Study to shew thyself approved...
 

What is the meaning of “study” in 2 Timothy 2:15, and how did you come to that conclusion?

Study...

Webster's 1828 Dictionary gives these definitions for the verb:

All three would fit the usage in that passage.

Strong's Concordance gives this definition:

from 4710; to use speed, i.e. to make effort, be prompt or earnest:--do (give) diligence, be diligent (forward), endeavour, labour, study.

From the context, it is obvious that this word means to be diligent in studying out the Bible.

Do you agree that the primary meaning of “study” was "diligent" in 1525 when it appeared for the first time in an English Bible, the Tyndale New Testament of 1525?
(The 1395 Wycliffe used “Bisili” which has a primary meaning of “diligently”)

Study is the right word used here in reference to 2 Tim. 2:15. It means study. Wherever it may have come from, God chose the word study to be there. In order to show yourself approved unto God one must study His Word to find His plan for your life. Without study you will not be effective in worshiping or approval with God. We must study to be able and answer any undoctrinal beliefs that might arrive. Such as the perfect preservation of Gods Word. One would study to find proofs that this is a fact. Studying to find error begins with doubt in God and His promises. Why worry about things like that, have faith in His word and take it for what it is, Gods Word. More blessed is he that believes without seeing.

Did God choose Wycliffe's word?
 

Did God choose Wycliffe's word or did Wycliffe make a mistake?

(The 1395 Wycliffe used “Bisili” which has a primary meaning of “diligently”)

First, God chose His word. Then used men to preserve it. As to the meaning of "study", how hard can it be? Can one say they study Gods Word if they only pick it up once and a while. God wants us to search the scripture. This is how He speaks to us today, along with the guidance of the Holy Spirit we are able to understand its meaning to our lives. To say the word study is the wrong word to use here is silly. Would you say you diligently studied for an exam if you only cramed the night before? No you would know that if you studied harder over time you would be more prepared. One must keep studying in order to be diligent. What word do you think should have been used?

Since the Greek word “Spoudazo” means “diligence” a better rendering would be diligent. Since it is in the imperative mode “Be diligent” would be a more accurate rendering. In addition, this translation would be more consistent with the other nearby usages of that exact word which are rendered “diligence” in the KJV (2 Ti 4:9, 2 Ti 4:21)

Tyndale introduced study here in 1525 because the primary meaning of “study” in 1525 was diligence.

Languages are fluid. In time the primary meanings of words change. Today study no longer conveys the same nuance as diligence.

Paul’s intent in this passage was that Timothy exert zealous, persistent, and maximum effort to preaching God’s word correctly, clearly, and completely.

While I recognize study will be a component to achieving that end that is not all that is required. Further, study is not what Paul intended. Had he intended “study” instead of “diligence” he could have used a Greek word like “melete” or “progummazo”.

The meaning of the Bible is the Bible. We should be diligent to convey the meaning of the author.

The Greek word means to be diligent - the context shows in what sense we are to be diligent: in studying God's Word.

P.S. Againstheresies: you are not going to get anywhere here on a KJVonly forum by trying to correct the KJV. It is counterproductive.

Helpful to me
 

It is helpful for me. For example, it may expose flaws in either your argument or mine. Thus far you have been helpful in exposing the weakness of your position. I anticipate a cogent rebuttal. Thus far the responses have skirted the questions and failed to provide a reasonably intelligent response. But I am sure we will have to agree to disagree on that conclusion. :)

The Greek word means diligent...
 

Since you agree that the Greek word means “diligent” and the KJV translators followed Tyndale and used “study” was it because they were trying to be more interpretive and less literal or was it because the 16th century usage of the word study had a primary meaning of diligence?

"Further, study is not what Paul intended."
Who wrote this and whos intention was it for these words to be written? These are not Pauls words but rather those of God. Do not take this lightly! Gods intention was that the word study was the appropriate choice God intended for the world to be able to read and make the choice for themselves. You do not have to believe. I suggest you try and believe because there will always be those who can use philosophy and other mens teaching to try and cause doubt in God. I believe In Gods preserved Word. Nothing no man can say will change my mind. Let God be true and all men liars.

Response
 

They are Paul’s words (2 Ti 1:1-2) as he was inspired by the Holy Spirit (2 Pet 1:21). It is accurate to say that Paul wrote 2 Timothy or to say that God wrote 2 Timothy, because both are true. Jesus used this convention to refer to Scripture (Mark 10:3).

Paul did not use the English word “study.” The Holy Spirit chose the Greek word “spoudazo”. Wycliffe used the English word “basili” in 1395 maybe we should stay with that word. Or do you think that between 1395 and Tyndale’s rendering of “study” in this text in 1525 that English speaking people did not have God’s inspired Word but were using a pre-modern corrupt version for a hundred and thirty years?

