Category: Pastoral Epistles|2 Timothy|2 Timothy 2 (Page 1 of 2)

Van den Heede, “La participation à la mort du Christ par le baptême”

A new article of potential interest to Pastorals scholars:

Philippe van den Heede, “La participation à la mort du Christ par le baptême (Rm 6,3–11: Une conception pré-paulinienne (Rm 6,8; 2 Tm 2,11).” Revue Biblique 128.1 (2021): 99–115.

Abstract: “Several scholars are of the opinion that the notion of participation in the death and resurrection of Christ through baptism does not appear before the letter to the Romans (Rom 6:3-11). It would therefore be an original theological creation of Paul. However, comparison of Rom 6:8 with 2 Tim 2:11, which is found in a traditional hymn, shows that this baptismal conception is pre-Paulinian (it is also found in Eph 5:14). Paul therefore inherited this tradition which he integrated and developed in his theological reflection.”

Harmai, “‘That . . . the Father of glory, may give you a spirit of wisdom’: Δωη in Ephesians 1.17 and 2 Timothy 2.25.”

A brief technical article:

Harmai, Gábor. “‘That . . . the Father of glory, may give you a spirit of wisdom’: Δωη in Ephesians 1.17 and 2 Timothy 2.25.” Bible Translator 71.2 (2020): 231–35.

Abstract: The spelling of δώῃ in NA28 in Eph 1.17 and 2 Tim 2.25 is wrong. The correct form is δῴη, as in Westcott and Hort (WH), and a number of other old editions. An additional difficulty is that the NA apparatus does not illuminate the problem for the reader as the WH editions do. The problem is not serious in the translation of 2 Tim 2.25, where the real problem is the translation of μήποτε. In any case, if the verb is an optative, expressing a wish, we can understand better the irony of the author. Translations of Eph 1.17 that read δωη as subjunctive (expressing possibility) rather than optative are erroneous: The verb is in fact optative, as earlier translations correctly reflect.

Marossy, “The Rule of the Resurrected Messiah: Kingship Discourse in 2 Timothy 2:8–13”

In the forthcoming edition of Catholic Biblical Quarterly, Michael David Marossy has produced an article of interest to students of the Pastorals: “The Rule of the Resurrected Messiah: Kingship Discourse in 2 Timothy 2:8-13,” CBQ 82.1 (2020): 84-100.

Abstract: “This article contributes to recent discussion on the role of kingship discourse in shaping Pauline participation in Christ by analyzing the role of kingship discourse in the neglected text that most clearly ties together the themes of kingship discourse and participatory soteriology in the Pauline corpus, namely, 2 Tim 2:8–13. In response to Joshua Jipp’s argument that Paul utilized and adapted the metaphorical framework of kingship discourse in the Scriptures to present participation in Christ as participation in the kingdom of “Christ the King,” I argue that in 2 Tim 2:8–13, the metaphorical framework of kingship discourse is employed to describe Jesus as the resurrected Davidic Messiah-king, whose reign is characterized by the narrative of his victory over death.”

New Coptic Fragments of 2 Timothy & Titus

In the most recent Journal of Biblical Literature, Brice C. Jones has published an article on three new Coptic papyrus fragments that witness text of the Pastoral Epistles.

Brice C. Jones, “Three New Coptic Papyrus Fragments of 2 Timothy and Titus (P.Mich. inv. 3535b)”. Journal of Biblical Literature, no 2 (2014): 389–397.

The article provides discussion and transcriptions of the fragments. Text on the fragments are:

  • Fragment 1: 2 Tim 2:14–18; 2:26–3:3
  • Fragment 2: 2 Tim 1:6–11; 1:18–2:6
  • Fragment 3: 2 Tim 4:18–20; Titus 1:7–9

Jones hesitates to provide dates any more specific than “sometime between the fourth and sixth centuries” (392).

I have yet to really read the article, but any time fragments of NT text are located, it is an important thing. Thanks to Brice C. Jones (see his blog) for his work in publishing these fragments.

Philip Doddridge’s Hymn from 2 Tim 2:19

Doddridge (1702-1751) was a prominent Dissenting minister in England. He was mentored by Isaac Watts and wrote over 300 hymns based on scriptural texts. This is his hymn based on 2 Timothy 2:19.

The Stability of the Divine Foundation, and Its Double Inscription
(2 Timothy 2:19)

To THEE, great Architect on high,
Immortal thanks be paid,
Who, to support Thy sinking saints,
This firm foundation laid.

2. Fix’d on a Rock Thy gospel stands,
And braves the rage of hell;
And, while the Saviour’s hand protects,
His blood cements it well.

3. Here will I build my final hope;
Here rest my weary soul;
Majestic shall the fabric rise,
Till glory crown the whole.

4. Deep on my heart, all-gracious Lord,
Engrave its double seal;
Which, while it speaks Thy honor’d name,
Its sacred use may tell.

5. Dear by a thousand tender bonds,
Thy saints to Thee are known;
And, conscious what a name they bear,
Iniquity they shun.

Second Timothy 2.22-26

[This is part of a running series on translating Second Timothy. See the introductory post for more information — RB]

Phrasing/Translation: 2Ti 2.22-26

22 Τὰς δὲ νεωτερικὰς ἐπιθυμίας φεῦγε,
22 So flee youthful desires.

