is only a few times used with actives. We have much stronger evidence.

The proof lies in Θεός and in the verbs that are compounded with Θεός to form the verbals. Let the student take Liddell and Scott and examine the long list of “god” verbals in τος. Why are all these verbals plainly and necessarily passive? Because God alone can be the agent! In this multitude of verbals there appears θεόπνευστος, “God-inspired.” We find only two in which God is the object, and even one of these is passive: θεοδήλητος, “by which the gods are injured.” The other is active: θεοσύστατος, “praising God.” These exceptions are not due to the accent, which is still on the antepenult; they are due to the meaning of the two verbs involved. One of these verbs still leaves us a passive verbal, and only the lone other an active.

The inspiration of the Scriptures is constantly denied, and thus efforts are made to eliminate from Scripture itself any linguistic claim to its own inspiration. Some follow the bold method: they let Paul say what he pleases, they do not believe what he says. Others that are not so bold tone down the idea of inspiration until nothing but the decorative word is left. They at least do not like to give up the word. They generally, however, speak with contempt of what they denominate “the verbal theory of inspiration.” They propose a “theory” of a different kind, one that allows for more or less error in Holy Writ. Thus this passive verbal is made the point of attack: it cannot remain passive and mean a Deo inspirata, “God-inspired”; it can at most be only active and mean Deum inspirans, “breathing God.” Human writings of godly men breathe God more or less; the Scriptures do no more.

The later German theologians especially advocate this view. For them inspiration ist ein ueberwundener Standpunkt. Take C.-K. 492–3, a great Woerterbuch, that is regarded as a real authority, yet note its claims in regard to θεόπνευστος. It first lists a number of pagan mantic and mystery terms and places θεόπνευστος among them although it is admitted that, unlike the pagan terms, it does not involve an ecstatic state. Nothing is said about the multitude of compounds with Θεός (several pages in Liddell and Scott), in particular about the verbals compounded with τος (a long array of these). Next follow citations in which passive meanings are acknowledged by C.-K.; but on the authority of Nonnus θεόπνευστος is, nevertheless, made active. Why? Because of the analogy of ἄπνευστος, “not breathing” (or “poorly breathing”), and εὔπνευστος, “well breathing,” two verbals which belong to an entirely different class, two which are compounded with adverbs and not with Θεός. The final point in C.-K. is argument, namely the claim that the passive “inspired of God” does not fit γραφή, but that the active “breathing God” does fit. But this is a subjective judgment. It is met by the fact that, if breathing can be applied actively to γραφή (“Scripture”), it most certainly can be applied also passively.

The passive idea is found throughout the Scriptures. Ὑπὸ Πνεύματος Ἁγίου φερόμενοι ἐλάλησαν ἀπὸ Θεοῦ ἄνθρωποι: “No prophecy of Scripture is of one’s own interpretation, for not by man’s will was prophecy ever brought forth, on the contrary, being borne along by the Holy Spirit spoke from God (certain) men,” 2 Pet. 1:21. As the wind wafts and bears a sailing vessel along on its course, so men spoke from God, borne along by the Holy Spirit—passive participle, the divine agent being expressed by the regular preposition with passives, ὑπό, intensified by ἁπό. Next consider the long list beginning with Matt. 1:22: “that uttered (passive) by the Lord (again ὑπό) through the prophet, saying.” The Lord is the speaker, the prophet is his instrument or medium (δία). This διά recurs again and again, sometimes with the expression “the mouth of the prophet.” The Old Testament reports how God communicated his messages, and how the prophets then announced them with, “thus saith the Lord”—this preamble occurring again and again. Here, in fact, is the concise Biblical definition of inspiration: By God—through or by means of men, first orally, then in written form. God is the full and complete agent; holy men of God are only his instruments. These are not two causes, two factors, like two horses pulling a wagon; there is one and only one moving power, the holy men were moved. Much more may be said. All of it, presented by Scripture, is unanimously to the same effect.

“All Scripture” is “writing,” γραφή. The pen traces words and combines these into sentences and paragraphs. These words convey the thought. Erase the words, and the thought disappears. These are not Woerter, vocables, but Worte, words expressing thoughts. This is Verbal Inspiration. It is before us on every written page of the Book. There is no other divine inspiration. The thought cannot be separated from the words which are its vehicles. To speak of an inspiration of thought that is not an inspiration of the words is to disregard what the Scriptures show us as a fact. Τὸ ῥηθὲν ὑπὸ τοῦ Κυρίου, “the thing that was uttered or spoken by the Lord” (Matt. 1:21), was uttered in words, Yahweh uttered them.

Were these utterances fallible, errant in any way, in any word or expression? Does Yahweh ever err? “Thy Word is truth,” ἀλήθεια, John 17:17. “Which things also we speak, not in words (λόγοι) taught of human wisdom, but taught of the Spirit, combining spiritual things with spiritual words (πνευματικοῖς πνευμάτικα, sc. λόγοις),” 1 Cor. 2:13. The very logoi were taught by the Spirit by verbal inspiration, they are inerrant in every word unless we intend to charge the Lord and his Spirit with errancy, fallibility.