This discussion might be more helpful if you could outline for us your superior credentials over those of the King James translators. How many Biblical languages did you speak at the age of 11?

Since you want to correct our Bible for us, it's only fair that you lay out your superior credentials. After all, the "fear of man" is what matters most in academia.

There is nothing that I said that challenges or impugns the credentials of the KJV translators. I am challenging your understanding of the KJV only issue and suggesting that in some cases your dogma may cause you to miss the meaning of the Bible.

My example is that the word translated “study” in 2 Ti 2:15 is better understood today as “be diligent”. Based on the etymology of the English word I suggested that the usage in the KJV was derived from Tyndale and it meant diligent in the 16th century and still carried that nuance in the 17th century. The word study no longer conveys that meaning today. The word study does not carry the same range of meaning as it did four hundred years ago, so a modern reader does not come away with the same meaning as the translators of the KJV. The responses thus far have demonstrated my point.
If you disagree with my position I would like for you to refute the essence of my argument.

Here are the essential points in brief:
1. The Greek word (spoudazo) means diligent.
2. In 1611 the English word (study) meant diligent
3. Today study does not mean diligent
4. Today in this passage we should use diligence

I am not trying to “correct your Bible” I am trying to challenge your understanding of the Bible. I do not expect to win any converts here, but it is most helpful to understand your position. My conclusions continue to be that your arguments are flawed, weak, and based on a poor understanding of the issues. It appears you are motivated by zeal without knowledge. Your motives should be commended, but your methods challenged. I do not expect that you will agree with my assessment, but I look forward to a challenge of my position.

[COLOR="Navy"]Hi Folks,

The next point to note is what I will call the 'casualness of the alternative word' fallacy, or problem.

Now, to be fair, at least 'against' did in fact try to offer an alternative word that he suggested would be used if Paul's sense would be to "study to shew...". Often this primary aspect of translation discussion is simply ignored.

> "against"
> Had he intended “study” instead of “diligence” he could have
> used a Greek word like “melete” or “progummazo”.

I will let 'against' indicate the New Testament usages of progummazo when he posts and we can discuss that later. For now let's discuss 'melete', a fascinating word . Is it well-suited for 2 Tiimothy 2:15 ?

This word has a number of forms and a diverse history, from a Greek muse, to exercise and practice, to meditation, to contemplative study, to ritualistic repetition of scripture as per monks.

The simplest and best analysis then is to look at the three koine Greek usages in the New Testament.

Mark 13:11
But when they shall lead you, and deliver you up,
take no thought beforehand what ye shall speak,
neither do ye premeditate:
but whatsoever shall be given you in that hour,
that speak ye: for it is not ye that speak, but the Holy Ghost.

Acts 4:25
Who by the mouth of thy servant David hast said,
Why did the heathen rage,
and the people imagine vain things?

1Timothy 4:15
Meditate upon these things;
give thyself wholly to them;
that thy profiting may appear to all.

http://www.sacrednamebible.com/kjvst...K319.htm#S3191
h) Greek 3191. meletao, mel-et-ah'-o;
to take care of, revolve in the mind:-imagine, (pre-)meditate

Clearly the mental emphasis in the NT koine Greek usages is unacceptable, it will not work at all for the sense that is given in 2 Timothy 2:15.

2Timothy 2:15
Study to shew thyself approved unto God,
a workman that needeth not to be ashamed,
rightly dividing the word of truth.

Where we are not called to simply meditate or think or imagine or mentally exert in order to "shew thyself approved unto God, a workman..".

So we see that the little throwaway line about using melete, when we examine NT usage, is a failure. Incidentally this is rather common in translation discussions, the issue of the best way to describe a point being made in the source language is glossed over. Substantive analysis is lacking.

Incidentally this leads us to another part of 2 Timothy 2:15, an aspect that is very import for the finest translation. The earnest, diligent, labor aspect of our study is already contextually emphasized strongly in the next phrase in the verse."workman that needeth not to be ashamed" . Thus allowing study to stand as a straightforward and simple wide-ranging word on its own, without adding in extraneous or repetitive words. In the other usages of melete in the NT you will not see this complementary contextuality ('context is king' - translation theory).

You can also see how the Timothy passage is complementary to another NT usage:

Hebrews 4:11
Let us labour therefore to enter into that rest,
lest any man fall after the same example of unbelief.

