The Scripture in Question

In 2 Timothy 4:13 it says this (NKJV):

Bring the cloak that I left with Carpus at Troas when you come—and the books, especially the parchments.

The Greek is the following (the Byzantine Majority text variant is in brackets, which also varies from other Byzantine manuscripts that match the UBS reading; the variant is irrelevant for this question):

Τὸν φαιλόνην [or φελόνην] ὃν ἀπέλιπον ἐν Τρῳάδι παρὰ Κάρπῳ, ἐρχόμενος φέρε, καὶ τὰ βιβλία, μάλιστα τὰς μεμβράνας.

Background Info

I do not believe there is any way to know with certainty what exact texts (if any) the terms βιβλία ("books") and μεμβράνας ("parchments") may refer, but it is not the purpose of this question to determine specifics, but rather generalities.

What elicited the question was a sermon I heard recently in which the speaker attempted to make "parchments" refer to the Scriptures, such that Paul was asking for some books, but especially for Timothy to bring the word of God (the Scriptures). This struck me as immediately an erroneous (or at least presumptuous) assumption on the speaker's part, but it did cause me to question what exactly Paul was asking for.

The typical Greek term to refer to Scriptures (mainly, if not exclusively, Old Testament) is γραφαῖς (the plural of γραφή), which is clearly not used in 2 Tim 4:13. The New Testament uses the term mainly to refer to what is written (i.e. the words themselves), and not the document upon which it is written. A few possible exceptions are passages such as Lk 4:21; Act 8:32, 35; 17:11; 18:28. In these passages there is clearly a written document actually present that is being read or used, and may be referring to more than the text of Scripture abstractly—but even so, the term is placing focus upon what is written, the text itself, not the document. I say all this to simply point out that it is possible that Paul was referring to bringing documents upon which the Scriptures were written, and that he may not have used γραφαῖς because the term does not seem used for directly referring to the physical documents themselves.1

βιβλία is the plural form of βιβλίον. According to BDAG,2 this term derives its usage from the Greek term βύβλος that itself refers to "Egyptian papyrus," a common material used for writing upon. Thus the meaning of βιβλίον itself is to any written document, commonly including scrolls, and in later usage to what we think of as bound books or codices (presumably particularly any document written on papyrus, though usage of βιβλίον need not be limited to that material only).

μεμβράνας is the plural of μεμβράνα, which BDAG notes means simply "parchment" (prepared animals skin used for writing upon) but can also by synecdoche carry the idea of referring to written works upon parchment, and as BDAG further notes regarding 2 Tim 4:13, may mean "scrolls" or "codices" as some take it to refer in this context.

It appears clear that βιβλία is used to refer to written documents (whatever they were). It seems less clear that μεμβράνας in this context refers to written materials, though it may still.

What is clear is that the relational word μάλιστα ("especially") indicates something distinct about the "parchments" that makes them more precious to Paul than the "books."

In consideration for resolving the meaning of μεμβράνας, recall that Paul is writing to Timothy while in prison and undergoing trial (2 Tim 4:16), probably facing imminent death (v.6), hence partly why Paul needs these delivered, and quickly (v.9).

The Specific Question

So the question is, given what is understood of βιβλία, to what does μεμβράνας here likely specifically refer to with its more superlative relation. Some options I see (partly from BDAG's entry info about how it has been taken, partly from my own conjecture):

  1. The Holy Scriptures versus other written works, as the Scripture obviously would be precious to Paul above other written works.
  2. Bound books versus scrolls (or vice versa?), in which case the form of the work was important to Paul (bound books are easier to read than scrolls).
  3. The animal skin writings versus the papyrus writings (whether of Scripture or not); that is, Paul is making a distinction about the written documents to bring based off of the material they are on. Since parchment was more durable than papyrus, he especially wanted the more durable documents.
  4. Blank pages versus written pages. Paul wanted certain written texts (the "books"), but he especially was in need of new, blank, durable writing material to continue his own writings on (the "parchments"). (I actually lean toward this one, but am seeking to know the best answer based on evidence.)

Any other ideas I have not thought of are welcome. A good answer will not be merely opinion, but have some informed linguistic, historical, and/or Scriptural evidences to back up why one view ought to be preferred over another.


1 If someone has more evidence of using the term more specifically to refer to the document more wholly or apart from the text on the document itself, I'm open to revising this understanding of mine.

2 William Arndt, Frederick W. Danker, and Walter Bauer, A Greek-English Lexicon of the New Testament and Other Early Christian Literature ( Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 2000). References to BDAG are all to the lexical entries of the terms noted.

  • This is pretty awesome, but it almost seems like you exhaust all answers in the question itself. – user2910 Oct 4 '14 at 13:23
  • 1
    @MarkEdward: I attempted to exhaust the possible answers, what I am seeking is scriptural, linguistic, and historical argumentation that helps determine which of the answers is what Paul meant (or if there is another answer that evidence may lead to). So I would expect an answer to focus on one of the given possibilities, citing sources and logic to defend that view verses one of the others. – ScottS Oct 4 '14 at 13:49

Sentiment often views the 'books' and 'parchments' as scriptures

One other view has been presented by T C Skeat in “ ‘Especially the Parchments’: A Note on 2 Timothy 4:13,” JTS n.s. 30 (1979): 174.

