2 Timothy 3

Selfishness in last days; only a form of Godliness 1
They are seductive; never learning 6
But you know my doctrine; godliness brings persecution 10
Continue in what you know; all Scripture is inspired 14
Which version? below
Text Comments
.1 ¶ This know also, that in the last days perilous times shall come.
.2  For men shall be lovers of their own selves, covetous, boasters, proud, blasphemers, disobedient to parents, unthankful, unholy,
.3  Without natural affection, trucebreakers, false accusers, incontinent, fierce, despisers of those that are good,
.4  Traitors, heady, highminded, lovers of pleasures more than lovers of God;
.5  Having a form of godliness, but denying the power thereof: from such turn away.
  3 - Natural affection It is natural for a man and a woman to have affection for each other. See ro0126., ro0131. Paul describes same-sex partners.
  5 - Form of godliness mt2323.
  5 - Power thereof The power to become more godlike may be seen in changes in character. In the last days (now) we find Christianity as either form and ceremony or as living as if sin doesn't matter once we have asked for forgiveness mal0315. See ez3331.
.6  For of this sort are they which creep into houses, and lead captive silly women laden with sins, led away with divers lusts,
.7  Ever learning, and never able to come to the knowledge of the truth.
.8  Now as Jannes and Jambres withstood Moses, so do these also resist the truth: men of corrupt minds, reprobate concerning the faith.
.9  But they shall proceed no further: for their folly shall be manifest unto all men, as theirs also was.

  6 - This sort As described in previous verses. Those with only a form of godliness serve from corrupt motivation and derive support from those they can mentally seduce.
  6 - Silly women Literally "little women." Many people give money to organizations that seem good only to find out that the promises were untrue.
  7 - Ever learning Not that they are becoming well educated but they continue to listen to questionable religious teachers and are distracted from the simple truth of the word.
  8 - James and Jambres "traditional names of the Egyptian magicians who resisted Moses (Ex 7:11,22), derived from 'the unwritten teaching of the Jews.' In a point so immaterial as the names, where Scripture had not recorded them, Paul takes the names which general opinion had assigned the magicians [of Pharaoh]." (Jamieson-Fausset-Brown Commentary)
  9 - Folly From anoia, meaning "lack of understanding."
.10 ¶ But thou hast fully known my doctrine, manner of life, purpose, faith, longsuffering, charity, patience,
.11  Persecutions, afflictions, which came unto me at Antioch, at Iconium, at Lystra; what persecutions I endured: but out of them all the Lord delivered me.
.12  Yea, and all that will live godly in Christ Jesus shall suffer persecution.
.13  But evil men and seducers shall wax worse and worse, deceiving, and being deceived.
   12 - All ... shall suffer Not just ministers. See also jn1518, 1pe0412.
  13 - Evil men ... worse Certainly a characteristic of corrupt governments around the world today.
.14  But continue thou in the things which thou hast learned and hast been assured of, knowing of whom thou hast learned them;
.15  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.
.16  All scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness: On translations, see below.
.17  That the man of God may be perfect, throughly furnished unto all good works.

  16 - Inspiration Does this mean the writer was inspired or that the words were? Of course both are but some believe that the Holy Spirit dictated and the prophets wrote down the words. See lu0101 and compare ge0207 remembering that "inspire" may mean breathing in or into.
  17 - Perfect From artios meaning "equipped" or "complete."
Timothy home
Commentary home: other books, contact, etc.

Luther believed that doctrine should be based on Scripture
The Catholic Church which he opposed, claimed that tradition was to be the standard

Which version?

