2 Timothy 3:16 Translation

Our Lord's God

Well-known member
All Scripture is inspired by God and profitable for teaching, for reproof, for correction, for training in righteousness... NASB

Since "Scripture" is just an archaic English word for "writing(s)", this would effectively state that everything anyone has written is inspired by God which makes no sense.

In Greek, there is no "is" there.

πασα γραφη θεοπνευστος και ωφελιμος....

So does it really say....

All Scripture is God breathed and profitable...?

OR

All God breathed Scripture is also profitable...?

Given the immediate context, it seems to me it is the latter.

Again, "Scriptures" is just an archaic English word for "writings." The Greek word itself does not denote inspired writings.

Only the God breathed writings are "Holy Writings."

and that from childhood you have known the Holy Scriptures which are able to make you wise unto salvation through faith that is in Christ Jesus. 16 All God breathed Scripture is also profitable for teaching, for reproof, for correction, for training in righteousness...

The God breathed writings are able to make Timothy wise.... but those same writings are also profitable for other things.

and that from childhood you have known the Holy Scriptures which are able to make you wise unto salvation through faith that is in Christ Jesus. 16 All God breathed Scripture is also profitable for teaching, for reproof, for correction, for training in righteousness...

It appears to me that the traditional translation of this verse is plainly wrong and it should be, "All God breathed Scripture is also profitable..." or "All inspired Scripture is also profitable...." rather than "All Scripture is God breathed..." or "All Scripture is inspired..." When you think about it, the traditional translation doesn't even make any sense.
 
Last edited:
All Scripture is inspired by God and profitable for teaching, for reproof, for correction, for training in righteousness... NASB

Since "Scripture" is just an archaic English word for "writing(s)", this would effectively state that everything anyone has written is inspired by God which makes no sense.

In Greek, there is no "is" there.

πασα γραφη θεοπνευστος και ωφελιμος....

So does it really say....

All Scripture is God breathed and profitable...?

OR

All God breathed Scripture is also profitable...?

Given the immediate context, it seems to me it is the latter.

Again, "Scriptures" is just an archaic English word for "writings." The Greek word itself does not denote inspired writings.

Only the God breathed writings are "Holy Writings."

and that from childhood you have known the Holy Scriptures which are able to make you wise unto salvation through faith that is in Christ Jesus. 16 All God breathed Scripture is also profitable for teaching, for reproof, for correction, for training in righteousness...

The God breathed writings are able to make Timothy wise.... but those same writings are also profitable for other things.

and that from childhood you have known the Holy Scriptures which are able to make you wise unto salvation through faith that is in Christ Jesus. 16 All God breathed Scripture is also profitable for teaching, for reproof, for correction, for training in righteousness...

It appears to me that the traditional translation of this verse is plainly wrong and it should be, "All God breathed Scripture is also profitable..." or "All inspired Scripture is also profitable...." rather than "All Scripture is God breathed..." or "All Scripture is inspired..." When you think about it, the traditional translation doesn't even make any sense.
Two initial problems.

The word "All" should be "Every" as scripture is without the definite article.
Secondly in the context of theological discourse, γραφὴ does refer specifically to scripture in the NT, usually the OT, and once to Pauline writings.

Hence θεόπνευστος would be redundant, if as you suggest, it were to refer to "God breathed writings", because the same is implied just by γραφὴ.
 
Two initial problems.

The word "All" should be "Every" as scripture is without the definite article.

No, that's just wrong. Do all those Translators need some lessons from you? Or were they just being dishonest with the text?

Secondly in the context of theological discourse, γραφὴ does refer specifically to scripture in the NT, usually the OT, and once to Pauline writings.

And what does that mean? Inspired writings?

Hence θεόπνευστος would be redundant, if as you suggest, it were to refer to "God breathed writings", because the same is implied just by γραφὴ.

Then by your own argument, there would be no need to redundantly say the writings are God-breathed either.
 
Last edited:
No, that's just wrong. Do all those Translators need some lessons from you? Or were they just being dishonest with the text?
I wasn't aware that you were an KJVO fanatic? How come? The use of the singular γραφὴ without the article is crucial. If the totality of scriptures were being inferred, γραφὴ would be plural and / or with the definite article. Hence "Every scripture." This is an accepted improvement on the AV. See also the NET bible ("Every scripture").

Cambridge Bible Commentary

16. All scripture] The word for ‘Scripture’ occurs fifty-one times in N.T., always, except 2 Peter 3:16, of the recognised Old Testament Scriptures, the Law, the Prophets, and the Hagiographa, or of one or more of them; in 2 Peter 3:16 the reference is to St Paul’s epistles and to ‘the other Scriptures.’ The A.V. of a.d. 1611 is therefore not wrong (though many printed copies have altered it) in rendering the word as ‘Scripture’ with a capital S; for it is by itself the recognised technical term.