δίωκε δὲ δικαιοσύνην πίστιν ἀγάπην εἰρήνην
Pursue righteousness, faith, love, peace;
    μετὰ τῶν ἐπικαλουμένων τὸν κύριον
    with those who call upon the Lord
        ἐκ καθαρᾶς καρδίας.
        out of a pure heart.

23 τὰς δὲ μωρὰς καὶ ἀπαιδεύτους ζητήσεις παραιτοῦ,
23 Reject foolish and ignorant speculations,
        εἰδὼς ὅτι γεννῶσιν μάχας·
        knowing that they breed quarrels.

24 δοῦλον δὲ κυρίου οὐ δεῖ μάχεσθαι
24 And it is not necessary for a slave of the Lord to quarrel
ἀλλὰ ἤπιον εἶναι πρὸς πάντας,
but to be gentle toward all,
    able to teach,
    25 ἐν πραΰτητι παιδεύοντα τοὺς ἀντιδιατιθεμένους,
    25 instructing with gentleness the ones who oppose you,
        μήποτε δώῃ αὐτοῖς ὁ θεὸς μετάνοιαν
        perhaps God may give them repentance
            εἰς ἐπίγνωσιν ἀληθείας
            leading to knowledge of the truth 
        26 καὶ ἀνανήψωσιν 
        26 and they may come to their senses, 
            ἐκ τῆς τοῦ διαβόλου παγίδος, 
            out of the devil’s snare, 
            having been captured alive 
                ὑπʼ αὐτοῦ 
                by him
                εἰς τὸ ἐκείνου θέλημα. 
                to do his will.


2Ti 2.14-26 is the larger section (cf. Van Neste, Marshall ICC); it will be examined in two smaller chunks: 2Ti 2.14-21 and 2Ti 2.22-26 (which the UBS4 text has as separate paragraphs). See previous notes on 2Ti 2.14-21.

Further note: Each of the four main clauses in this section (each block above is a “main clause”) are connected with the conjunction δε. Apart from the last main clause, I’ve not translated the word. Each of these blocks is individual, but they do build one upon the other (particularly the first three). The nature of what δε is doing is needed in the Greek, but there is no easy way to translate the function into the English. The typical (and typically inaccurate) gloss of “but” doesn’t work because it is inherently adversative, and the use here is not adversative, it is developmental. Each of these clauses builds in a succession. Translations like “so” or “now” or something of that nature could work, but seem contrived and clunky.

Verse 22

Τὰς δὲ νεωτερικὰς ἐπιθυμίας φεῦγε] Note the imperative verb φεῦγε (“flee”) at the end of the clause, with the object fronted, perhaps something like: “Those ignorant, youthful urges? Run away [from them]!” The fronted object here is, according to Runge, a “Topical Frame”; it brings the topical scope of the clause into view first so one knows how to process the verb when it is encountered.

ἐπιθυμίας] Note that in many contexts this word has a negative connotation (e.g. “lust” or “sinful desires”), but that connotation — specifically the lustful or sinful side of it — is not innate in the meaning of the word. It can (and does) occur positively too. That is, context of occurrence adds that notion, the word itself is used in positive, negative, and neutral contexts. Here it tends toward the negative based on the context of the following command (flee youthful desires, pursue righteousness, faith, love, etc.).

νεωτερικὰς] NT hapax, see also $afen(IgnMag 3.1)

δίωκε δὲ δικαιοσύνην πίστιν ἀγάπην εἰρήνην] Here component order is inverted, instead of Object-Verb, it is Verb-Object. The conjunction δὲ is used for a developmental connection to the previous clause. They are rhetorically connected through the inversion of component order. The previous clause was an exhortation to avoid particular negative action; this clause is an exhortation to partake of particular positive action. The flee/pursue exhortation is used to similar effect in 1Ti 6.11; see also Mt 10.23 where the order is reversed.

μετὰ τῶν ἐπικαλουμένων τὸν κύριον] prepositional phrase, modifying the imperative verb δίωκε. This provides information on how to pursue righteousness, faith, love and peace. The object is a participle clause with the participle ἐπικαλουμένων functioning substantivally.

ἐκ καθαρᾶς καρδίας] another prepositional phrase, here modifying the participle of the previous clause, ἐπικαλουμένων. It’s not just those who call on the Lord, but those who call on the Lord “from” or “out of” a pure heart. On purity of heart, see also 1Ti 1.5.

Verse 23

τὰς δὲ μωρὰς καὶ ἀπαιδεύτους ζητήσεις παραιτοῦ] This clause, again, is ordered Object-Verb, and again the verb (παραιτοῦ) is imperative. This is a third exhortation, here Paul wants Timothy to reject “foolish and ignorant speculations”. After emphasizing the positive, Paul returns to make sure Timothy also understands what not to do. The “foolish and ignorant speculations” include anything that is contrary to Paul’s gospel. Anything that would prevent pursuing righteousness, faith, love and peace with others.

εἰδὼς ὅτι γεννῶσιν μάχας] participial clause with subordinate clause, modifying the imperative verb in the main clause. This provides the reason for avoiding “foolish and empty speculations”, it is because such things are the source of further battles. To avoid them is to avoid the later battles.