The KJV (King James Version or AV, Authorized Version) is very good although a number of words are not correctly translated. Marginal notes help. The New King James (NKJV) is probably better. It tends to follow the KJV apparently because it is translated from the same basic Hebrew, Greek and Aramaic manuscripts that translators rely on. All modern language translations tend to draw from other sources than these basic manuscripts mentioned. Modern translations such as NIV, NEB, NJB, etc. Errors of the KJV are corrected. These are generally insignificant to the truth of the text. On the Bible Explained website, corrections are being noted as part of the "comments.". For the Greek and Hebrew words, Italics are used. Archaic words in the KJV can be confusing. Having said this, I would emphasize that the KJV presents the inspired truth and is able to make us wise for salvation (2 Tim. 3:15). Its errors do not tend to misrepresent the flow of the text. Here are typical examples: Jer. 10:17 and Acts 7:45. Other minor revisions based on the KJV are available including the MKJV, Modern King James Version. At least once the KJV is more accurate, considering the context, than the NKJV. Dan. 12:13 (last verse in the book) “But go thou thy way till the end be: for thou shalt rest, and stand in thy lot at the end of the days.” The RSV agrees with the KJV but most others don't.

= = = = = = = = = = = =
"The King-James-Only position is most prevalent within the fundamentalist and Independent Baptist branch of the Baptist movement in Christianity. The rejection of modern translations is based in part on the different original-language texts which were used as source material for the different translations of the Bible. In regards to the New Testament, most modern translations are mainly translated from the Alexandrian manuscripts, primarily represented by the Codex Vaticanus, Codex Sinaiticus and some other 50-odd minority texts. The King James Version originates from the Textus Receptus, otherwise known as the Received Text, which is a representative of the Byzantine text-type (but not identical with the "Majority Text" as that term is currently used)." From Wikipedia Internet encyclopedia. Viewed July 9, 2006.

The New American Standard Bible 1977, probably more faithful to the original language, not following particular doctrines because they are popular in some churches. Questionable texts and translations are very few cosidering the size of the Bible.

Criticism of the NKJV. A defense of the KJV is presented by Pastor Clark. His desire for the pure word is certainly commendable but I find it zeal without knowledge (Rom. 10:2).
   I am not an expert in biblical languages but have studied them to some degree including the history of the RSV. I also was personally acquainted with Dr. Gerhard Hasel who was on the team of translators for the NKJV and know him to be very careful in accuracy. Incidentally the Textus Receptus was attached to the KJV text by someone who was promoting the sale of the then new Bibles. It was promoted as the text to be received by all, thus the Latin words.
   Also, the KJV that we have today is very different from the original KJV of 1611. If I remember correctly our current Bible is the second revision after that.
   The logo: Many NKJV Bibles have no logo. 
   On 100,000 translation changes: Most or all were probably needed. For example ”cometh” is replaced with “comes,” “tarry” with “wait,” in 2 Kings 2:2. I opened my Bible at random for this word, “wait.”
   In Hebrews 10:4, the Interlinear Greek translation is “being sanctified.”
   “Jehovah” is equivalent to “Yahweh.” They came from the sounds of the same Hebrew letters.
   The KJV has many wrong translations of the original Hebrew, Aramaic, and Greek texts. The hand of the Lord was still over it. Scholars today have the advantage of many manuscripts and a more accurate understanding of many words. No one is going to be lost by studying either the modern or the old Bibles. 
   The NIV is more problematic. I studied through a list of NIV words said to be in error and misleading and found half a dozen were indeed incorrect. Human translators bring their own theological biases and sometimes consciously or unconsciously bend the translation. Even the NIV should not be cast off. It is clear and should not affect the salvation of its readers. It is always good to look at more than one translation. Any word in question should be understood by the context, too.

May God bless His word and our study,

= = = = = = = = = = = =
We always need to study the context of a verse and be careful to compare translations.

The NIV is a good translation in being easy to read and footnotes can help where there are questions. However, for many texts it interprets rather than translating. This means deliberately changing the meaning of the manuscript reading. One of these is 2 Cor. 5. The NIV has been revised a few times without a change in its name.

My personal Bible is the New American Standard Bible (NASB) It has been followed by the Updated NASB. The NASB includes a few questionable translations. It is important to check context and compare translations for any Bible. All point to Christ as the way of salvation.

May the Creator God be strength and hope for us all

Commentary home:  http://www.bibleexplained.com .