The central Presbyterian. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1856-1908, 1881-10-19
For the Central Presbyterian.
What is the True Rendering of
9 Timothy iii: l6?


IS. '" in the Central of October 9Th, ex-
hibits spirit so candid and excellent
that do not think he will object to a
brief rejoinder And, Notwithstanding
your well-founded and often expressed
aversion to protracted debate, hope the
Importance of the question, and the earn
est wish of all who discuss it to reach a
sound conclusion, will induce you to in
sert few more remarks from me.
as. does not call in question the cor
rectness of the view of the original pas
sage given by the able professor of Greek
from whose letter l have quoted That
view is, that the passage is capable OF
being translated, with perfect gram
NAUTICAL correctness, both in the sense OF
the new and of. the old version" The
simple question, therefore, is: Which
version gives most accurately the in
spired thought which was in the mind of
Paul? On this question, in my former
article, invoked the aid of both usage
and history and gave, with some care,
the elements and facts on which Just
conclusion may be founded. as" admits
the accuracy of all the separate state
ments as to the use Of the word grophe
and its plural graphai in the Greek les
lament, made by me; but insists that the
fair and logical conclusion to be drawn
from them is the exact contrary to the
conclusion drawn by me, and is favorable
to the old version of the text This, of
course, eliminates from the problem all
doubG as to the ell, ments and facts in
volved and brings us down to simple
question of sound reasoning to be deter
mined by the fixed principles of logical
science.
Without intending to do injustice to
the subject, as" seems to have fallen into
obvious error in stating the syllogism in
volved. He states it as though the usage
1 disclosed authorized the following
Major premise. All the cases in the New
Testament in which the word grophe OF
it's plural is used, apply only to inspired
Scripture. Minor premise. 2 Timothy
iii: l6, is one of those cases: Sequitetr.
Therefore 2 Timothy iii 16, applies only
to inspired Scripture. But the fatal vice
of his reasoning is, that he, unintention-
ally but completely, misstates the form
of the syllogism required by the facts OF
usage disclosed by my former article
Those facts are as follows: The noun
graph6, in itself, means nothing more nor
less than scripture-a writing of any
kind, and therefore pas0 grophe-all
scripture, every scripture-every writing,
taken in its natural and universal mean
ing, would include the writings of Ho-
mer, Herodotus, and Hesiod, as well as
those of Moses, Ezra, David, and Isaiah.
And in the inspired New Testament,
this noun is used forty-ni1ae times; but in
forty-elght of these instances the writer
takes care by his CONTEXT and his direct
citations from the Old Testament to limit
the meaning of the word to inspired
Scripture. In the forty-ni1ath instance,
he does not, either by context or citation,
SO limit it, and therefore the inference is
Legitimate that in that forty-ninth in
stance, no such limitation was intended.
Thus, from these facts the syllogism
forms itself as follows
MAJOR. All cases in which graphic is
used in the New Testament, in the known
sense Of inspired Scripture, fix that sense
by the context or by direct citation.
Minor. 2 Timothy iii: 16, is case in
which graphic is used without fixing that
sense by the context or by direct citation
Segu1tlr. Therefore Timothy Iii /: 16,
is case in which grophe is not used in
the known sense of inspired Scripture
This conclusion from admitted premises
will stand the most rigid test that the
laws of the human mind can apply.
AS to the legitimate argument from
usage 1 admit it as fully as as" does. In
fact 1 rely on it, for it is entirely in favor
Of the revised rendering That argu-
ment is simply as follows: When a word
is used frequently by writer or in any
connected work, and it is perfectly GER
tain that in forty eight cases out Of forty
nine, that word as thus used has special
meaning, then we have a right to con-
clude that in the forty-ninth case also, it
has that special meaning. But let us
suppose that the word used (graphe for
example) has no special meaning, but
only general meaning, and that in forty
eight cases out Of the forty nine, that gen