Verse 24

δοῦλον δὲ κυρίου οὐ δεῖ μάχεσθαι] Here again the δὲ implies a logical connection to what precedes, but little more. The negator ου modifies the verb δεῖ (“it is necessary”) adverbially. μάχεσθαι (“to fight”) is an infinitive verb, it takes δοῦλον .. κυρίου as its accusative subject. Note the repetition of the semantic notion of “fighting” with the cognate μαχ* and the consistent position against such fighting.

ἀλλὰ ἤπιον εἶναι] εἶναι is another infinitive verb which has implicitly the same subject as the previous infinitive, though it is unstated. The conjunction ἀλλὰ notes a relationship between this infinitive clause and the previous one. The previous verb (“to fight”) and this verb+object (“to be gentle”) provide the contrast and correction. The servant of the Lord does not fight (as in physically fight) but is instead gentle in the approach he takes to correct the false teaching and doctrine he encounters.

πρὸς πάντας] prepositional phrase functioning adjectivally. This provides the range of whom Timothy is to “be gentle” toward (at least in his correction of false doctrine). He is to be gentle toward everyone while he corrects.

διδακτικόν, ἀνεξίκακον] additional groups in the object. These as well function as objects of the infinitive verb, providing a comprehensive opposite to fighting: instead responding by physically fighting, he is to respond with gentleness toward all, the ability to teach, and patience. Note especially BDAG’s gloss of ἀνεξίκακος: “pertaining to bearing evil without resentment”. The idea is for Timothy to bear the person with love and correct the false doctrine — not to simply end the relationship with the person who has succumbed/is succumbing to false doctrine.

Verse 25

ἐν πραΰτητι παιδεύοντα τοὺς ἀντιδιατιθεμένους] participle clause; with prepositional phrase modifying participle. Note the continuance of the semantic notion of “gentleness” from verse 24. Instruction and correction of those opposing isn’t a smackdown, it is done (as specified above) in gentleness and love. This doesn’t mean that one gives ground, but it does mean that one is not belligerent in the maintaining and outlining of the true doctrine.

μήποτε δώῃ αὐτοῖς ὁ θεὸς μετάνοιαν] Subordinate clause. “that God may perhaps give repentance to them”. On μήποτε as “perhaps”, see BDAG μήποτε 3bβ, which classifies usage with the subjunctive in indirect questions (such as we have here). While not punctuated in the Greek with a question mark, this could perhaps also be a rhetorical question: “might not God give them repentance [leading to the truth]?”

εἰς ἐπίγνωσιν ἀληθείας] prepositional phrase, modifying the verb of the subordinate clause (δώῃ). The same prepositional phrase occurs in 1Ti 2.4; the function there is similar to here. The idea is that, though a gentle and patient approach, the mindset of the opponent can be changed. I think there is a bit of wordplay with the idea of repentance (μετάνοιαν, “changing the mind”) here, though the Christian idea of repentance also applies to some degree. The opponent must turn (repent) from the way of error and come to knowledge of the truth.

Verse 26

καὶ] joins the previous subordinate clause and the following subordinate clause (all of v. 26) together into one structure: “that God may give repentence and may come to their senses”

ἀνανήψωσιν] subjunctive verb, primary verb in the subordinate clause, “return to one’s senses”. NT hapax, but with adequate testimony in Philo (Leg II 60), Josephus (Ant 6.241; Wars 1.619) and Ignatius ($af(IgnSmyrn 9.1)). The Ignatius reference is most analogous to the instance here in 2Ti.

ἐκ τῆς τοῦ διαβόλου παγίδος] prepositional phrase, modifying the subjunctive verb. On “snare of the devil” see also 1Ti 3.7. By this langauge, realize, the opponents are actually presently trapped within “the snare of the devil”, and coming to their senses, repenting, and coming into knowledge of the truth will get the out.

ἐζωγρημένοι] participle clause (also containing the following two prepositional phrases), modifying the verb, explaining how and why the opponents ended up in the trap of the adversary. Occurs 2x in NT, here and also in Luke 5.10 where it is used of “catching” men (e.g., becoming fishers of men). Here the sense is of “catching alive”.

ὑπʼ αὐτοῦ] prepositional phrase, modifying the participle. “by him”, the referent being the devil/adversary. The opponents were captured alive by the adversary …

εἰς τὸ ἐκείνου θέλημα] … “to do his [the adversary’s] will”. Another prepositional phrase modifying the participle. θέλημα occurs 33x in the NT, 18 of those are as objects of prepositional phrases (as here). It occurs most commonly with δια (8x, usually “by the will …”, 5x in Pauline epistolary salutations, including the salutation to Second Timothy) and κατα (3x, “according to God’s will”). In Paul, outside of 1Co 7.37 and perhaps this instance, θέλημα as prepositional object always has to do with God’s will. There is some debate as to the referent of ἐκείνου here (does it refer to God or to Satan?). The plain referent (particularly if you just look at most English translations) seem to be devil/adversary; some ambiguity is present in the Greek, however. The pronoun ἐκεῖνος usually refers to a more distant referent (“that one” instead of “this one”). I’ve followed the traditional route (the same route as Marshall (768) and Knight (426)).

