"Rightly Dividing" 2 Timothy 2:15

[throughfaith]

in slang terms we wouldn't be far off to translate this as "get the scripture straight" and my premise is that this carries the meaning of using and understanding it correctly & skillfully. i believe that understanding fencing well has carryover by analogy to understanding how to use the scripture well, and this thread is an example of it.

the word is a spiritual sword and the skillful use of a sword involves keeping the blade aligned with the motion of it. so the obvious question is, what is the motion of it? we know some things from scripture:

• all scripture is God-breathed
  • 2 Timothy 3:16-17
• scripture is given by men & women being moved by the Holy Spirit / the Holy Spirit speaking through them
  • 2 Peter 1:21, Mark 12:36, Acts 1:16

so the authorship of all the scripture is via the Spirit of God.
also we know,

• the Christian, the man or woman of God, the believer, the born-of-God is walking & moving by the Spirit when they are doing the will of God
  • John 3:5-7, Romans 8:4-5, Galatians 5:16, 5:25 etc etc
• our armament is spiritual and our warfare is spiritual, not earthly
  • 2 Corinthians 10:3-5, Ephesians 6:10-17, Romans 13:12, Romans 6:13
    • note: in Romans 6:13 the word "instruments" is probably better translated "armament" - in Greek it's a military term for a soldier's kit, describing both armor & weapons

so i will propose that "the motion of the sword" is by the Holy Spirit. this is true both when we talk about the Christian using the sword, and when we talk about the sword being used of God on the Christian to chasten, to teach, and to sanctify us as we read it. it's the action of the Holy Spirit - the intent of the sword is the intent of the Spirit of God, and so this is how the strikes and parries that the sword carries out are determined. the Spirit is the one wielding it in our own hearts, and when we pick it up to wield it, we're only using it rightly 'in proper form' when we are using it in the Spirit, following the Spirit, walking in the Spirit.

so, the arc the blade should travel in is the way the Spirit moves. when we handle the scripture we should keep it aligned with the working of the Spirit.
yeah, that's vague on the surface. i know. but that's why this is a thread, not a blog -- so we can discuss it.
however it does say "study" -- and we know some things from scripture about how the Spirit speaks, what the intent of the Spirit is, which in my analogy translate to what are the motions we need to keep the sword-edge aligned with?

• The scripture testifies of Christ
  • John 5:39, Luke 24:27, 44-45
• the Spirit testifies of Christ
  • John 15:26, John 16:8-15

so i'm going to say from this, that the fundamental intention of all of scripture is to testify of Christ, His person and His work. whether directly teaching us knowledge of Him, or whether convicting & judging sin, which is antithesis of Him, or whether explaining righteousness, which is His character.

from all this -- i would say that "the motion of the sword" when accurately handled is the movement of the Spirit of God, and that movement is speaking of Christ, glorifying Christ & revealing Christ. that is fundamentally what we need to keep our use of the scripture aligned with, if we are to use it skillfully, as "a workman that needeth not be ashamed"

a great example of this is given to us in Galatians 4:21-31 where Paul 'trains us' in proper spiritual swordsmanship, explaining that the right understanding of Genesis 16, Hagar & Sarai, is as testimony of Christ, speaking about salvation through Him & the covenant of His blood & body. yes, Genesis is absolutely a true account of literal events that actually happened. but the fundamental purpose of this account is to testify of Christ, and when we use it the proper use is to speak about the person and work of Him.

we're supposed to see Jesus on every page of the Bible. that's what the Bible is, a revelation of God to us, and Jesus is the Invisible God made visible ((Colossians 1:15, 1 Timothy 3:16 etc)) -- He is there in every chapter, and just as He hid Himself in cloud and fire in the wilderness when He led His people out of Egypt, and Hid Himself in flesh when He was born incarnate in the flesh, He has hidden Himself in the scripture from the first to the last page, and in these last days given us of His Spirit Who reveals Him.

the revealing of Him is the motion of our sword; this is what we line up our point with when we thrust, and our edge with when we cut. He is our shield when we parry, the truth of Him our guards and our posture.


((if this makes sense))

Any one who has common sense knows that the bible needs to be read properly . Having a translation that says so is some what redundant.