We hear the statement: That is a “theory,” a “mechanical” conception which makes the writers “automatons.” When did God ever have difficulty or use faulty means in conveying his thought to men? “God-inspired” means “breathed by God,” the very word “breathed” referring to his Pneuma. Is that mechanical? Peter says: “borne along by the Holy Pneuma” like a vessel on its true course by the gentle wind. This is neither a theory nor something dead and mechanical. God made the mind and the heart of man, and his Spirit knows how to guide them. He does not move them about like blocks but fills them with light, guides them with light, guides them in word and in thought. The fathers express the simple fact: God is the causa efficiens, men the causae instrumentales; the act itself the suggestio rerum et verborum. Any improvement on this formulation as a correct statement of the fact that occurred we are ready to accept, but we care for no “theory” and no speculation. We who have never ourselves experienced this act of the Spirit cannot penetrate the mystery of it; we doubt whether the holy writers themselves did. God’s mysteries fill the natural world, yet, while they defy penetration, we get along quite well with the undoubted facts and realities of our natural world.

The product attests its source; the effect proves its cause. The police mentioned in John 7:46 realized the deity of Jesus when they returned without arresting him and reported: “Never man spoke like this man!” So here: “Never scripture spoke like this Scripture!” The strange thing is that even those who deny its inspiration treat Holy Writ as they treat no other writing. These men still write commentaries, place every word on the Goldwage, write New Testament dictionaries, expend endless labors generation after generation. If we gave these men a book which they would accept as being verbally inspired, could they treat it with more minute care?

Paul sketches the tremendous effect of this God-breathed Scripture. Because it is God-inspired it is “profitable for teaching.” Here there is found all that man needs to be taught and to learn to make him wise for salvation; here and nowhere else. Scripture has the whole divine truth, the entire ἀλήθεια or “reality” (John 17:17). It is profitable for ἐλεγμός, “for refutation” of every religious lie, falsehood, fiction; truth naturally destroys all these and frees from them (John 8:31, 36). Where is there another scripture that is able to do such a thing? Compare what other so-called sacred writings have done. Our versions have the word mean “reproof,” and some texts, thinking of sinners who are to be convicted of sin, have ἔλεγχον: “for convicting one of his sinfulness.” But this thought is expressed in the next phrase.

Finally, “profitable for παιδεία, the education in righteousness,” as a child is educated, trained, and disciplined in all righteous living. Note that δικαιοσύνη is forensic: that quality which has God’s own verdict in its favor, which he as the Judge approves by his verdict (Matt. 25:34–40). Only the Scripture that is inspired of God is able to train and to educate so as to secure the favorable verdict of God. Is any other Scripture able to do this? Yes, the effect proves the cause.

17) The ἵνα clause denotes contemplated result and is to be construed with all four phrases and not merely with the last, for righteousness in life is not attained without the other three. While the four prepositions make the four phrases distinct and draw special attention to each other, their four objects are connected in the order in which they appear: teaching first—refutation of falsehood second—restoration to an upright position third—education in righteousness at the end; and thus all these “so that the man of God (1 Tim. 6:11), he who belongs to God, may be fitted up as having been fully fitted for every good work” whether it be to teach, to refute, to raise up somebody, to educate. All these which are received by the man of God from the inspired Scripture and make him such a man he in turn dispenses to others; this is the meaning of “every good (beneficial) work.”

Ἄρτιος = in gehoerigem Stande, “in fit shape or condition.” This idea is emphasized by repetition and by the addition of the appositional perfect passive participle ἐξηρτισμένος which also has the perfective ἐκ: “as having been (and thus still being) fully fitted up (by all Scripture inspired of God).” “Perfect” (A. V.) is incorrect; “complete” (R. V.) is little better. The idea that lies in both the adjective and the participle is a fit, adequate condition “for every beneficial work,” the preposition adding the idea “altogether fit.” There is nothing wanting in the Christian’s outfit for work, in his equipment for what God expects him to do. There is no restriction to a man of God in some office. This is plain: “all Scripture, inspired of God,” is intended for every man of God so as to make him fit and not for the clergy alone who are to dispense this or that to others.

The value of Paul’s famous sentence is beyond question. It is a proof passage for verbal inspiration and for much more besides. As such a proof passage it is outstanding and yet forms only a part of the entire volume of proof and evidence for verbal inspiration. It is one of the peaks in the Rocky Mountain range that establishes “The Impregnable Rock of Holy Scripture” (Gladstone) as inspired.

The fact that “Scripture” = the whole Old Testament canon is beyond question. That the New Testament writings are included rests on the fact that Jesus promised his Spirit of inspiration to the New Testament writers. The first church, which fixed the New Testament canon, did so on the criterion that the writer of any document must be inspired by God, and that his writing must have the stamp of being thus inspired. When it made this decision the first church had the aid of the apostle John who lived beyond the year 100, decades after the inspired writings of all others were in the hands of the church. The fact that John’s own writings were inspired was beyond question.

R A. T. Robertson, A Grammar of the Greek New Testament in the Light of Historical Research. 4th edition..

B.-D Friedrich Blass’ Grammatik des neutestamentlichen Griechisch, vierte, voellig neugearbeitete Auflage, besorgt von Albert Debrunner.

B.-P Griechisch-Deutsches Woerterbuch zu den Schriften des Neuen Testaments, etc., von D. Walter Bauer, zweite, voellig neugearbeitete Auflage zu Erwin Preuschens Vollstaendigem Griechisch-Deutschen Handwoerterbuch, etc.

C.-K Biblisch-theologisches Woerterbuch der Neutestamentlichen Graezitaet von D. Dr. Hermann Cremer, zehnte, etc., Auflage, herausgegeben von D. Dr. Julius Koegel.