We should translate "Every" Scripture probably, as is the proper rendering when there is no article. The word ‘Scripture’ is without the article also in John 19:37; 1 Peter 2:6; 2 Peter 1:20. Those who retain the rendering ‘All Scripture’ with A.V. would lay stress on the technical use of the word shewn above, so that it may be treated as a proper name, comparing Acts 2:36, ‘all (the) house of Israel.’ But this is unnecessary, especially as the three places where the word occurs without the article in the singular have the meaning ‘a Book or passage of Scripture’ and they are in date as late as or later than this Epistle.

Expositors Bible Commentary

No doubt the absence of the article in the Greek (πασα γραφη and not πασα η γραφη) is against the old rendering; but it is by no means conclusive, as other instances both in the New Testament and in classical Greek prove. Nevertheless, there is the further fact that in the New Testament "the scripture" generally means a particular passage of Scripture. {Luke 4:21; John 19:24; John 19:28; John 19:36-37; Acts 8:32; Acts 8:35} When Scripture as a whole is meant, the word is commonly used in the plural, "the scriptures". {Matthew 21:42; Mark 12:24 John 5:39}


And what does that mean? Inspired writings?
Yes

Then by your own argument, there would be no need to redundantly say the writings are God-breathed either.
Not so. The force is plainly that "every individual passage of scripture is God breathed" - and not that "Scripture (as a totality) is God breathed" which is a tautology.

This simple inference is (apparently) missed by many commentators who have tied themselves up in knots.
 
I wasn't aware that you were an KJVO fanatic? How come?

Where do all these weird ideas in your head come from?

The use of the singular γραφὴ without the article is crucial. If the totality of scriptures were being inferred, γραφὴ would be plural and / or with the definite article. Hence "Every scripture." This is an accepted improvement on the AV. See also the NET bible ("Every scripture").

Cambridge Bible Commentary

16. All scripture] The word for ‘Scripture’ occurs fifty-one times in N.T., always, except 2 Peter 3:16, of the recognised Old Testament Scriptures, the Law, the Prophets, and the Hagiographa, or of one or more of them; in 2 Peter 3:16 the reference is to St Paul’s epistles and to ‘the other Scriptures.’ The A.V. of a.d. 1611 is therefore not wrong (though many printed copies have altered it) in rendering the word as ‘Scripture’ with a capital S; for it is by itself the recognised technical term.

We should translate "Every" Scripture probably, as is the proper rendering when there is no article. The word ‘Scripture’ is without the article also in John 19:37; 1 Peter 2:6; 2 Peter 1:20. Those who retain the rendering ‘All Scripture’ with A.V. would lay stress on the technical use of the word shewn above, so that it may be treated as a proper name, comparing Acts 2:36, ‘all (the) house of Israel.’ But this is unnecessary, especially as the three places where the word occurs without the article in the singular have the meaning ‘a Book or passage of Scripture’ and they are in date as late as or later than this Epistle.

Expositors Bible Commentary

No doubt the absence of the article in the Greek (πασα γραφη and not πασα η γραφη) is against the old rendering; but it is by no means conclusive, as other instances both in the New Testament and in classical Greek prove. Nevertheless, there is the further fact that in the New Testament "the scripture" generally means a particular passage of Scripture. {Luke 4:21; John 19:24; John 19:28; John 19:36-37; Acts 8:32; Acts 8:35} When Scripture as a whole is meant, the word is commonly used in the plural, "the scriptures". {Matthew 21:42; Mark 12:24 John 5:39}

Are you having trouble making up your mind? Is it a matter of plural graphe or a matter of the article or a matter of whatever you like?

Yes


Not so. The force is plainly that "every individual passage of scripture is God breathed" - and not that "Scripture (as a totality) is God breathed" which is a tautology.

I guess that went right over your head.

This simple inference is (apparently) missed by many commentators who have tied themselves up in knots.
 
Last edited:
Where do all these weird ideas in your head come from?



Are you having trouble making up your mind? Is it a matter of plural graphe or a matter of the article or a matter of whatever you like?



I guess that went right over your head.
BTW "All God breathed Scripture is also profitable" only makes sense in English if related back to the previous sentence. Otherwise there is no reason for use of "also" .

But if you are using καὶ as "also" to refer back to the previous sentence, then καὶ is in the wrong place as in the middle of the next sentence. I can't help but think your interpretation is very strained as far as Greek sentence structure is concerned.