 

[throughfaith]

in slang terms we wouldn't be far off to translate this as "get the scripture straight" and my premise is that this carries the meaning of using and understanding it correctly & skillfully. i believe that understanding fencing well has carryover by analogy to understanding how to use the scripture well, and this thread is an example of it.

the word is a spiritual sword and the skillful use of a sword involves keeping the blade aligned with the motion of it. so the obvious question is, what is the motion of it? we know some things from scripture:

• all scripture is God-breathed
  • 2 Timothy 3:16-17
• scripture is given by men & women being moved by the Holy Spirit / the Holy Spirit speaking through them
  • 2 Peter 1:21, Mark 12:36, Acts 1:16

so the authorship of all the scripture is via the Spirit of God.
also we know,

• the Christian, the man or woman of God, the believer, the born-of-God is walking & moving by the Spirit when they are doing the will of God
  • John 3:5-7, Romans 8:4-5, Galatians 5:16, 5:25 etc etc
• our armament is spiritual and our warfare is spiritual, not earthly
  • 2 Corinthians 10:3-5, Ephesians 6:10-17, Romans 13:12, Romans 6:13
    • note: in Romans 6:13 the word "instruments" is probably better translated "armament" - in Greek it's a military term for a soldier's kit, describing both armor & weapons

so i will propose that "the motion of the sword" is by the Holy Spirit. this is true both when we talk about the Christian using the sword, and when we talk about the sword being used of God on the Christian to chasten, to teach, and to sanctify us as we read it. it's the action of the Holy Spirit - the intent of the sword is the intent of the Spirit of God, and so this is how the strikes and parries that the sword carries out are determined. the Spirit is the one wielding it in our own hearts, and when we pick it up to wield it, we're only using it rightly 'in proper form' when we are using it in the Spirit, following the Spirit, walking in the Spirit.

so, the arc the blade should travel in is the way the Spirit moves. when we handle the scripture we should keep it aligned with the working of the Spirit.
yeah, that's vague on the surface. i know. but that's why this is a thread, not a blog -- so we can discuss it.
however it does say "study" -- and we know some things from scripture about how the Spirit speaks, what the intent of the Spirit is, which in my analogy translate to what are the motions we need to keep the sword-edge aligned with?

• The scripture testifies of Christ
  • John 5:39, Luke 24:27, 44-45
• the Spirit testifies of Christ
  • John 15:26, John 16:8-15

so i'm going to say from this, that the fundamental intention of all of scripture is to testify of Christ, His person and His work. whether directly teaching us knowledge of Him, or whether convicting & judging sin, which is antithesis of Him, or whether explaining righteousness, which is His character.

from all this -- i would say that "the motion of the sword" when accurately handled is the movement of the Spirit of God, and that movement is speaking of Christ, glorifying Christ & revealing Christ. that is fundamentally what we need to keep our use of the scripture aligned with, if we are to use it skillfully, as "a workman that needeth not be ashamed"

a great example of this is given to us in Galatians 4:21-31 where Paul 'trains us' in proper spiritual swordsmanship, explaining that the right understanding of Genesis 16, Hagar & Sarai, is as testimony of Christ, speaking about salvation through Him & the covenant of His blood & body. yes, Genesis is absolutely a true account of literal events that actually happened. but the fundamental purpose of this account is to testify of Christ, and when we use it the proper use is to speak about the person and work of Him.

we're supposed to see Jesus on every page of the Bible. that's what the Bible is, a revelation of God to us, and Jesus is the Invisible God made visible ((Colossians 1:15, 1 Timothy 3:16 etc)) -- He is there in every chapter, and just as He hid Himself in cloud and fire in the wilderness when He led His people out of Egypt, and Hid Himself in flesh when He was born incarnate in the flesh, He has hidden Himself in the scripture from the first to the last page, and in these last days given us of His Spirit Who reveals Him.

the revealing of Him is the motion of our sword; this is what we line up our point with when we thrust, and our edge with when we cut. He is our shield when we parry, the truth of Him our guards and our posture.


((if this makes sense))

That's a lot of fluff . But 'rightly dividing ' is clear . A person who applies Luke 9.6 , Acts 2.38 for today is not noticing the 'divides '. He's not rightly dividing ..apportioning. People seem to realise this with animal sacrifices but then all of a sudden their brains fall out and all scripture is just seen as one big mush .