Note, even the modern versions often agree on the concept of labour and effort here.

strive - ESV
make every effort - HCSB
make every effort - NIV

Thus we find that all the examples, the King James Bible translators work with the definition, the semantic range, the context and the flow of meaning. When we see folks with limited backgrounds somehow think they are improving, no correcting, the work of fifty world-class scholars who had a depth of day-to-day language background far beyond the norm today .. with little rinky-dink and transparent attempts like critiquing "study to shew .. !" .. you really do wonder a bit and scratch your head in puzzlement. Only the authority of the King James Bible must be the real issue.

Shalom,
Steven

Response
 

Unfortunately, Steven Avery, you have committed a logical fallacy by engaging in a straw man argument. Perhaps you will actually consider dealing with the content of my argument.

Today the word “study” normally conveys the idea of acquisition of knowledge. Diligence normally conveys the idea of persistent effort. The Greek word “spoudazo” means persistent effort. Four hundred years ago “study” meant persistent effort. The first phrase in 2 Ti 2:15 is intended to convey the idea of persistent effort to be approved of God not acquiring knowledge. Thus “Be diligent” is a better rendering of “spoudazo” not because the KJV translators made an error, but words change their meaning over time.

If the English rendering has led you to believe that this passage is only about acquiring knowledge or mainly about acquiring knowledge, then you have misunderstood the meaning of this passage and you are not “rightly dividing the Word of truth.”

Hi against, in the course of my four posts multiple parts of your argument were reviewed and found wanting.

To begin with .. you misunderstood the usage of study in 1611, even overlooking the usage and footnote in Ecclesiastes. You overlooked, you didn't even notice, the full context of 2 Timothy 2:15, which helps direct the specific semantic range by its harmony with the complementary phrase. You very improperly attempted to limit the Greek word to what you repeatedly called its 'primary meaning', a basic lexical fallacy. Any you misunderstood the word 'study' in today's English, reducing its semantic range. And you offered alternate words that would have been used for 'study' without, apparently, doing any study on those words yourself.

Your attempted construct failed on multiple particulars, amply demonstrated. You then severely compound your error above by fabricating the concept of a "straw man argument" -- when point after point of my posts directly addressed your improper claims. Such a totally erroneous, fabricated accusation of a logical fallacy is the last vestige of a person whose arguments have disintegrated.

There is one thing you might do that would help, 'against' -

2 Timothy 2:15
Study to shew thyself approved unto God,
a workman that needeth not to be ashamed,
rightly dividing the word of truth.

Shalom,
Steven Avery

Perhaps you have a selected memory - I have already shown you the meaning of the English word "study" - and it does include that meaning:

It very much looks like you are - that is all you have done since you came to these boards - challenge and question and correct the KJV.

Of course you are -- you are saying that the word is inadequate and needs to be changed.

Anyway, several of us have already explained that we know what study means. You have constructed something of a straw man here by insisting people can only follow one narrow definition of the word study, and therefore offer up a new word that follows one narrow aspect of study.

It is you and the translators of the NKJV who are missing truth for your dogma's sake. There is nothing wrong with the word study in the KJV.

Rather than try to make a case that the word has changed meaning, you might ask yourslef why the KJV translators translated the word "study" in 2Ti 2:15 but "diligence" in 2Ti 4:9,21. Could it be that they simply knew more about the Greek word than you do? That they understood a contextual significance that eludes you? No, of course not -- why am I asking...

Well if you agree that “spoudazo” should be diligent here in 2 Ti 2:15 and rendered the same way as the exact form is translated in 2 Ti 4:9 and 2 Ti 4:21, then to use “study” today would be more interpretive and less literal. The context is about being approved to God in contrast with those who are unapproved. One of the ways to be approved is to acquire knowledge (study) but it is my contention that is not all that is being communicated here. You are free to make that the only or primary emphasis, but by translating 2 Ti 2:15 with “be diligent” the exegete is free to make a case for the meaning. “Study” is more interpretive. Further my argument is that the KJV translators followed Tyndale and did not intend for this word to convey an idea other than diligence. The essence of my argument has not been addressed, and thus still stands intact.

1. The first Century Greek word (spoudazo) meant diligent.
2. In 1611 the English word (study) meant diligent
3. Today study does not mean diligent.
4. Today in this passage we should use diligence.

The KJV translators followed Tyndale in their reading of this passage. I still would like to hear a response to my argument.
1. The first Century Greek word (spoudazo) meant diligent.
2. In 1611 the English word (study) meant diligent
3. Today study does not mean diligent.
4. Today in this passage we should use diligence.

Response
 

Try a modern dictionary. The normal meaning that is conveyed by study is an effort to acquire knowledge. When you see the word “study” used in this passage does it really convey the idea of being diligent to be approved of God? If does then I would suggest that your understanding is unique. Most people would not conclude that “study” here means “diligent.”

