James White, Semantic Domains, and ὠφέλιμος

In a recent attempt to side-step the exegetical implications of the weak meaning of ὠφέλιμος ("profitable"; "useful") in 2 Tim 3:16, Reformed Baptist James R. White has appealed to the concept of semantics and lexical domains of words in an attempt to claim that Paul is teaching formal sufficiency of "scripture" in this text and therefore, sola scriptura (beginning around the 17:00 mark of this video)

Before I begin, let me note that I agree with White's endorsement of Moisés Silva's excellent volume, Biblical words and their Meanings (Zondervan). This post should not be seen as an attack on the importance of knowing the semantic domains of biblical Greek (and Hebrew) words.

The problem for White’s argument is that there is nothing in the semantic domain of ὠφέλιμος, unlike the terms ικανος and αυταρκεια, that denotes what he needs it to mean, i.e., formal sufficiency. Indeed, the semantic domain of ὠφέλιμος is much weaker than this. English translations are rather correct in translating it as “profitable” and other like-terms.

 In the 3-volume Exegetical Dictionary of the New Testament, eds. Horst Balz and Gerhard Schneider (Grand Rapids, Mich.: Eerdmans, 1993), the following definition of the term (ωφελιμος) is offered, which highlights how weak the term is in comparison to the force many Protestant apologists read into it (taken from 3:511-12)

ωφελιμος ophelimos useful, advantageous.

This noun occurs 4 times in the NT, all in parenetic contexts in the Pastorals. According to 1 Tim 4:8 (bis) “bodily training is useful only for some things, while godliness is of value in every way” (πρὸς ὀλίγον ἐστὶν ὠφέλιμος . . .προς παντα ωφελιμος) . . .The context suggests that the idea of “training, physical fitness” is to be appropriated for the realm of piety, alluding to the ascetic goals of the adversaries in vv. 1ff . . . 2 Tim 3:16: πασα γραφη . . . και ωφελιμος προς διδασκαλιαν . . .”useful/profitable for teaching . . .” Titus 3:8: “good deeds” (καλα εργα) are expected of Church members, since they are καλα και ςφελιμα τοις ανθρωποις, “good and profitable for people.”

 In the standard scholarly Koine Greek Lexicon, A Greek-English Lexicon of the New Testament and Other Early Christian Literature (3d ed.), or BDAG, we read the following:

8089  ὠφέλιμος• ὠφέλιμος, ον (ὠφελέω; Thu.+) useful, beneficial, advantageous τινί for someone or for someth. (Polyaenus 8 prooem.) Tit 3:8; Hv 3, 6, 7. Also πρός τι (Pla., Rep. 10, 607d) 1 Ti 4:8ab; 2 Tim 3:16. Heightened ὑπεράγαν ὠφέλιμος 1 Cl 56:2.—The superl. (Artem. 5 p. 252, 13; Ps.-Lucian, Hipp. 6; Vi. Aesopi II p. 306, 12 Ebh.; Jos., Ant. 19, 206; PMich 149 XVIII, 20 [II AD]) subst. τὰ ὠφελιμώτατα what is particulary helpful 62:1 (Appian, Bell. Civ. 5, 44 §186 τὰ μάλιστα ὠφελιμώτατα).—DELG s.v. 2 ὀφέλλω. M-M.

In Louw-Nida, Greek-English Lexicon of the New Testament Based on Semantic Domains (2d ed.), we read the following:

65.40  ὄφελος, ους n ; ὠφέλιμος, ον: pertaining to a benefit to be derived from some ob ject, event, or state - 'advantage, benefit, beneficial.' ὄφελος: τὶ το ὄφελος, ἀδελφοί μου, ἐὰν πίστιν λέγῃ τις ἔχειν, ἔργα δὲ μὴ ἔχῃ 'what advantage is it, my fellow believers, for a person to say, I have faith, if his actions do not prove it?' Jas 2.14. ὠφέλιμος: ἡ γὰρ σωματικὴ γυμνασία πρὸς ὀλίγον ἐστὶν ὠφέλιμος 'physical exercise is beneficial to a small extent' 1 Tm 4.8.

In a number of languages the equivalent of 'benefit' or 'beneficial' is often 'that which helps.' Accordingly, in 1 Tm 4.8 one may render ἡ γὰρ σωματικὴ γυμνασία πρὸς ὀλίγον ἐστὶν ὠφέλιμος as 'physical exercise helps to a small extent' or 'if one exercises one's body, that helps a little.'