θεόπνευστος is frequently used as a predicate in the Orthodox church, following Chrysostom "πᾶσα οὖν ἡ τοιαύτη θεόπνευστος". It cannot ever be "wrong" to put the implied copula before θεόπνευστος. A second implied copula could then be placed before ωφελιμος.
 
BTW "All God breathed Scripture is also profitable" only makes sense in English if related back to the previous sentence. Otherwise there is no reason for use of "also" .

Did you get that insight from my OP?

But if you are using καὶ as "also" to refer back to the previous sentence, then καὶ is in the wrong place as in the middle of the next sentence. I can't help but think your interpretation is very strained as far as Greek sentence structure is concerned.

Good grief man. Do you just make it up as you go along?

In the previous sentence, Paul explains the Holy Scriptures are good for making Tim wise unto salvation.
In the next, he tells Timmy what they are ALSO good for.


θεόπνευστος is frequently used as a predicate in the Orthodox church, following Chrysostom

The Jew hater?

"πᾶσα οὖν ἡ τοιαύτη θεόπνευστος". It cannot ever be "wrong" to put the implied copula before θεόπνευστος. A second implied copula could then be placed before ωφελιμος.
 
Did you get that insight from my OP?



Good grief man. Do you just make it up as you go along?

In the previous sentence, Paul explains the Holy Scriptures are good for making Tim wise unto salvation.
In the next, he tells Timmy what they are ALSO good for.




The Jew hater?
So if you won't address any of my points rationally, there seems little point in continuing the debate.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Mik
All Scripture is inspired by God and profitable for teaching, for reproof, for correction, for training in righteousness... NASB

Since "Scripture" is just an archaic English word for "writing(s)", this would effectively state that everything anyone has written is inspired by God which makes no sense.

In Greek, there is no "is" there.

πασα γραφη θεοπνευστος και ωφελιμος....

So does it really say....

All Scripture is God breathed and profitable...?

OR

All God breathed Scripture is also profitable...?

Given the immediate context, it seems to me it is the latter.

Again, "Scriptures" is just an archaic English word for "writings." The Greek word itself does not denote inspired writings.

Only the God breathed writings are "Holy Writings."

and that from childhood you have known the Holy Scriptures which are able to make you wise unto salvation through faith that is in Christ Jesus. 16 All God breathed Scripture is also profitable for teaching, for reproof, for correction, for training in righteousness...

The God breathed writings are able to make Timothy wise.... but those same writings are also profitable for other things.

and that from childhood you have known the Holy Scriptures which are able to make you wise unto salvation through faith that is in Christ Jesus. 16 All God breathed Scripture is also profitable for teaching, for reproof, for correction, for training in righteousness...

It appears to me that the traditional translation of this verse is plainly wrong and it should be, "All God breathed Scripture is also profitable..." or "All inspired Scripture is also profitable...." rather than "All Scripture is God breathed..." or "All



Scripture is inspired..." When you think about it, the traditional


translation doesn't even make any sense.

Aramaic Bible in Plain English
"Every writing which is written by The Spirit is profitable for teaching, for correction, for direction and for a course in righteousness", imo.
 
So all the Spirit does for you is tell you what writings are inspired?
In the East they callled it samadhi. I think it is similar - ability to enter spiritual world. Abraham bad natural ability some have trained ability (Heb5). Christ Jesus shown to be able to do it (entering spiritual world) in several diverse ways. It is super interesting subject.
 
It is super interesting subject.
But hardly an arguable subject, except in respect of peripheral books not quoted by Christ, for it was Christ who substantially approved the OT scriptures. I don't believe it was Paul's intention in 2 Tim 3:16 to raise distinctions between books within the Jewish cannon: such an appraisal would have merited a rather different linguistic treatment.

Sirach (circa 180 BC) provides a collection of the most important sacred scriptures similar to portions of the Hebrew Bible, which doesn't seem to have been in dispute, although the books of the Ketuvim were not all named by him.
 
Last edited:
But hardly an arguable subject, except in respect of peripheral books not quoted by Christ, for it was Christ who substantially approved the OT scriptures. I don't believe it was Paul's intention in 2 Tim 3:16 to raise distinctions between books within the Jewish cannon: such an appraisal would have merited a rather different linguistic treatment.

Sirach (circa 180 BC) provides a collection of the most important sacred scriptures similar to portions of the Hebrew Bible, which doesn't seem to have been in dispute, although the books of the Ketuvim were not all named by him.
Imo, subject of 2 Tim is Timothy's 'readiness' for spiritual work. Paul was looking for spiritual people to continue what he started.
"36Or was it from you that the word of God came? Or are you the only ones it has reached? 37If anyone thinks that he is a prophet, or spiritual, he should acknowledge that the things I am writing to you are a command of the Lord. 38If anyone does not recognize this, he is not recognized."
Paul thought that spiritual element (1Cor 2) must control teaching in the chursh and impart spiritual wisdom. "faith and knowledge (Gnosis)".
 