 

[posthuman]

Get the scripture straight by rightly dividing.😉

i.e. "cutting straight" -- i don't see any verse telling me to segment the scripture into divisions. i do see many verses explaining to me what the accurate use of scripture is.

Jesus, Paul, Peter, James -- all of these quote the law and the prophets using them to teach the gospel. to me this is a clear indication that the testimony which came before the incarnation, and that which was spoken before the resurrection, and before the ascension, all of these are preaching one thing: God is Salvation. that is how Christ interprets scripture, that is how Paul interprets scripture, that is how Peter interprets scripture.

in the 1800's some men came along and said the proper use of scripture is to cut it into relevant and irrelevant sections. i fundamentally disagree with that, and i know that 2 Timothy 2:15 is a kind of primary 'proof text' for that, but debating about dispensationalism isn't really my primary intention here, even tho it's going to be unavoidable given the subject matter. what i really want to talk about is drawing out testimony of Christ from the scripture, and aligning our use of scripture with that approach.

i agree with "divide" here in the sense of taking the precious out from the vile, separating the spiritual from the carnal, making distinction between the holy and the profane. but as pointed out back in 2012, which i reposted here yesterday ((link: post #48)) there is a word in Greek that actually means "divide into segments" -- but it's not the word that's in 1 Timothy 2:15.
Paul's not telling Timothy to segmentize the scripture. he's telling him to take & to make straight, right paths in it.

 

[JohnDB]

God used the KJV and it’s believers to head the largest world wide revival in history. None other can compare. Satan has used the copycat new versions to bring in the Laodicean age. But let’s get back to the thread at hand.

Actually God has used many different translations to accomplish revival in people. The Geneva Bible by far was the foremost in this. The Oxford/Cambridge "KJV" was never very popular until the beginning of the 1900's.
The early settlers and two great migrations of immigrants to America both held Geneva Bibles. That's two centuries of use. The Oxford/Cambridge KJV has only been popular for one.

Latin Vulgate was popular for longer. (Error riddled from hand transcribing personal copies by priests)

But like I said before... Scripture wasn't really used in English much. The Psalter and Book of Prayers was used much more extensively.

 

[throughfaith]

The ' majority ' should never be the standard for truth . In most sciences this has proven time and time again ,where the majority opinion was wrong . Hand washing was not seen as a problem by the ' majority ' in hospitals ect . Then we have astronomy , astrology , biology, chemistry, mathematics, ect . And you think the Majority that keep the mantra of " more reliable and better manuscripts " and the " majority of scholars say ...." is any different ?

 

[JohnDB]

i.e. "cutting straight" -- i don't see any verse telling me to segment the scripture into divisions. i do see many verses explaining to me what the accurate use of scripture is.

Jesus, Paul, Peter, James -- all of these quote the law and the prophets using them to teach the gospel. to me this is a clear indication that the testimony which came before the incarnation, and that which was spoken before the resurrection, and before the ascension, all of these are preaching one thing: God is Salvation. that is how Christ interprets scripture, that is how Paul interprets scripture, that is how Peter interprets scripture.

in the 1800's some men came along and said the proper use of scripture is to cut it into relevant and irrelevant sections. i fundamentally disagree with that, and i know that 2 Timothy 2:15 is a kind of primary 'proof text' for that, but debating about dispensationalism isn't really my primary intention here, even tho it's going to be unavoidable given the subject matter. what i really want to talk about is drawing out testimony of Christ from the scripture, and aligning our use of scripture with that approach.

i agree with "divide" here in the sense of taking the precious out from the vile, separating the spiritual from the carnal, making distinction between the holy and the profane. but as pointed out back in 2012, which i reposted here yesterday ((link: post #48)) there is a word in Greek that actually means "divide into segments" -- but it's not the word that's in 1 Timothy 2:15.
Paul's not telling Timothy to segmentize the scripture. he's telling him to take & to make straight, right paths in it.

I tend to agree with you on this.

Gnosticism was beginning to be popular with the world. Which was tantamount to licensing sin.

Paul was groaning with what people were doing with their own interpretation of various parts of scripture.

