"Bring the cloak that I left with Carpus at Troas when you come-and the books, especially the parchments." (2 Timothy 4:13)

Paul previously affirmed, in his second letter to Timothy, "All Scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness, that the man of God may be complete, thoroughly equipped for every good work." (2 Timothy 3:16, 17) While the New Testament is not the Scripture that Timothy had during his childhood (2 Timothy 3:15), it is Holy Scripture and is, therefore, profitable for doctrine, reproof, correction and instruction in righteousness. We learn this when we consider the following points: 

• The apostles were guided into all truth (John 16:8-13).
• The epistles they wrote were to be looked upon as Scripture (2 Peter 3:15, 16).
• The New Testament was the Holy Spirit's dispensation to the Apostles (Ephesians 3:1-5).
• The letters were to be circulated and read by the various churches (Colossians 4:16).

So, some may wonder, what does 2 Timothy 4:13 have to offer that makes it profitable for doctrine, reproof, correction, and instruction in righteousness?

New Testament Christianity Class in a Secular University

During the 1993/94 school year, while I was attending Indiana University, Bloomington, I took a course in New Testament Christianity. The class was very large, and it soon became obvious to me that the professor did not believe the Scriptures were inspired. I was able to profit a little from the class, but I was greatly disturbed by the overall disrespect given to God's holy word. Had that been my first interaction with the Bible, I probably would have used what I heard in that class to pave a path to atheism. Parents should know that classes in many state universities-even classes entitled New Testament Christianity-- have become breeding grounds for atheism. In this class, I was introduced to the assertion that several books in the Bible are not authentic but pseudepigraphical--that many of the books were not written by the one who is said to be the author. Through supposed higher criticism, many scholars have dismissed 2 Thessalonians, 1 and 2 Timothy, Titus, and others as having anonymous authors who used apostles' names to give their writings an air of authority. Even books that have general consent as being authentically Pauline, were attacked before my eyes, as well as the eyes of hundreds of other students, as having interpolations in them. For instance, Paul's teaching about women in 1 Corinthians 14:34-35 was dismissed as not genuine.

This professor also demanded that we use the New Revised Standard Version (a gender-neutral perversion of the Scriptures that I consider to be better suited as a dust magnet in my office than a useful read).

As the class progressed, I became convinced that those who challenged a Scripture's authenticity had, in all probability, ulterior motives--to displace particular doctrines from the Scriptures. So if you believe that women and men have equal authority, naturally you will question the originality of 1 Corinthians 14:34, 35. If you don't believe baptism is necessary for salvation, then you must question the legitimacy of Mark 16:9-20. If you don't like the teaching that requires bishops to be married and have children, then 1 Timothy and Titus must be placed in the non-Pauline trash can. And where 1 Timothy and Titus go, 2 Timothy must follow.

The Relevance of 2 Timothy 4:13

Allow me to explain what all this has to do with 2 Timothy 4:13. What I love about passages that seemingly have little or no intrinsic value regarding doctrine or conduct is that they may actually have tremendous worth, an importance that we have either overlooked or simply not yet discovered. As far as our text in 2 Timothy 4:13 goes, I am thankful to Paul for having written it. Think about how this slight stroke of the pen refutes the idea that a forger wrote 2 Timothy. Why would a forger, who was trying to pass off a letter as Paul's, insert such a Scripture in the first place? What would make him even think of making such a remark? It would serve no benefit to his cause. If so, what benefit would it serve? But if 2 Timothy is written by a friend (Paul) to a friend (Timothy), then it makes perfect sense to insert little statements of this type. They support the genuineness of a letter written to a close and beloved companion.

Three Assertions Against Pauline Authorship

The assault against the authenticity of these letters is based primarily on three things:

1. The use of new words that are not used in Paul's other epistles.
2. A high concern for the organization of the church.
3. Some problematic historical correlations with the book of Acts.

These could be dealt with far more substantially than the scope of this short article permits, but it suffices to say that the historical problems can and have been resolved by those who understand that Acts closes with Paul's first imprisonment. This persuasion contends that Paul was subsequently released, as he expected to be (Philippians 1:19, 20, 25, 26; 2:24; Philemon 1:22), and in due time (five to six years) was arrested, imprisoned a second time in Rome, and ultimately executed a couple of years prior to the destruction of Jerusalem. The events in the letters to Timothy and Titus are to be understood within this chronology--Paul visited Miletus, Troas, and probably Philippi, as well as taking a possible evangelistic tour westward to Spain.