Second Timothy 2.14-21

[This is part of a running series on translating Second Timothy. See the introductory post for more information — RB]

Phrasing/Translation: 2Ti 2.14-21

14 Ταῦτα ὑπομίμνῃσκε
14 Remind them of these things,
    διαμαρτυρόμενος ἐνώπιον τοῦ θεοῦ 
    charging them before God
        μὴ λογομαχεῖν,
        not to fight about words, 
            ἐπʼ οὐδὲν χρήσιμον, 
            which is useful for nothing, 
            ἐπὶ καταστροφῇ τῶν ἀκουόντων. 
            resulting in the ruin of those who hear.

15 σπούδασον σεαυτὸν δόκιμον παραστῆσαι τῷ θεῷ,
15 Take pains to present yourself approved of God,
    ἐργάτην ἀνεπαίσχυντον,
    an unashamed worker,
    ὀρθοτομοῦντα τὸν λόγον τῆς ἀληθείας.
    guiding the word of truth along a straight path.

16 τὰς δὲ βεβήλους κενοφωνίας περιΐστασο·
16 But shun frivolous, empty talk, 
    ἐπὶ πλεῖον γὰρ προκόψουσιν ἀσεβείας 
    for such will lead to even more ungodliness
    17 καὶ ὁ λόγος αὐτῶν ὡς γάγγραινα νομὴν ἕξει.
    17 and their word will spread like gangrene.

ὧν ἐστιν Ὑμέναιος καὶ Φίλητος,
Of whom are Hymenaeus and Philetus,
    18 οἵτινες περὶ τὴν ἀλήθειαν ἠστόχησαν,
    18 who have strayed in regards to the truth,
    λέγοντες [τὴν] ἀνάστασιν ἤδη γεγονέναι,
    saying the resurrection has already taken place,
    καὶ ἀνατρέπουσιν τήν τινων πίστιν.
    and they upset the faith of some.

19 ὁ μέντοι στερεὸς θεμέλιος τοῦ θεοῦ ἕστηκεν,
19 However, the solid foundation of God stands,
    ἔχων τὴν σφραγῖδα ταύτην·
    bearing the following inscription:
        ἔγνω κύριος τοὺς ὄντας αὐτοῦ,
        “The Lord knows those who are His,”
            ἀπὸ ἀδικίας
            from wickedness
            πᾶς ὁ ὀνομάζων τὸ ὄνομα κυρίου.
            all who name the name of the Lord.”

    20 Ἐν μεγάλῃ δὲ οἰκίᾳ
    20 Now in a large house
οὐκ ἔστιν
there are not
    μόνον σκεύη χρυσᾶ καὶ ἀργυρᾶ
    only pots of gold and silver
    ἀλλὰ καὶ ξύλινα καὶ ὀστράκινα,
    but also pots of wood and clay,
    [ ]
        ἃ μὲν εἰς τιμὴν
        some for honor
        ἃ δὲ εἰς ἀτιμίαν·
        and some for dishonor.
    21 ἐὰν οὖν τις ἐκκαθάρῃ ἑαυτὸν
    21 If then anyone might cleanse himself
        ἀπὸ τούτων,
        from these,
    ἔσται σκεῦος
    he will be a pot
        εἰς τιμήν,
        for honor,
        having been made holy,
        εὔχρηστον τῷ δεσπότῃ,
        useful to the master,
        εἰς πᾶν ἔργον ἀγαθὸν ἡτοιμασμένον.
        having been prepared for every good work.


2Ti 2.14-26 is the larger section (cf. Van Neste, Marshall ICC); it will be examined in two smaller chunks: 2Ti 2.14-21 and 2Ti 2.22-26 (which the UBS4 text has as separate paragraphs).

Verse 14

Ταῦτα ὑπομίμνῃσκε] the section starts with another imperative, “Remind” or “Tell”; and a demonstrative pronoun. According to Runge, the pronoun is a “near demonstrative”. Here it is anaphoric, pointing back to the items which Paul has just discussed in previous verses (2Ti 2.1-13).

διαμαρτυρόμενος ἐνώπιον τοῦ θεοῦ] participial clause. The idiom “charging [you] before God” occurs elsewhere in the Pastorals, cf. 1Ti 5.21; 2Ti 4.1. A similar idiom with different verb (παραγγέλλω) is used in 1Ti 6.13. Here God is invoked as a witness of the charge that Paul is giving Timothy. While not strictly adhering to the syntactic criteria of the so-called “Charge Form” (cf. also Craig A. Smith, $amz(1905048297 Timothy’s Task, Paul’s Prospect: A New Reading of 2 Timothy)), it uses similar language complete with an appeal to authority. Timothy is to remind his hearers; one way to do that is to charge them before God of what it is they need to hear.

μὴ λογομαχεῖν] a negated infinitive, “not to fight about words”. As I read this currently, this is an exhortation from Paul to Timothy to not let folks disagree with them. The problem is false teaching, something that disagrees and is incompatible with Paul’s gospel. As Timothy presents this (charges them before God) he is to not let them fight about words; that is, he is to not let them disagree.

