Problem: Some argue that traditional translation of 2 Timothy 3:16 is misguided. They often cite the New English Bible (NEB) as an alternative. The NEB translates 2 Timothy 3:16 in this way: “Every inspired scripture has its use for teaching.” If this translation is correct, then Paul is saying that only some passages of Scripture are inspired—not all—and only some parts of Scripture have a use for teaching. We reject this erroneous translation, and we will look at 2 Timothy 3:16 word by word demonstrate that the traditional translation is indeed correct.
Solution: “Scripture” or “writing”?
OPTION #1: “All Scripture is inspired by God and profitable.”
OPTION #2: “Every inspired scripture has its use for teaching.”
“Scripture” (graphē) simply meant “writing” in the common usage of the day. However, if you notice above, even this alternate translation grants that we should translate this as “Scripture,” rather than “writing.” This isn’t debated. After all, this term is used 50 times in the NT “only of holy scripture.”[1] Moreover, Paul earlier referred to the “sacred writings” (3:15), and later he tells Timothy to “preach the word” (4:2). Clearly, he is referring to Scripture.
“All Scripture” or “every Scripture”?
OPTION #1: “All Scripture is inspired by God and profitable.”
OPTION #2: “Every inspired scripture has its use for teaching.”
The term “all” (pasa) in the words “all Scripture” (pasa graphē) lacks the article. Therefore, it could be translated as “all Scripture” or as “every Scripture.” We hold the former view, for several reasons:
Grammatically, there is no problem translating this as “all.” Other passages lack the article (“the”) before a proper noun, and yet, the translation should be considered “all,” rather than “every.” For example, Jesus said, “All authority has been given to Me” (Mt. 28:18). Peter said, “Let all the house of Israel know” (Acts 2:36). Likewise, Paul wrote, “All Israel will be saved” (Rom. 11:26). Just consider how bizarre these passages would be if we translated them with the word “every”! Grammatically, it’s perfectly acceptable to translate this word as “all” (pasa) when it’s combined with a “collective or proper noun.”[2] Furthermore, the word “all” (pasa) holds an “emphatic position” in the sentence, which implies that it should refer to the entirety of the OT—not just individual passages.[3]
Contextually, Paul is referring to all Scripture—not individual passages. In the previous verse, Paul referred to the “sacred writings” (v.15) which is clearly parallel to this passage.[4] Three verses later, we read, “Preach the word” (2 Tim. 4:2). When Paul writes “the word” (ton logon), he uses the article (“the word”) and it is unqualified. This assumes that he is looking back to “all Scripture” (pasa graphē) in 3:16.[5] Moreover, elsewhere, the singular use of “Scripture,” rather than “Scriptures,” is used to describe all of Scripture (Acts 8:32; Rom. 4:3; 9:17; 10:11; Gal. 3:8, 22; 4:30; 1 Tim. 5:18; 1 Pet. 2:6; 2 Pet. 1:20).
Practically, even if “every Scripture” is the correct translation, this would not change our interpretation all that much. Knight comments, “In the final analysis there is no essential difference in meaning. ‘All scripture’ perceives scripture as a whole, and ‘every scripture’ perceives it in terms of all its component parts.”[6] In fact, Philip Towner holds the “every” translation, but he still affirms the plenary (full) inspiration of the Bible, rendering this as “every (text of) Scripture.” He writes, “The scope is extensive, leaving no text of ‘Scripture’ unaccounted for.”[7] The real issue is whether the entire translation is correct, which would lead us to partial inspiration of the text.
“And” or “also”?
OPTION #1: “All Scripture is inspired by God and profitable.”
OPTION #2: “Every inspired Scripture is also profitable.”
Should this Greek word (kai) be translated as “and” or as “also”? (We removed the NEB translation above because it doesn’t even attempt to translate this Greek word kai!) Once again, we hold the former view for a number of reasons:
Lexically, this word (kai) is normally translated as “and.” In fact, the translation “and” is preferable twelve times as much as “also” in the NT.[8]
Grammatically, the translation “and” makes better sense. It is normal Greek syntax to translate this word (kai) as “and” when it is placed between two adjectives (e.g. “God-breathed” and “profitable”).[9] Greek expert Bill Mounce writes, “When two adjectives follow the subject and are connected by kai, it is natural to treat them both the same way.”[10]
Practically, Paul gives Timothy no criteria for which parts of Scripture are inspired and which are not. How can Timothy know which portions of the Bible to “preach” (2 Tim. 4:2) with great usefulness and which are not useful?
What does Paul mean by “inspired by God”?