 One could go on, but it is rather obvious that White simply begs the question vis-a-vis the semantic domain of ὠφέλιμος in his comments in response to a Roman Catholic apologist on the issue of sola scriptura.  As noted above, there were a number of Greek word Paul could have, and should have used if he wished to portray “Scripture” as being formally sufficient, such as the terms ικανος and αυταρκεια. Indeed, such terms are used in the Pastoral Epistles themselves to denote the concept of formal sufficiency:

καὶ ἃ ἤκουσας παρ᾽ ἐμοῦ διὰ πολλῶν μαρτύρων, ταῦτα παράθου πιστοῖς ἀνθρώποις, οἵτινες ἱκανοὶ ἔσονται καὶ ἑτέρους διδάξαι.

And the things that thou hast heard of me among many witnesses, the same commit thou to faithful men, who shall be able to teach others also. (2 Tim 2:2)

Ἔστιν δὲ πορισμὸς μέγας ἡ εὐσέβεια μετὰ αὐταρκείας

But godliness with contentment is great gain. (1 Tim 6:6)

Had Paul wished to convey to Timothy the concept of formal sufficiency of "scripture," he was very sloppy in using ὠφέλιμος. It is akin to how sloppy Matthew et al. were in using αδελφος ("brother") of relatives of Jesus (e.g., Matt 12:46-50) had they wished to convey the perpetual virginity of Mary!

Related to this abuse of Greek, White abused the Greek of Athanasius in his essay, "Sola Scripture in the Early Church." Catholic apologist, Robert Sungenis, wrote the following on this issue:

Quoting from Athanasius' statement, " . . . and God-breathed Scriptures are self-sufficient for preaching of the truth," in footnote 41, p. 61, White focuses on Athanasius's use of the Greek word αυταρκεις, which Bauer and others define as "sufficiency, a competence" and "contentment, self-sufficiency." White then cites the use of αυταρκεις in 2 Corinthians 9:8 as biblical support for this definition of the word. In reply, we argue that αυταρκεις means "sufficiency" but αυταρκεις never appears in connection with Scripture. The word appears twice in the New Testament (2 Cor. 9:8 and 1 Tim. 6:6). In the first passage it is the grace of God, not Scripture, which Paul deems as sufficient. Since the grace of God is multifaceted, we can understand why Paul would assign "sufficiency" to it but not to Scripture, since Scripture is one-dimensional revelation.

We would also take issue with White's next footnote, #42, where he faults Catholic apologists for attempting "to weaken the term ωφελιμος ("profitable") in 2 Tim. 3:16. White claims that Athanasius's statement "γραφες ικανασ ειναι προς διδασκαλιαν" ("Scripture is good [or worthy, sufficient] for instruction") is parallel to and serves as a commentary on Paul's use of ωφελιμος. He concludes with the statement, "Roman apologists must utterly reject Athanasius's obvious understanding of the term 'profitable' in 2 Timothy 3:16 as referring to sufficiency and adequacy" (p. 62). In reply we must first point that that if there ever was an opportunity for Paul to use either αυταρκεις or ικανας to describe Scripture, (if indeed he had the concept of sufficiency in his mind), that opportunity would have been in 2 Timothy 3:16 where he is describing Scripture's very nature and purpose. Moreover, White's strained connection between Athanasius and 2 Timothy 3:16 becomes apparent when we discover that: (1) the New Testament never refers to Scripture as ικανας but rather refers to men in 2 Tim. 2:2 who are able to teach sufficiently after having received oral instruction, and (2) Athanasius never exegetes or even refers to 2 Timothy 3:16 in all of his writings. Thus, while this Protestant apologist has offered many suppositions, he has not presented any positive proof or even strong evidence that what he is claiming for Athanasius is indeed true. We would suggest that if one wants to define and describe the usage of biblical words then one must start by examining the way the Bible uses those words. (“Point/Counterpoint: Protestant Objections and Catholic Answers” in Robert A. Sungenis, ed. Not by Scripture Alone: A Catholic Critique of the Protestant Doctrine of Sola Scriptura [2d ed: Catholic Apologetics International: 2009], pp. 193-294, here pp. 291-92, n. 145)

Notwithstanding being correct in appealing to the importance of the semantic domain of any given word in Koine Greek (or any other language), ὠφέλιμος simply does not mean what White needs ὠφέλιμος to mean to support the doctrine of sola scriptura. Ultimately, as with so much of Reformed theology, it is based on eisegesis, not exegesis, of the Bible.