ἐπʼ οὐδὲν] The first of two subsequent prepositional phrases, both with ἐπὶ. Here it is ἐπὶ + accusative; “for nothing”; it appears to modify the word that follows, χρήσιμον. This analysis follows Marshall, ICC and differs with and Mounce WBC (and Lock, ICC) , which sees χρήσιμον as the object of the prepositional phrase. There isn’t much functional difference, but there is some difference in translation. This is the reason why one shouldn’t fight about words, it is useful for nothing. The next prepositional phrase gives the result.

χρήσιμον] a predicate adjective, “useful”.

ἐπὶ καταστροφῇ τῶν ἀκουόντων] The second prepositional phrase, here ἐπὶ + dative. This prepositional phrase communicates the result of the fight about words; it will result in the ruin of those hearing.

Verse 15

σπούδασον] aorist active imperative, “Take pains” or “make every effort” (BDAG); ESV “Do your best”. The action is completed with the following infinitive clause that functions as a complement. Paul uses σπουδαζω + infinitive three times outside of the Pastorals (Ga 2.10; Eph 4.3; 1Th 2.17); the same structure occurs 3x in Second Timothy: 2Ti 2.15; 4.9, 21. The structure also occurs in Heb 4.11; 2Pe 1.10, 15; 3.14.

σεαυτὸν δόκιμον παραστῆσαι τῷ θεῷ] Infinitive clause. Note that δόκιμον is in an appositive relation (also known as an “epexegetical” relation) with the following clause, “an unashamed worker”.

ἐργάτην ἀνεπαίσχυντον] appositional clause. Runge calls it a “Right Dislocation”, describing an appositional functionality. Here “approved” is further explained/enhanced by “an unashamed worker”. Both phrases describe a similar aspect of the same person.

ὀρθοτομοῦντα τὸν λόγον τῆς ἀληθείας] participial clause, further modifying the adjective ἀνεπαίσχυντον. The interesting word here is the participle ὀρθοτομοῦντα, which only occurs here in the NT. While the traditional translation, which apparently hearkens back to Tyndale, is “rightly divide”, the basic idea of the word is “to cut a straight path” (BDAG). This is supported by LXX usage (Pr 3.6; 11.5). Spicq’s article in TLNT is worth consulting on ὀρθοτομέω, it tracks classical references to show how making a straight path “takes on a metaphorical sense” (Spicq, 2:595). See also the seven-part article on the Better Bibles Blog on this word. Many commentaries seem to focus on this word in isolation instead of noting its larger context; first in the immediately-following contrast with “frivolous, empty talk” and second with v. 17’s “their word will spread like gangrene”. Here, the word of truth is guided along a straight path, in v. 17 “their word” spreads like gangrene. That’s quite a contrast.

Verse 16

τὰς δὲ βεβήλους κενοφωνίας περιΐστασο] The δὲ is developmental; it shows a loose coupling between the previous section and this section, but implies a moving on from the previous section. The verb περιΐστασο is a middle imperative, but it is at the end of the clause—the position of the verb in the clause brings prominence to it. Also, as noted above, the contrast between this and the word of truth guided along a straight path.

ἐπὶ πλεῖον γὰρ προκόψουσιν ἀσεβείας] γὰρ indicates that the clause offers support as to why the babbling chatter is to be ignored: because it leads to greater (even more) ungodliness. Here the prepositional phrase is emphasized (prominent) as it is fronted in the clause.

Verse 17

καὶ ὁ λόγος αὐτῶν] “their word” is that of the opponents. Note the last mention of λόγος was above in v. 15, with v. 16 also operating in the domain of communication (“frivolous, empty talk”, also in reference to the opponents.

ὡς γάγγραινα νομὴν ἕξει] “will spread like gangrene”. BDAG uses “cancer” in its gloss (BDAG, νομή 2). Contrast this with the order of the spread of the word of truth in v. 15, “guiding the word of truth along a straight path”.

ὧν ἐστιν Ὑμέναιος καὶ Φίλητος] Here Paul singles out two of the opponents, bringing new participants into the discourse. The relative pronoun refers to the whole group.

Verse 18

οἵτινες περὶ τὴν ἀλήθειαν ἠστόχησαν] The relative pronoun has Hymenaeus and Philetus as its referent. The prepositional phrase περὶ τὴν ἀλήθειαν “concerning the truth” brings the subject matter into focus so the rest of clause has the information it needs to make sense. First, Paul had to activate Hymenaeus and Philetus; next he has to bring the topic of discussion into focus: regarding the truth (recall the subject matter of this letter and First Timothy before it: right doctrine), these men have strayed from it.

λέγοντες [τὴν] ἀνάστασιν ἤδη γεγονέναι] participle clause. This details how “straying from the truth” has taken place: the opponents say that the resurrection has already taken place.

καὶ ἀνατρέπουσιν τήν τινων πίστιν] In addition to “straying from the truth”, the opponents, personified in Hymenaeus and Philetus, have “upset the faith of some”. The καὶ logically connects ἠστόχησαν (aorist active indicative 3d plural) and ἀνατρέπουσιν (present active indicative 3d plural); they “went astray” and now they “upset”.

Verse 19

ὁ μέντοι στερεὸς θεμέλιος τοῦ θεοῦ ἕστηκεν] BDAG labels μέντοι as “mostly adversative”; Runge sees this as a point, the previous phrase being the counterpoint. I think it’s probably larger; that is, μέντοι is a hinge between the previous complex and this one: While the opponents continue schlepping ungodliness [μέντοι] the solid foundation of God stands.

