May the Lord: see 1.16.

In the previous verse Paul prayed for the family of Onesiphorus; here he prays for Onesiphorus himself. Continuing the idea of “finding” mentioned in the previous verse, Paul offers in this verse the hope that Onesiphorus may find mercy from the Lord on that Day. Lord is mentioned twice and is once again ambiguous, referring either to God or, more likely, to Christ. Or it is possible (but not likely) that the first Lord refers to Christ, and the second Lord to God. Contemporary English Version takes this position and translates “I pray that the Lord Jesus will ask God to show mercy to….” For Day see verse 12. The focus here is on the final judgment.

The eschatological tone of the verse has created some problems in interpreting it. The difficulty arises because the verse does not explicitly say that Onesiphorus was alive at the time the letter was written; there is therefore a possibility that he could have been dead by that time. This position is supported by verse 16, where a blessing is pronounced on Onesiphorus’ family but not directly on Onesiphorus himself. Furthermore, the blessing pronounced for Onesiphorus is not for the present but for the future, that is, the final day of judgment. Accordingly some interpreters support the position that Onesiphorus was dead when this letter was written. But if this is correct, then how does one take the blessing pronounced on Onesiphorus? If it is taken as a prayer (for the subjunctive form, see discussion on 1.16), then this would be a prayer for someone who is already dead. Accordingly some scholars who hold that Onesiphorus was no longer living at that time do not take this as a prayer but simply as a wish from someone who believed that the end is near; the statement therefore should not be used as a theological argument for or against the practice of praying for the dead. This problem can of course be avoided by assuming that Onesiphorus was very much alive at the time this letter was written. Obviously this is a controversial issue. Fortunately translators can make a meaningful translation of the verse without making explicit the information about Onesiphorus’ state at that time.

The word for know (ginōskō) is different from that used in verse 15 (oida). The two words are very close in meaning but have some slight differences in emphasis. Whereas oida refers more to knowledge acquired through observation, ginōskō focuses on a growing realization and understanding of something. So here one can say “you realize how much he did for me.”

For Ephesus see 1 Tim 1.3. This was where Onesiphorus came from, and on the basis of 4.19, his family still lived there when this letter was written. The services rendered are not specifically mentioned; some understand this as referring to personal ministrations to Paul similar to those mentioned in verse 16. This understanding is certainly in the mind of the text editors who inserted the phrase “for me” in the text, a reading that is reflected in King James Version, “how many things he ministered unto me at Ephesus….” Without this textual insertion the statement becomes more generic, describing Onesiphorus’ service and ministration not primarily to Paul but to the whole Christian community in Ephesus.

Alternative translation models for this verse are:
• I ask the Lord to be kind to Onesiphorus on that last Day! You are well aware that he did all kinds of things for me in the city of Ephesus.

Or:
• I pray the Lord Jesus to ask God to be kind to Onesiphorus on that last Day. You….

Quoted with permission from Arichea, Daniel C. and Hatton, Howard A. A Handbook on Paul’s Second Letter to Timothy. (UBS Handbook Series). New York: UBS, 1995. For this and other handbooks for translators see here .