 

[posthuman]

rightly dividing ..apportioning.

i know it's going to be really hard for a number of you to accept, but the phrasing of the KJV here does not accurately reflect the language the apostle used when he wrote this.

orthotomeo does not mean to "apportion" or "divide"

see previous information. the Jews who lived in these days and fluently spoke both Greek and Hebrew as their native languages understood this word to be appropriate to describe God making your paths straight ((Proverbs 3:6, 11:5, post #49))

the word does not have the meaning cut into pieces or segment or apportion or divide. that's a totally different word, katatomeo, which Paul certainly knows how to use -- it's here:

Beware of dogs, beware of evil workers, beware of the mutilation!
(Philippians 3:2 nkjv)
​

that word "mutilation" ? ((concision in kjv))
that's the word that means "to divide into segments"

i'm not sure there's really any sense in which we are to "rightly mutilate the word of truth"

 

[John146]

i.e. "cutting straight" -- i don't see any verse telling me to segment the scripture into divisions. i do see many verses explaining to me what the accurate use of scripture is.

Jesus, Paul, Peter, James -- all of these quote the law and the prophets using them to teach the gospel. to me this is a clear indication that the testimony which came before the incarnation, and that which was spoken before the resurrection, and before the ascension, all of these are preaching one thing: God is Salvation. that is how Christ interprets scripture, that is how Paul interprets scripture, that is how Peter interprets scripture.

in the 1800's some men came along and said the proper use of scripture is to cut it into relevant and irrelevant sections. i fundamentally disagree with that, and i know that 2 Timothy 2:15 is a kind of primary 'proof text' for that, but debating about dispensationalism isn't really my primary intention here, even tho it's going to be unavoidable given the subject matter. what i really want to talk about is drawing out testimony of Christ from the scripture, and aligning our use of scripture with that approach.

i agree with "divide" here in the sense of taking the precious out from the vile, separating the spiritual from the carnal, making distinction between the holy and the profane. but as pointed out back in 2012, which i reposted here yesterday ((link: post #48)) there is a word in Greek that actually means "divide into segments" -- but it's not the word that's in 1 Timothy 2:15.
Paul's not telling Timothy to segmentize the scripture. he's telling him to take & to make straight, right paths in it.

The example that followed in 2 Timothy 2 was misplacing the resurrection. False preachers were teaching that the resurrection had already occurred. They were teaching truth misplaced upon the body of Christ.

When studying scripture, one needs to understand the audience to whom the writer is writing, Jew, Gentile, or the church of God. When that is determined, then one can place the correct doctrine with the correct audience.

 

[Lucy-Pevensie]

Ok Then the next question this raises is ' how ' ? This is the problem with this translation.

I don't think the problem is so much with translation.
The problem is with people believing they can understand all archaic usage without learning it.
There are many words which are not used in the same way they were 400 years ago.
Not even in the same country the translation in question was done. There are changes in grammar.
It helps to avoid errors if you read a language you understand.
Failing that, you should learn to use the older English regularly before you claim you really understand it.

 

[posthuman]

When studying scripture, one needs to understand the audience to whom the writer is writing, Jew, Gentile, or the church of God. When that is determined, then one can place the correct doctrine with the correct audience.

per Galatians 4 Paul apparently thought Genesis 16 was written to believers in Christ after His death, burial and resurrection, and that it should be properly understood as testimony of the freedom in Him through the covenant of His blood.

so it is apparently wrong to 'apportion' this as being 'meant for Jewish audience not for gentile Christians'
'cutting straight' with Genesis 16, according to the example given through the apostle, is recognizing it as meant for Christians, speaking to Christians, testifying of the work of Christ.
'get rid of the slave woman' doesn't mean the audience of Genesis 16 is old-covenant Jews. it means the shadows are passed away and the true substance is come.

all scripture is for our edification. we who believe are the audience for all of it, and all scripture testifies of Christ: He is the doctrine of all of it.

 

[TheDivineWatermark]

When studying scripture, one needs to understand the audience to whom the writer is writing, Jew, Gentile, or the church of God. When that is determined, then one can place the correct doctrine with the correct audience.

Yes.