ἔχων τὴν σφραγῖδα ταύτην] participle clause, providing support for the assertion that the solid foundation of God stands. It not only stands, it is inscribed with what follows. Note ταύτην, which points forward to what is inscribed on the foundation.

ἔγνω κύριος τοὺς ὄντας αὐτοῦ] treated as a quotative frame. This is a statement, “The Lord knows those who are his”.

καί] connective, joining the two quotative frames.

ἀποστήτω ἀπὸ ἀδικίας] first portion of the quotative frame. The prepositional phrase ἀπὸ ἀδικίας functions adverbially to provide circumstance to the verb; “depart from wickedness”.

πᾶς ὁ ὀνομάζων τὸ ὄνομα κυρίου] The participial clause functions as the subject of the whole clause. “The ones naming” is the substantival participle (in the nominative) while “the name of the Lord”, in the accusative, is the object of the participial clause; the whole thing functioning as a unit “all who are naming the name of the Lord”. These are the ones who are to “depart from wickedness”.

Verse 20

Ἐν μεγάλῃ δὲ οἰκίᾳ] Fronted prepositional phrase, here functioning as a “spatial frame” (Runge). In order for the balance of the clause to make sense, the changed scene needs to be made known. Here the switch is to a metaphor, or a wisdom statement.

οὐκ ἔστιν μόνον σκεύη χρυσᾶ καὶ ἀργυρᾶ] First portion of a counterpoint/point set using ἀλλὰ as hinge. This is a relatively standard structure, οὐ μόνον/ἀλλὰ καὶ (“not only/but also”) that is corrective and, to some degree, additive. (For more on this structure, see ΕΝ ΕΦΕΣΩ on its use in 4 Maccabees) In the large house, there are not only gold and silver pots …

ἀλλὰ καὶ ξύλινα καὶ ὀστράκινα] … there are also wood and clay pots. This is the second portion of the counterpoint/point set. Here Paul has effectively outlined two different sets of things (gold and silver; wood and clay) that occur in a larger context (the house).

καὶ ἃ μὲν εἰς τιμὴν] Here again is the first portion of a counterpoint/point set, indicated by μὲν/δὲ. This relates directly to the previous counterpoint/point set. With the two different sets of pots (gold and silver; wood and clay); some of those are for honor …

ἃ δὲ εἰς ἀτιμίαν] … and some for dishonor. This is the second portion, again. The relationships are well specified. Paul’s larger point is that in the set of things, some things are formed for honorable duty, others for dishonorable duty.

Verse 21

ἐὰν οὖν τις ἐκκαθάρῃ ἑαυτὸν ἀπὸ τούτων] Fronted subordinate clause (“Conditional-Exceptive Frame”, according to Runge), with prepositional phrase modifying the verb. We’re moving from the metaphor/wisdom statement into the real situation the metaphor is intended to describe. So here “from these” likely refers to what needs to be cleansed from dishonor (it makes no sense to cleanse the honorable ones, they’re already clean) in order to become honorable. The distinction between pots (gold/silver; wood/clay) has transformed to a distinction between honorable and dishonorable. Unlike pots in a house, those who are dishonorable can be cleansed and become honorable.

ἔσται σκεῦος] If cleansed, “he will be a pot”; this has four components (each in the accusative case; the whole thing a series of word groups functioning as the complement of the clause []) that follow it up and describe the “cleansed pot” (thus, the one who has repented from the false doctrine [dishonor] and been cleansed and now is read to live the true doctrine [honor]).

εἰς τιμήν] a prepositional phrase, “for honor”. Once cleansed, the pot is no longer used for dishonorable purposes.

ἡγιασμένον] passive participle, “having been made holy”. This describes that the pot is now cleansed, and that the pot didn’t do it to itself.

εὔχρηστον τῷ δεσπότῃ] noun phrase, in the accusative, with a dative noun phrase qualifying the usefulness. “useful to the master”. The now-clean vessel is once again useful to the master of the house.

εἰς πᾶν ἔργον ἀγαθὸν ἡτοιμασμένον] participle clause, with fronted prepositional phrase. According to Runge, this provides emphasis to the object of the prepositional phrase.

Note: The second portion of this chunk, 2Ti 2.22-26, will be discussed in a subsequent post.

Second Timothy 2.8-13

[This is part of a running series on translating Second Timothy. See the introductory post for more information — RB]

Phrasing/Translation: 2Ti 2.8-13

8 Μνημόνευε Ἰησοῦν Χριστὸν
8 Remember Jesus Christ,
        ἐκ νεκρῶν,
        from the dead,
    ἐκ σπέρματος Δαυίδ,
    from the seed of David, 
    κατὰ τὸ εὐαγγέλιόν μου, 
    according to my gospel;

9 ἐν ᾧ κακοπαθῶ 
9 in which I suffer misfortune, 
    μέχρι δεσμῶν 
    even to being bound with chains 
        ὡς κακοῦργος, 
        as a criminal, 
    ἀλλὰ ὁ λόγος τοῦ θεοῦ οὐ δέδεται· 
    but the word of God has not been bound.

