I don’t keep a list of people who hold this view or that view, but I doubt you can seriously believe that there are not scholars who disagree with your views on inerrancy, inspiration, and whether the Bible claims to be the Word of God.
My friend is not well now. I will not distract him.
What about the ASV? Or simply get a Greek Interlinear. Look up the passage. There is no “is” in the Greek. It is “every inspired scripture,” not “all/every scripture is inspired.”
If you don’t think the Greek Interlinear is authoritative enough, then I can’t help you.
I’m sorry to hear your friend is not well and pray they will recover soon. However I don’t see how providing their name is a distraction to them exactly? If I appealed to a friend who was an expert in a field I would expect people to ask for his/her name. If I were unwilling to provide the name, I would be cautious about appealing to such an authority at all…
I’m going to assume that you and your friend understand how Greek works, right? namely, that English words like ‘is’ are often implied by the construction of the Greek grammar?
1 Like
So, in other words, you’ve got nothing. 
There are people who argue for a whole range of things. Asserting their mere existence is not a counter-argument. Their credentials and expertise, respect among their peers, and quality of arguments matter. I acknowledge inerrancy is debated among Christians. I am happy to grant that Christian scholars argue for both. What I am highly skeptical of is your contention that lots of Christian scholars argue against the Bible as special revelation and against the doctrine of inspiration.
I have actually read up quite a bit on inerrancy debates. I do not recall ever reading any Christian scholar, even quite progressive ones, who deny the Christian doctrine of inspiration and revelation. It’s actually the other way around. They go out of their way to say that one can still affirm the Bible as God’s inspired word, special revelation, even if it is not inerrant.
4 Likes
This is what the early church father had to say about the veracity of the Old Testament and its relation to the NT:
(174) Jesus, therefore, is the Word of God who enters the soul, which is called Jerusalem, riding on an ass which has been loosed from its bonds by the disciples. Now by the ass I mean the artless letters of the Old Testament which are clarified by the two disciples who loose them. One of these disciples is the person who refers the things which have been written anagogically to the service of the soul and who interprets them allegorically for it, and the other is the one who presents the good and true things which are to be through those things which are found in the shadow.
(175) Now he is also riding the young colt, which is the New Testament. For it is possible to find in both Testaments the word of truth (Cf. 1 Cor 6.7) which cleanses us and drives out all the arguments which are buying and selling in us.
(176) But he does not enter the soul, which is Jerusalem, alone; neither does he enter with a certain few. For there must be many things present in us which precede the Word of God who perfects us, and many others which follow him. All, however, praise and glorify him, and place their own adornment and garment under him, that his mounts might not touch the earth (Cf. Dn 8.5) since they have the one who has come down from heaven resting upon them.
ORIGEN’S COMMENTARY ON JOHN, BOOK 10, Pages 295
If you don’t know the original language using an interlinear is not a good way to do a translation.
What I do is look at multiple translations. Biblehub has 29 different translations of this verse and they all agree. The “is” may be an added English word but it is there because the Greek says it should be.
Care to back that up with any hard data? That fact that the translations don’t agree with your personal belief doesn’t count.
I will say that I believe translations are produced by humans and are therefore fallible. Which is why I go with the multiple translations.
2 Likes
Bill, Biblehub doesn’t have the ASV, NMB, DRA, or WYC — all of which correct the mistranslation?
And many others put the “is” in italics, demonstrating the insertion of a word not in the original text.
If you view the Bible as the Word of God, how can you support the insertion of a word that changes the meaning?
I will repost something a friend posted elsewhere. My friend learned Koine Greek as a teenage and continued his studies at Princeton Seminary. Here it is:
Here, the passage you invoke is 2 Timothy 3:16. And while you can read through dozens of various translations, they will mostly sound like the KJV because this verse has become a proof text to, well, … hose the newcomer.
(2Ti 3:16 KJV) All scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness:
However, that’s not what’s written. This is what was written:
(2Ti 3:16 Greek NT TR) πασα γραφη θεοπνευστος και ωφελιμος προς διδασκαλιαν προς ελεγχον προς επανορθωσιν προς παιδειαν την εν δικαιοσυνη
And the important segment of this verse is πασ α γραφη θεοπνευστος και ωφελιμος
So… yes, we kinda need a Greek grammar lesson here.
As shown by the work of J.W. Roberts way back in 1961, you can find twenty-one instances in the New Testament in wherein the word πασ (all or every) is used to modify a noun (γραφη) which is immediately followed by another adjective or adjectival clause (θεοπνευστος και ωφελιμος) as in 2 Tim.3:16.
In every case the Greek order of words is (1) πασ , (2) the noun, and (3) the adjective. And in every case, the English word order is (1) every, (2) the adjective, (3) the noun; except for 2nd Tim. 3:16. (And you’re smart enough to figure out why.)