My Random House Websters (1999) Includes "zealous endeavor or assiduous effort" among its definitions for the word -- definition 8 of 26. Is it your position that a Bible must use words which have a single meaning in every case to be found at the "top" of a definition in a modern dictionary? You assume much -- not the least of which is that you actually understand the word you are complaining about, and that you understand why Tyndale and the KJV translators used it. Ho hum...

Response
 

No. My contention is that “be diligent” more accurately conveys the proper meaning in this passage for readers today.

Hi Folks,

I really enjoyed reading about what it means to study to shew thyself approved !
Thank you Lord Jesus for your pure and perfect word.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Diligent ask .. why the KJV translators translated the word "study" in 2Ti 2:15 but "diligence" in 2Ti 4:9,21. Could it be that they simply knew more about the Greek word than you do? That they understood a contextual significance that eludes you? No, of course not -- why am I asking...

:-)
Amen. So lets look at a couple of comments, and try to continue the 'dialogue'. 'against' does not seem to be responsive to simple questions.

Quote:

Originally Posted by againstheresies2 Further my argument is that the KJV translators followed Tyndale

And if the King James Bible translators simply "followed Tyndale" rather than deciding on the proper translation by their own approved study .. then why didn't they "follow Tyndale" in 1 Thessalonians 4:11 ?

Quote:

Originally Posted by againstheresies2 and did not intend for this word to convey an idea other than diligence.

And do you make the same claim for the usage in Ecclesiastes ?

Ecclesiastes 12:12
And further, by these, my son, be admonished:
of making many books there is no end;
and much study is a weariness of the flesh.
or, reading

And on what basis do you know so well what the 50 skilled world-class translators intended ? Do you always make such awkward and ill-supported and illogical conjectures about the intentions of scholars whose knowledge of the languages far, far surpasses yours ? And if you speak so loosely, why should anything you say be taken seriously ?

Oh, and why not tell us more about the two alternate words that you claim could have been in the Greek if Paul had intended to indicate study -- ie. study including the learning and student and 'hungry for truth' sense. You did not respond to my question to you about one word's usage in the New Testament nor about the clear inapplicability of the other.

Quote:

The essence of my argument has not been addressed, and thus still stands intact. 1. The first Century Greek word (spoudazo) meant diligent.

Wrong. We showed that the word has a far wider range of meaning. You ignored that.

Quote:

2. In 1611 the English word (study) meant diligent

Wrong. The King James Bible itself in Ecclesiastes disproves this assertion, showing study used like we use it today.

Quote:

3. Today study does not mean diligent.

One-dimensional. The dictionary range of meanings includes to diligently endeavor or pursue.

to apply oneself to the acquisition of knowledge, as by reading, investigation, or practice.
to apply oneself; endeavor.

Quote:

4. Today in this passage we should use diligence.

GIGO. (Garbage in, garbage out). All of your components were false or one-dimensional, yet there is such deep rebellion against God's pure word that you simply ignored every improper assertion and every error you made that was carefully pointed out to you.

Now, to try to help you out in your confusions, the most you could possible say is that 'diligent' is an alternate translation. Personally I see it as quite a bit inferior, subtracting from the sense of the word of God, however you could make a case for an alternate translation and have a sensible discussion. That however would not fulfill your self-proclaimed role as bible corrector.

So what you have done instead is look foolish and obstinate on each and every point.

against, I would like to know where you picked up this whole idea from ? A web-site ? Why not tell us.

Also I would like to know why you did not do even rudimentary NT study of the alternate words you said would have been written by Paul.

And you should answer the question from Diligent about your background.

Shalom,
Steven

I've been studying all weekend all week for my last papers and exams of my college career.

I wish all I had to do was "be diligent."

See.

Response
 

Thanks for finally attempting to answer my thesis, but I still find your answers deficient.

Your response to my propositions summarized followed by my response:

1. Study is a possible meaning---Yes, but a more thorough word study would demonstrate that possibility is very unlikely here.

2. KJV in Ecclesiastes disproves---Ecclesiastes was written in Hebrew. The Hebrew word “Lahag” only occurs once in the Bible at this verse. The Septuagint translated “lahag” with “melete” not “spoudazo.” You should address the usage of the meaning of “study” in Middle English.

3. One-dimensional, dictionary includes diligently as a meaning for study---diligent is clearer, people today normally understand study as acquiring knowledge.

4. GIGO…rebellion against God’s Word—pejorative responses and imputation of motives do not enhance or advance the discussion.