    10 διὰ τοῦτο 
    10 For this reason 
πάντα ὑπομένω
I endure all things
    διὰ τοὺς ἐκλεκτούς, 
    for the sake of the elect,
    ἵνα καὶ αὐτοὶ σωτηρίας τύχωσιν
    so that they may also obtain salvation 
        τῆς ἐν Χριστῷ Ἰησοῦ
        which is in Christ Jesus
        μετὰ δόξης αἰωνίου.
        with eternal glory.

11 πιστὸς ὁ λόγος·
11 This saying is trustworthy:
    εἰ γὰρ συναπεθάνομεν, καὶ συζήσομεν·
    For if we died together, we will also live together;
    12 εἰ ὑπομένομεν, καὶ συμβασιλεύσομεν·
    12 If we endure, we will also rule together as kings;
    εἰ ἀρνησόμεθα, κἀκεῖνος ἀρνήσεται ἡμᾶς·
    If we will deny him, He also will deny us;
    13 εἰ ἀπιστοῦμεν, ἐκεῖνος πιστὸς μένει,
    13 If we are unfaithful, he remains faithful,
        ἀρνήσασθαι γὰρ ἑαυτὸν οὐ δύναται.
        for he is unable to deny himself.


Recall that 2Ti 2.1-13 is likely one section, with subsections of 2Ti 2.1-7 and 2Ti 2.8-13. See previous entry on 2Ti 2.1-7.

Verse 8

Μνημόνευε Ἰησοῦν Χριστὸν] Here μνημονεύω is an imperative, in the second person singular; Ἰησοῦν Χριστὸν (accusative) is the object of the verb. Timothy is to remember Jesus Christ. Paul provides other supplementary information about Christ, discussed below.

ἐγηγερμένον ἐκ νεκρῶν] participial clause, here further describing “Jesus Christ”. One important aspect of Paul’s gospel is that Jesus Christ was raised from the dead.

ἐκ σπέρματος Δαυίδ] prepositional phrase, this as well modifies “Jesus Christ”, providing us even more essential information about him: He has not only been raised from the dead, he is also of the seed of David.

κατὰ τὸ εὐαγγέλιόν μου] prepositional phrase, with accusative object. I believe that this as well modifies “Jesus Christ” and acts as a summary statement: “Remember Jesus Christ … according to my gospel”. Note ESV’s translation, “as preached in my gospel”, which inserts a verb (“as preached in”) that doesn’t actually exist in the text.

Verse 9

Note: v. 9 in the above assumes the start of a new clause unit. Here I follow Marshall who notes “In terms of syntax the next phrase is added on loosely to the preceding phrase by a rel. pron., but it should probably be regarded as a main affirmation. The rel. construction is used, as frequently, as a link and not as a means of subordination.” (ICC Pastoral Epistles, 736)

ἐν ᾧ κακοπαθῶ] another prepositional phrase, this with a relative clause (headed by a dative relative pronoun) as the object, “in which I suffer”. The pronoun’s referent is Paul’s gospel. He suffers because of what he preaches (some content of which is reflected in the emphasis on Jesus Christ, risen from the dead, and of the seed of David).

μέχρι δεσμῶν] μέχρι can be parsed as an adverb or as an improper preposition. Here the phrase provides further circumstance to the suffering, indicating the extent of which or degree of which Paul will endure: he will “suffer even to the point of being imprisoned” (BDAG). Here δεσμῶν is best translated using “bound” in some way (“bound in chains”) due to the play on words in the upcoming αλλα statement.

ὡς κακοῦργος] adverbial, further circumstance to the main verb, κακοπαθῶ. Note also the κακ* stem being repeated (cf. κακοπαθῶ above). Paul suffers “in chains/bonds”, he suffers “as a criminal”.

ἀλλὰ ὁ λόγος τοῦ θεοῦ οὐ δέδεται] Here the αλλα offers correction to the previous statement. Paul has set himself up as an example. He preached his gospel, concerning Christ’s resurrection, and as a result suffered as a criminal, even being imprisoned. But, Paul avers, “the word of God has not been bound!” Here the contrast is in the binding. Even though Paul has been shut up in prison, the word of God has continued its proclamation. Paul takes heart in this, and is exhorting Timothy to continue in preaching Jesus Christ, to continue to ensure that the word of God will be preached and proclaimed.

Verse 10

διὰ τοῦτο] Fronted prepositional phrase, providing circumstance to the following verb. The referent of τοῦτο (“this”) is likely looking back (thus following Marshall, ICC 737; though cf. Knight, NIGTC 398, who sees it as looking ahead).

πάντα] Fronted object. Translated “all things”, serves as the object of the verb. Runge labels it with “main clause emphasis”, though it isn’t “emphasized” as one would normally think. Runge says it is the most important information in the clause.

ὑπομένω] Present active indicative, here in the sense of “endure” (cf. 1Ti 6.11). Paul endures all things because of Christ and the gospel. See also v. 12 below, where the same word is used (in the “faithful saying”).

διὰ τοὺς ἐκλεκτούς] prepositional phrase, “for the sake of the elect”, providing circumstance to the verb. Paul perseveres in spite of persecution so that he is a continuing example to those who will later be persecuted.