Last edited:
Imo, subject of 2 Tim is Timothy's 'readiness' for spiritual work. Paul was looking for spiritual people to continue what he started.
"36Or was it from you that the word of God came? Or are you the only ones it has reached? 37If anyone thinks that he is a prophet, or spiritual, he should acknowledge that the things I am writing to you are a command of the Lord. 38If anyone does not recognize this, he is not recognized."
Paul thought that spiritual element (1Cor 2) must control teaching in the chursh and impart spiritual wisdom. "faith and knowledge (Gnosis)".
I think you're straying from the subject of the OP, which was specifically 2 Tim 3:16, not the "subject of 2 Tim."
 
I think you're straying from the subject of the OP, which was specifically 2 Tim 3:16, not the "subject of 2 Tim."
Church built a doctrine around those verses, imo, knowing the subject Paul speaks about make me see this doctrine irrational. When one starts with basic: 1Cor2 and sort it out it makes it much clearer.
 
As used in the Christian Greek Scriptures, the Greek word gra·pheʹ (“a writing”) refers only to the sacred writings in God’s Word the Bible. There were other documents used by the writers of both the Hebrew and the Greek Scriptures, such as official public genealogical records, histories, and so forth, but these were not regarded as inspired or on an equal level with the writings recognized as canonical.
(...)
Appealed To by Christ and Apostles. Jesus Christ and the writers of the Christian Scriptures often used the word gra·pheʹ in appealing to the writings of Moses and the prophets as their authority for their teaching or for their work, on the grounds that these writings were inspired by God. Frequently these Hebrew writings as a whole were designated “Scriptures.” (Mt 21:42; 22:29; Mr 14:49; Joh 5:39; Ac 17:11; 18:24, 28) Sometimes the singular form “Scripture” was used where a certain text was cited, referring to it as part of the entire body of writings in the Hebrew Scriptures. (Ro 9:17; Ga 3:8) Again, reference was made to a single text as a “scripture,” with the sense of its being an authoritative statement. (Mr 12:10; Lu 4:21; Joh 19:24, 36, 37) At 2 Timothy 3:16 and 2 Peter 1:20, Paul and Peter appear to refer to both the inspired Hebrew and Greek writings as “Scripture.” Peter classifies Paul’s writings as part of the “Scriptures” at 2 Peter 3:15, 16.

The expression “prophetic scriptures” (Ro 16:26) may have reference to the prophetic character of all the Hebrew Scriptures.—Compare Re 19:10.
 
As used in the Christian Greek Scriptures, the Greek word gra·pheʹ (“a writing”) refers only to the sacred writings in God’s Word the Bible. There were other documents used by the writers of both the Hebrew and the Greek Scriptures, such as official public genealogical records, histories, and so forth, but these were not regarded as inspired or on an equal level with the writings recognized as canonical.
(...)

Graphe simply means "a writing." It has no other special meaning to it.

Appealed To by Christ and Apostles. Jesus Christ and the writers of the Christian Scriptures often used the word gra·pheʹ in appealing to the writings of Moses and the prophets as their authority for their teaching or for their work,

Jesus' authority was not a book but his God and Father abiding in him.

on the grounds that these writings were inspired by God. Frequently these Hebrew writings as a whole were designated “Scriptures.” (Mt 21:42; 22:29; Mr 14:49; Joh 5:39; Ac 17:11; 18:24, 28)

"Scriptures" is nothing more than an archaic English word for "writings."

Sometimes the singular form “Scripture” was used where a certain text was cited, referring to it as part of the entire body of writings in the Hebrew Scriptures. (Ro 9:17; Ga 3:8) Again, reference was made to a single text as a “scripture,” with the sense of its being an authoritative statement. (Mr 12:10; Lu 4:21; Joh 19:24, 36, 37) At 2 Timothy 3:16 and 2 Peter 1:20, Paul and Peter appear to refer to both the inspired Hebrew and Greek writings as “Scripture.” Peter classifies Paul’s writings as part of the “Scriptures” at 2 Peter 3:15, 16.

Peter had no concept of a canon as you are suggesting nor does his words mean he was setting Paul's writings on par with the books of Moses. He wasn't.

The expression “prophetic scriptures” (Ro 16:26) may have reference to the prophetic character of all the Hebrew Scriptures.—Compare Re 19:10.

There's one thing you got right.

 
Back
Top