"Jew"... "Gentile"... "the Church of God[<--wherein there is NO DISTINCTION in our standing before God 'IN CHRIST']"... these three can indeed be traced out throughout the Scripture...

"discerning [/distinguishing] the things that differ"...

"correctly apportion"...

"direct your paths" as He Himself has laid it out in the Scripture...

 

[throughfaith]

I don't think the problem is so much with translation.
The problem is with people believing they can understand all archaic usage without learning it.
There are many words which are not used in the same way they were 400 years ago.
Not even in the same country the translation in question was done. There are changes in grammar.
It helps to avoid errors if you read a language you understand.
Failing that, you should learn to use the older English regularly before you claim you really understand it.

I'm not that old ,I work on building sites . I understand it . Which word do you struggle with ?

 

[throughfaith]

i know it's going to be really hard for a number of you to accept, but the phrasing of the KJV here does not accurately reflect the language the apostle used when he wrote this.

orthotomeo does not mean to "apportion" or "divide"

see previous information. the Jews who lived in these days and fluently spoke both Greek and Hebrew as their native languages understood this word to be appropriate to describe God making your paths straight ((Proverbs 3:6, 11:5, post #49))

the word does not have the meaning cut into pieces or segment or apportion or divide. that's a totally different word, katatomeo, which Paul certainly knows how to use -- it's here:

Beware of dogs, beware of evil workers, beware of the mutilation!​

(Philippians 3:2 nkjv)​

​

that word "mutilation" ? ((concision in kjv))
that's the word that means "to divide into segments"

i'm not sure there's really any sense in which we are to "rightly mutilate the word of truth"

That's the spin your putting on it . Why would anyone assume that's what were saying?

 

[posthuman]

As its evident every cult and False religion sits in the four gospels and has no clue of ' rightly dividing ' ,you can line up all day long every verse that ' testifies of Jesus ' ,and have no understanding on how to appropriate.

To Him give all the prophets witness, ​

that through His name whosoever believeth in Him shall receive remission of sins.​

(Acts 10:43, kjv)​

​

according to the Bible, the correct appropriation of "all the prophets" is witness of salvation through faith in Jesus Christ.
the appropriate use of all scripture is testimony of Christ.

if we believe the Bible it is apparently not "right" to "divide" the OT away from the new. all of it is preaching one singular, ubiquitous gospel.

 

[TheDivineWatermark]

Why would anyone assume that's what were saying?

I must say... I agree.

[is that bad? ]

 

[John146]

per Galatians 4 Paul apparently thought Genesis 16 was written to believers in Christ after His death, burial and resurrection, and that it should be properly understood as testimony of the freedom in Him through the covenant of His blood.

What part of Genesis 16 is doctrine for the church? Can we learn from it and apply principles? Absolutely. That’s what Paul was doing, using an OT principle. Paul is teaching those Galatians not to place themselves under the burden of the law.

 

[posthuman]

Any one who has common sense knows that the bible needs to be read properly . Having a translation that says so is some what redundant.

These were more noble than those in Thessalonica,
in that they received the word with all readiness of mind,
and searched the scriptures daily, whether those things were so.​

(Acts 17:11)
​

the people in Berea understood that the testimony of the law and the writings and the prophets was of the gospel of salvation through faith in the incarnation, death, burial, resurrection, ascension & return of Christ.
that's why they were searching daily in the scripture and comparing the message being brought to them with what they read there, to see whether what they heard was true.
and they found that it was.

the purpose and testimony of the scripture is Christ, all of it. it's not 'misappropriated' when we understand it and use it in accordance with what has now been revealed to us through Jesus and His apostles -- that is absolutely the 'right handling' of it. all of it. it was meant for them, believers, to reveal the truth of Christ to them. even as Paul wrote to the Galatians, it is our schoolmaster to lead us to Christ -- it's not for a different audience; it's for the audience that believes in Him. it's not a different gospel; it's the gospel of Christ.

 

[John146]

I'm not that old ,I work on building sites . I understand it . Which word do you struggle with ?

What she is saying is the Bible needs to be updated according to our current language, therefore, if the word grace becomes obsolete in the English language then we need to rip that word out of the Bible and replace it with a new word.