As for the differences in style, we may well take into account those to whom Paul dictated the letters. Tertius penned the letter to the Romans (Romans 16:22). Only Luke was with Paul when he wrote 2 Timothy (2 Timothy 4:11). Isn't it possible that Luke served in the same capacity for 2 Timothy as Tertius did for Romans? If not, why not? Perhaps these men had an effect on the style of the epistles? Regardless, style differences are not sufficient proof to debunk authenticity; all of our styles change depending on the subject matter being addressed, as well as the type of audience we are addressing.

With regard to any concern about Paul's emphasis on the organization of the church in the letters to Timothy and Titus, we need only to remember that Paul labored hard to have elders appointed in every church (Acts 14:23). Further, he spoke often of these things in other epistles (Philippians 1:1; Ephesians 4:11; 1 Thessalonians 5:12). That these offices should be clearly defined before the canon of Scripture closed only makes sense.

Further proof against an imposter is that there are three letters. Why would an imposter write three letters rather than just one? Clearly, the author of one is the author of all three. What would be an imposter's motive for writing 2 Timothy? Whatever motive he might have is not readily apparent.

Further, a forger would refrain from using names, places, and events. Yet, in this short letter, Paul mentions 23 names of Christians and apostates who lived during the apostolic era. He mentions large apostate movements, such as those in Asia, turning from him (2 Timothy 1:15). He warns against certain doctrines and names those who were advocating them (2 Timothy 2:17, 18). It would be contradictory for one to contend against imposters while, at the same time, being an imposter (cf. 2 Timothy 3:13).

The writing also demonstrates Paul's large forgiving heart toward those who failed him; "At my first defense no one stood with me, but all forsook me. May it not be charged against them." (2 Timothy 4:16; cf. Luke 23:34; Romans 10:1; 2 Corinthians 2:6-8) At the same time, we see that the Lord will repay those who resist the truth (2 Timothy 4:14). Compare such a statement with "since it is a righteous thing with God to repay with tribulation those who trouble you" (2 Thessalonians 1:6; cf. Romans 12:19).

Another huge internal evidence for Pauline authorship of 2 Timothy is the fact that if this was a second-century forgery, we could expect to hear of Demas' usefulness and Mark's apostasy based on what older texts revealed about their character. Yet, we see the opposite (see 2 Timothy 4:10, 11; cf. Colossians 4:14; Acts 15:37, 38). A forger would work with the facts known to be true at the time he is trying to portray. A forger would have little to gain from elevating Mark and demoting Demas (Acts 15:37-39; Colossians 4:14; Philemon 1:24). But we see here that it is Demas who falls short and abandons the Lord's worker, while Mark is now considered useful.

Why would a forger insert such information? Along with such strong internal evidence that my professor failed to mention, is the fact that Irenaeus, a second-century person, quoted from 2 Timothy as if it were common knowledge (Against Heresies, Book 3, 3:3). Since 2 Timothy is obviously a genuine letter from Paul, it stands to reason that 1 Timothy and Titus would also be considered genuine.

These books, like 2 Timothy, were also cited and alluded to by early Christian writers. Polycarp was evidently immersed in 1 Timothy, as he quotes from it in several places in a letter he wrote to the Philippians approximately 120 A.D.

Clement of Rome, a faithful co-worker with the apostle Paul and mentioned in Philippians 4:3, alluded to Paul's teaching in the book of Titus when he wrote an epistle to the Corinthians between 68-97 A.D.

It stands to reason, that if the early church accepted these books as genuine, when they would reject others that were false, why should we not also accept them? The evidence for denying these books, when weighed on the balance of truth and reason, will be found too light. Remember, all Scripture is given by inspiration and has a purpose!

---

^[i] All Scriptures are from the New King James Version
^[ii] See 2 Timothy 4:13, 20, Romans 15:24, 28, and Clement's Epistle to the Corinthians, chap. 5
^[iii] Polycarp, Epistle to the Philippians, chap. 4, (Quoted from the Christian Classic Ethereal Library, http://www.ccel.org/ccel/schaff/anf01.iv.ii.iv.html) see also from the same epistle, chap. 5, "They must not be slanderers, double-tongued" cf. 1 Tim. 3:8 as well as chap. 12, "Pray also for kings..." cf. 1 Tim. 2:2.
^[iv] Clement of Rome, Epistle to the Corinthians, chap. 27, cf. Titus 1:2. Also see chap. 2 of the same epistle "ready to every good work" and Titus 3:1 along with several other references from 1 Timothy and Titus by Ignatius.