Skeat views the adverb “especially” (malista) as equating the “scrolls” and the “parchments” instead of differentiating between them. In his view Paul would have been saying, “Bring the books—I mean the parchment notebooks.” [Lea, T. D., & Griffin, H. P. (1992). 1, 2 Timothy, Titus (Vol. 34, p. 254). Nashville: Broadman & Holman Publishers.]

| improve this answer | |
  • 1
    Thank you for pointing out a different speculation, though I do not agree with Skeat's allowing μάλιστα to mean "namely" rather than "especially." I've encountered this elsewhere in reference to 1 Tim 4:10, and I agree with Thomas Schriener that such a view is incorrect. For Schriener's argument against it, see “‘Problematic Texts’ for Definite Atonement in the Pastoral and General Epistles,” in From Heaven He Came and Sought Her: Definite Atonement in Historical, Biblical, Theological, and Pastoral Perspective, David and Jonathan Gibson, eds. (Wheaton, IL: Crossway Books, 2013):380–382. – ScottS Mar 18 '15 at 19:22

As you note, we can't definitively answer the question as to content. What I can point out is that blank parchment could be purchased in any city of the empire. It would not have necessitated bringing it all the way from Troas to Rome via special messenger. If all Paul wanted was blank parchment he could have simply asked Timothy to buy some on his way to the prison.

Since parchment documents (either scrolls or codexes) were much more durable than papyrus ones, it's understandable that they would have correspondingly more valuable content, such as the Septuagint version of the scriptures, or possibly even a Hebrew version since Paul was conversant in Hebrew. It's probable that Paul did not have a complete copy of the scriptures bound into one codex, and certainly not a scroll which is much too bulky to contain an entire Old Testament. That would have been an extremely expensive purchase in ancient times. He might have had some books of the Hebrew Bible on papyrus and others on parchment (perhaps the Pentateuch). Or perhaps the Hebrew scriptures were on parchment and he had commentaries from Hebrew rabbis on papyrus. He could also have had some correspondence from apostles and the churches he had started, probably on papyrus.

| improve this answer | |
  • 1
    I appreciate some of your observations, however, please edit your answer: (1) To support your assertion with documented sources for (a) parchment's availability and (b) its being inexpensive enough to warrant not bringing it pre-owned from a distance (this would dampen my #4 speculation). (2) To clarify your position, which appears is my #3 speculation, with some #1 also; specifically needed is some scholarly reasons why βιβλία should be conceived as referring to the material of papyrus here, rather than its common usage referring to any written document (regardless of material). – ScottS Mar 18 '15 at 19:08

You could watch or listen to this class by Dr. Mark Kruger. https://subsplash.com/reformtheosem/learn-about-rts/mi/+eyjspdt It is class #19 of the series "the Origin and Authority of the NT". It is a great class from Reformed Theological Seminary, and it is free. I have listened to the previous 18 classes and am currently on this one. In this class, Kruger discusses the difference between codices and scrolls in how they were historically used by the church. New Testament writings were always in codices. There are basically zero preserved NT writings as scrolls. Non canonical books are found both as codices and as scrolls. Kruger says that biblos was used to refer to the Bible, and he thinks that was the Old Testament. He says that there was no Greek word for parchment, so Paul transliterated the word from Latin. He says the word is used mainly to refer to codices, not scrolls. So it would be New Testament codices. Which ones? He said some people think the 3 gospels, others Luke, others Paul's epistles. These are guesses. Kruger thinks the most likely would be Paul's epistles. (That makes sense to me, as I most want to look at my previous work on a subject.) Kruger also says the same thing as King David above, that blank parchment could be purchased in any major city, so it would not make sense for Paul to ask Timothy to bring these from somewhere else.

| improve this answer | |

Paul in his preaching (as in his defences before Jews in Acts) and in his writings, often makes use of, or refers to, Old Testament prohecies, whether showing Jesus to be the predicted Messiah, or references to the Gentiles/nations in God's purposes.Isaiah 42:6; 49:6; Acts 13:16-49; Romans 16:25-26. Perhaps the parchments refer to these. Though he is an inspired apostle, he can do research, and also back up his claims with the actual Scriptures. Compare Luke 1:1-4. Interestingly, in the context of 2 Timothy 4:13, Luke is with Paul at this time. Downunderwriter David

| improve this answer | |
  • Welcome to Stack Exchange. If you haven't done so already, check out the site tour. In particular, be sure to read the section on what constitutes a good answer and revise your post to either cite references that back your position or to more thoroughly explain how you get this interpretation from the text itself. Please note that "showing your work" is required on this Stack Exchange. – ThaddeusB Aug 13 '15 at 0:51

Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service, privacy policy and cookie policy

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.