Typical examples are:
“every good tree” (Mat 7:17)
“every idle word” (Mat 12:36)
“every good work” (2Co 9:8)
“every good work” (Col 1:10)
“every good work and word” (2Th 2:17)
“Every good gift” (Jas 1:17)
“every evil work” (Jas 3:16)
“every good work.” ( 2Ti 2:21)
“every evil work” ( 2Ti 4:18)
In no case of this usage is the adjective separated from the noun so as to be taken as a predicate, and as you can see this phrasing structure is found at least twice in 2 Tim. itself.
Roberts also lists several examples from the Septuagint (Gen 1:21, 30; Exod 12:6; 18:26; Deut 1:39; 17:1) which have the same order and in which the adjectives are predominantly attributive. So let’s look at the phrase again…
πασ α γραφη θεοπνευστος και ωφελιμος
This does not say, every writing is inspired… The verb “is” isn’t even present. Rather, as shown in the grammar above, the text says, “… every inspired and profitable writing…”
(2Ti 3:15,16) And that from a child thou hast known the holy scriptures (which are able to make thee wise unto salvation through faith which is in Christ Jesus) every inspired and profitable writing for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness:
It doesn’t say “All scripture is given by inspiration of God” - not even the verb “given” is in the text. Rather it’s saying, “thou has known the holy scriptures - every inspired and profitable scripture for…”
Second Timothy 3:16 is purposefully mistranslated so someone can Bible thump you over the head. Christians like to do that.
Hope this helps.
- Roberts, J. W. “Every Scripture Inspired of God.” Restoration Quarterly, 5 (1961), 33-37.
- Roberts, J. W. “Note on the Adjective after πασ in 2 Timothy 3:6.” Expository Times, 76 (1964-65), 359.
It doesn’t change the meaning. The Greek language allows for dropping the linking verb in attributive clauses. This is common in the languages of the world, but not allowed in standard English. Translations have to be grammatical in the target language. Adding ‘is’ is required by English grammar, not a mistranslation.
http://www.ntgreek.net/lesson14.htm#attributivepredicate
However, if an adjective in the nominative case stands in the predicate position, the verb can be and often is omitted without changing the meaning of the sentence.
2 Likes
If you think “all scripture is inspired” means the same thing as “all inspired scripture,” then we disagree again.
More than a few Greek scholars as or way more qualified than you have been involved in the manifold translations that you are dissing. It is only your not-so-humble opinion that continuing to drive this.
Dale, all you have to do is look at a Greek Interlinear to see the truth. There is no “is,” but the post of my friend above and the associated references are also there as proof.
And, for inerrancy, all you have to do is answer the question of whether Jesus told the Apostles to bring or not to being a staff on the missionary journey.
every good tree PRODUCES (subject of the clause, main verb present)
every careless word that (head of a relative clause)
in every good work (object of a preposition)
in every good work (object of a preposition)
every good gift IS COMING DOWN (subject of the clause main verb present)
THERE WILL BE every evil work (predicate, main verb present)
for every good work (object of preposition)
from every evil deed (object of preposition)
None of these examples are grammatically parallel examples to the verse in question, so your friend’s point doesn’t make any sense. He gave a bunch of examples of noun phrases in sentences with the same quantifier. That shows nothing grammatically, because you have to actually analyse how the noun phrase functions in the sentence you are looking at. In 2 Tim 4:18 it is clearly the subject of an attributive clause. There is no main verb in the sentence. It’s kind of dishonest of your friend to discount the punctuation and sentence breaks decided on by the scholars who compiled the most authoritative Greek versions of the NT. What justification does he have for skipping over the period at the end of verse 15 in his translation? That sounds more like a purposeful mistranslation to me.
2 Likes
I think “all inspired Scripture” is not a good translation, given the structure of the sentence. All major English Bible translation committees agree with me.
2 Likes
You can get additional information by downloading this article:
I have taken Greek and exegesis classes in the last five years, and I have an MA in Bible translation. I can attest to the fact that your friend’s argument about the translation of Greek attributive clauses has gained no traction in the sixty years since he published it, and all major translation committees, committees full of Greek scholars, have translated the verse as “all Scripture is God-breathed,” or something similar and not a single one has gone with trying to make that noun phrase part of the previous sentence about Timothy’s instruction. I’m no Greek expert, but I know enough to know when someone else is not being persuasive.
2 Likes
The bias is very strong, as translators have been inserting “is” and reordering the text of 2 Timothy 3 for at least 400 years to pad the resume of the Bible, with a possible motivation of balancing the Roman Catholic claims of papal authority.
Several translations (I listed 4 earlier) do not participate in the mistranslation.
You’re sounding a lot like a young earther with the conspiracy theories and the small group of people (or maybe just one) who rage against consensus scholarship to bring the enlightened few the truth. Sorry, but nope. Not buying any of it.
2 Likes
I am sorry you feel that way, Christy.
I checked Biblehub. You need to look again.
The ASV is there and disagrees.
Wycliffe is there and disagrees.
The Aramaic Bible in Plain English is there and disagrees.
The Douay-Rheims is there and disagrees.
The English Revised Version is there and disagrees.
How did you miss 5 versions in your review?