ἵνα καὶ αὐτοὶ σωτηρίας τύχωσιν] subordinate clause, ἵνα + τύχωσιν, “so that they may obtain”. Note the extra inclusion of the pronoun αὐτοὶ, “they”, making the subject explicit instead of implicit (via grammaticalization of the verb person/number). This is a specific referent, referring back to the elect. Also notice the “adverbial” καὶ; usually translated “also”. Lastly, σωτηρίας (accusative) is what is also being obtained. On salvation language in the Pastoral Epistles, see George Weiland, $amz(1597527211 The Significance of Salvation: A Study of Salvation Language in the Pastoral Epistles), who discusses this specific instance as well as every other instance in the PE.

τῆς ἐν Χριστῷ Ἰησοῦ] Here the article functions like a relative pronoun, thus this structure functions like a relative clause; the prepositional phrase provides circumstance to the implied “is” verb; “which is in Christ Jesus”. The referent of the article functioning as pronoun is σωτηρίας in the previous clause.

μετὰ δόξης αἰωνίου] prepositional phrase, providing circumstance to the verb of the subordinate clause.

Verse 11

Note: πιστὸς ὁ λόγος is a catch phrase in the Pastoral Epistles. The full scope of it will not be examined here. Sometimes it is cataphoric, sometimes it is anaphoric. See Knight, $amz(0801054028 The Faithful Sayings in the Pastoral Letters), for more information.

πιστὸς ὁ λόγος] Here this acts almost like a quotation formula, indicating some sort of likely quoted material that follows as worthy and somehow relevant to the current context. It is followed by four conditional clauses, which various commentators have made various suggestions concerning the relationship between clauses and progression of subject matter within the clauses.

γὰρ] The γὰρ offers support, connecting the introduction to the “faithful word” to this group of clauses. Several commentaries (Marshall is best; Mounce and Knight are also worthy of consultation) handle the four statements as a unit, discussing possible approaches to them. The interesting aspects to me involve the tenses of each conditional clause as well as any semantic contrast present by virtue of concepts/words used. Also necessary is to recall the larger context from above; Paul has just laid out essential aspects of his “gospel”; he has said that even if he is bound, the word of God is not bound; he has encouraged Timothy to continue to proclaim his gospel; he has noted his own motive for “enduring all things”, which is to bring Christ’s salvation to the ones who are his. Here the “faithful word” justifies/provides support for Paul’s action, and for Paul’s exhortation of Timothy to endure as Paul has endured.

εἰ γὰρ συναπεθάνομεν, καὶ συζήσομεν] conditional clause. The καὶ is adverbial. Note contrast in the verbs, between aorist “we died together” and future “we will live together”. The καὶ ties the two actions together, bringing an almost sequential vibe to the wisdom saying.

Verse 12

εἰ ὑπομένομεν, καὶ συμβασιλεύσομεν] conditional clause. The καὶ is adverbial here as well. Here the contrast in verbs is between the present tense “if we endure” and the future tense “we will also reign”. Again, the effect is to create sequence between the two verbs. Note also lexical cohesion with earlier instance of ὑπομένω in v. 10, above. Here present difficulties, if rightly endured, are rewarded in the future.

εἰ ἀρνησόμεθα, κἀκεῖνος ἀρνήσεται ἡμᾶς] conditional clause. Here the first verb is a future tense verb; the crasis κἀκεῖνος (και + ἐκεῖνος) consists of an adverbial και and the demonstrative pronoun. This is interesting because of the function of the demonstrative. Runge (following Levinsohn) calls ἐκεῖνος in such circumstances the “far demonstrative”, hence a sense of “that” or “that one” is intended. This, combined with the middle voice of the repeated verb could be translated “if we deny [him]; that one, he will also deny us”. The effect is to focus on the second party who is somewhat removed from the current context, the one initially denied, and his reaction to the denial. I’ve not followed this translation above, but that is largely because it sounds clunky. The sense is there, and I may revisit to see if some of the idea can be worked in more smoothly.

Verse 13

εἰ ἀπιστοῦμεν, ἐκεῖνος πιστὸς μένει] conditional clause. Again, note the tenses of the two verbs; here they are both present. Also again note the presence of ἐκεῖνος, the “far demonstrative”. Again, it could be translated “If we are unfaithful, that one, he remains faithful”. Also interesting is the lexical cohesion; here μενω could be seen as part of a semantic chain with the two previous instances of ὑπομένω (vv. 10 & 12).

ἀρνήσασθαι γὰρ ἑαυτὸν οὐ δύναται] This offers support to the previous clause, God remains faithful because he cannot deny himself. This provides the motive/support for remaining faithful. Some (e.g. Runge, Knight, Marshall, Mounce) see the cause as functionally subordinate while others (e.g. mark it as a separate top-level clause. Some lexical cohesion within the unit is present with the repeating of ἀρνήσασθαι (cf. v. 12b above). The infinitive clause functioning as complement (ἀρνήσασθαι .. ἑαυτὸν, “to deny himself”) is fronted, with a negator and a verb following (“not he is able”). The infinitive clause completes the primary verb (“he is not able to deny himself”).

« Older posts

© 2024 Pastoral Epistles

Theme by Anders NorenUp ↑