“Inspired by God” (theopneustos) literally means “God breathed.” It comes from several root words:
“God” (theos)
“Inspired” (pneō) is a verb that means “to breathe.” Thus, this “must be understood as a metaphor for speaking.”[11]
The passive suffix (tos) implies that God is breathing into the Scriptures.
Inspired or God-breathed? It seems that the translation “inspired” is a hangover from the KJV of 1611. The translation “God-breathed” is better than “inspired.” God didn’t breathe the Scriptures in, but rather, he breathed them out. Technically, the terms “‘spiration’ or even ‘expiration’ would convey the meaning of the Greek adjective more accurately.”[12]
Paul is the first author to use the word theopneustos,[13] though this term is similar to other words used by Paul in this construction: “taught by God” (theodidaktos, 1 Thess. 4:9).
Does this teach that the authors of Scripture were inspired by God? For some reason, many good theologians miss the clear and obvious reading of the text: In this passage, God inspired the text of Scripture—not the authors of Scripture. This passage simply doesn’t tell us how the authors were led to write Scripture—only that the result of their writing was God-breathed.
Conclusion
We agree with Greek expert Daniel Wallace, who considers the NEB’s translation to be “highly suspect.”[14] We also agree with the vast majority of English translations that state that Paul is referring to all Scripture being inspired by God—not pieces and parts (see NIV, ESV, NET, NCV, ISV, CSB, NLT, LEB, NRSV, KJV).
OBJECTION: Why would Paul need to teach the inspiration of Scripture to Timothy?
Mounce aptly responds to this question when he writes, “The opponents are teaching commandments that come from demons (1 Tim 4:1) through people (Titus 1:14). Scripture, on the other hand, Paul says, comes straight from God, and therefore Timothy can trust it to equip and train him to do his work as an evangelist.”[15]
[1] George W. Knight, The Pastoral Epistles: A Commentary on the Greek Text, New International Greek Testament Commentary (Grand Rapids, MI; Carlisle, England: W.B. Eerdmans; Paternoster Press, 1992), 445.
[2] George W. Knight, The Pastoral Epistles: A Commentary on the Greek Text, New International Greek Testament Commentary (Grand Rapids, MI; Carlisle, England: W.B. Eerdmans; Paternoster Press, 1992), 445.
[3] Thomas D. Lea and Hayne P. Griffin, 1, 2 Timothy, Titus, vol. 34, The New American Commentary (Nashville: Broadman & Holman Publishers, 1992), 235.
[4] William D. Mounce, Pastoral Epistles, vol. 46, Word Biblical Commentary (Dallas: Word, Incorporated, 2000), 567.
[5] Daniel B. Wallace, Greek Grammar beyond the Basics: An Exegetical Syntax of the New Testament (Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan, 1996), 314.
[6] George W. Knight, The Pastoral Epistles: A Commentary on the Greek Text, New International Greek Testament Commentary (Grand Rapids, MI; Carlisle, England: W.B. Eerdmans; Paternoster Press, 1992), 445.
[7] Philip H. Towner, The Letters to Timothy and Titus, The New International Commentary on the New Testament (Grand Rapids, MI: Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Co., 2006), 587.
[8] Daniel B. Wallace, Greek Grammar beyond the Basics: An Exegetical Syntax of the New Testament (Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan, 1996), 313.
[9] Daniel B. Wallace, Greek Grammar beyond the Basics: An Exegetical Syntax of the New Testament (Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan, 1996), 314.
[10] William D. Mounce, Pastoral Epistles, vol. 46, Word Biblical Commentary (Dallas: Word, Incorporated, 2000), 569.
[11] Wayne Grudem, “Scripture’s Self-Attestation and the Problem of Formulating a Doctrine of Scripture” in Scripture and Truth, eds. D. A. Carson and John D. Woodbridge (Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Book House, 1992), 39.
[12] John R. W. Stott, Guard the Gospel the Message of 2 Timothy, The Bible Speaks Today (Downers Grove, IL: InterVarsity Press, 1973), 101-102.
[13] Philip H. Towner, The Letters to Timothy and Titus, The New International Commentary on the New Testament (Grand Rapids, MI: Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Co., 2006), 589.
[14] Daniel B. Wallace, Greek Grammar beyond the Basics: An Exegetical Syntax of the New Testament (Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan, 1996), 314.
[15] William D. Mounce, Pastoral Epistles, vol. 46, Word Biblical Commentary (Dallas: Word, Incorporated, 2000), 570.
“All scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness: (2 Tim 3:16)”