As to the criticism of my expertise and the challenge of my scholarship, I will allow my argumentation to speak for itself. I am diligently committed to rightly dividing the Word of Truth and engage in sound exegesis in order to properly communicate God’s Word. I would argue that you are guided by a particular tradition. I am guided by the truth even if it causes me change my position. Honestly, I would change my position if you gave me a compelling argument. Thus far your arguments are unconvincing, but I am sure our evaluations will be polar opposites.

I would argue that you are guided by a particular tradition and I will even tell you what that tradition is.

It is the tradition of not having a final authority, of questioning God's words (WORDS). And it is a very old tradition, it goes back to...

Well, I can't seem to remember, something to do with a woman and a snake and "Yea, hath God said..."

Maybe I'm just a simpleton, but "Here I stand..."

Just throwing my two cents in: (or should it be denarii?)

I have not heard anyone who when explaining what the verse meant stumbled at the word "study". The natural response of a spiritually-aware person is to see the whole verse together, and understand that the point is - diligent effort must be put into seeking the truths of the Scriptures.

Brother Tim's Easy Hebrew/Aramaic/Greek Lexicon: The meaning of the Greek word translated "study" in the KJB for II Timothy 2:15 is ... "study".

(p.s. This definition method will work on any other words also.)

Good stuff there Tim!:D

Oops, your post has an attribution issue -- seems you quoted some text from "against" but from my reply, so your quotes say they were made by me. Nope! :D

What exactly then is the purpose of your argument?

Is it to help today's English speaking people of the world "better understand" the word of God? If so, would it be safe to say that there are quite a few more places in scripture that you would like to "help" us out at?

I know the real "essense" of your argument. Your "beef" isn't with a five letter English word at all, it's with a Book. A Book that you have not yet come to understand (the knowledge of the holy is understanding), a Book that you cannot control, and therefore, perhaps unknowingly, resist.

I have known no better days than the days in which I have completely submitted myself to the pure and preserved words the AV. The uncopyrighted text is unbound and it roars with confidence and power unknown to the unbelieving heart. There's just something about that Book. It stands alone, above all corrections and counterfeits, in purity and godly fruit, and is the final authority for all matters of faith (what to believe) and practice (how to live).

And now, correct me if I'm wrong, but YOU want to change it. YOU have something better. Should we allow such a change, where will it end? Isn't it true that you have alot of changes to be made to our King James Bible? Now then, what would the result be? Would it be your handy New King James Version?

My problem is this - even your NKJV contains the promise of preservation of the pure words of the LORD, and it even states that, "Every word of God is pure." Are you then going to suggest that the NKJV is in fact God's preserved words in their purity? I know you wouldn't dare say that, certainly not amidst this company.

So then, you've entered an arena of silly, ignorant King James Bible believers who actually believe that their Book is the Holy Bible. You've attempted to release us from this bondage and, in your own words you said, "I am challenging your understanding of the KJV only issue and suggesting that in some cases your dogma may cause you to miss the meaning of the Bible." Now, should we follow you, what will you put in our hands? We need a book. We need "the holy scripures" that our God promised to preserve for us.

Can you help?

Sic 'emmm!

If anyone's argument is that it ought to be translated "Be diligent to present yourself approved" then explain please how one will be diligent to present himself approved without studying in the other sense of reading the Scriptures? Those who try and make "be diligent" mean that we don't have to "study" in the sense of reading the Bible, are merely looking to cause trouble, just caviling unbelievers. After all, 1 Tim 4:13 is essentially the parallel passage in the other letter to Timothy, "Till I come, give attendance to reading, to exhortation, to doctrine." Now, compare 2 Tim 2:15 "Study to show thyself approved unto God, a workman that needeth not to be ashamed, rightly dividing the word of truth." Now, how will a man "be diligent" to be approved by God and rightly divide the word of truth without reading the word of truth? Perhaps one will be diligent to be approved of God by bodily exercise. (smirk)

:D Easy E ---I think you "hit the nail on the head"!

Is it not strange that someone who uses the screen name 'againsttheheresies'....comes onto a website called the King James Bible website, and uses in his signature the New KJV---a version which 95%+ of the folks here would consider a dummed down compromise version ??

I remember that booklet put out by Thomas Nelson pubs. explaining/advertising their NKJV. They had a list in the back showing all the people that worked/consulted/contributed to the project. One of them was a fellow named Nathaniel Urshan-head of the United Pentecostal Church....a Oneness (triune God denying) outfit! I wrote T.N.pubs a letter voicing my concern that a heretic should be an advisor to a Bible translation. They wrote back and said something like: "We are trying to appeal to all Christians"... shades of Thyatira--?