 

[Blackpowderduelist]

yes!
i study two-handed/hand-and-a-half swordfighting, which is, no shield. so it is especially true about the techniques i have learned, that the sword is used to protect yourself just as much as it is used to attack your enemy.
and parrying is really even more important than attacking - it hardly matters if you are able to wound your adversary, if he also wounds you. first protect yourself: get salvation. second, look for openings to riposte. put to death the sinful desires of the flesh. that's the order. you cannot win a battle by only blocking, but you cannot survive a battle if you never block.

the medieval sword masters are not in unanimous agreement about whether to block with the edge or the flat of your blade. some prefer one, some prefer the other, and some seem to use the edge to block in some contexts and the flat in others. i'm not really clear about how that translates to spiritual metaphor?

but i can tell you this: there are three primary ways to parry.
first, you can hold your sword firmly in the way of the opponents weapon, like a wall. you do this with the part of your blade close to the hilt, called the 'strong' of the sword.
second, you can cut into their cut at the same time they are cutting, so that you either knock their attack out of the way as you follow through, or at least keep him from being able to complete his attack. you do this with the center of percussion, for most swords about 2/3 of the way towards the tip. that's the part that transmits the most force when you swing, identical to the 'sweet spot' on a baseball bat.
and third, you can use the tip of your blade to deflect the adversary's blow. you only have to move his weapon a little bit in order to keep it from landing where he wants it to land, but to do this you need to act very quickly, anticipating his movements, so that you contact his weapon just after he begins to strike. the tip of your sword is called the 'weak' because it has the least leverage, and if you are too late in trying to deflect, you won't have the strength to move his strike far enough to keep you out of danger. you do it early so that your 'weak' contacts his 'weak' instead of his 'strong'

so the easiest parry is to bring your sword up like a wall. this takes strength, but it doesn't take so quick of a reaction time.
the middle parry is to respond to his attack with a similar attack of your own, aiming at his own weapon. this takes quicker reflexes but it's more natural to do, in a sense, because it's the same general motion as making an attack of your own.
the hardest thing to do requires the least strength but the greatest skill & speed - to use a small motion at just the right time to make his attacks swing harmlessly through the air. this in turn gives you the best chance to counterattack

My favorite defensive move is also an offensive one. I strike their defensive position to drive it off of the defensive position leaving them open to a strike, unless they can recover quickly. So rather than strike against their person I strike their sword with a hard forceful blow to drive it away from the ability to protect their person. Then follow up with a strike against the person. They are forced into wide sweeps to protect themselves while I thrust toward center mass.

 

[posthuman]

What part of Genesis 16 is doctrine for the church? Can we learn from it and apply principles? Absolutely. That’s what Paul was doing, using an OT principle. Paul is teaching those Galatians not to place themselves under the burden of the law.

there is much more there than simply that -- if and when we recognize it as meant for our edification by imparting knowledge of God & His Christ to us. that is 'cutting straight' -- dividing it into a 'not really for us category' is not 'cutting straight' but crooked.

why did Abram listen to his wife and try to bring about the promise through Hagar? this is speaking of sin and being a slave to it, linking to Genesis 3 and to Romans 6 simultaneously, because he joined himself to the slave woman in unbelief. it's speaking of placing our faith in the working of God vs. establishing a righteousness of our own. it's speaking of the mercy of God, because Christ appeared to her at a spring of water on the road to Shur, meaning "wall" -- she was headed to 'enclosure' but He spoke kindly to her, blessed her son, and sent her back to the friend of God, to the free woman representing the Jerusalem above and the covenant of forgiveness of sin. this is speaking to us about repentance and God's everlasting lovingkindness.

if we think this is all just for the Jew living under Moses, we'll never see these things; we won't look. it isn't right to divide the scripture into believer-relevant and not-believer-relevant sections; that's not what Paul is telling Timothy to do. he's telling him to diligently study the scripture and see it straight and true -- and what scripture is Timothy supposed to be studying? what scripture exists when Paul writes to him? the law and the writings and the prophets! the synoptic gospels! these things aren't 'for a different audience' they are exactly for the audience of Timothy and the people he shepherds: Gentile and Jewish believers in the gospel -- all these things supposedly 'divided' from NT believers are exactly the things that teach the gospel that NT believers believe in.