Exegetical and Hermeneutical Commentary of 1 Timothy 1:3
As I besought thee to abide still at Ephesus, when I went into Macedonia, that thou mightest charge some that they teach no other doctrine,
3. As I besought thee so do] Rather as I exhorted thee so do I now, i.e. exhort thee. The R.V. varies between ‘beseech’ and ‘exhort’ for parakalein, e.g. reading in Phm 1:9, ‘for love’s sake I rather beseech.’
to abide still] Or to tarry; the force of the preposition in the verb is expressed by ‘still’; the aorist is usual after verbs of hoping, &c.
when I went into Macedonia ] The present participle is emphatic when I was going. This journey into Macedonia cannot be fitted in anywhere during the period covered by the Acts. See Ellicott here, and Paley, Hor. Paul. ch. xi. Cf. Introduction, p. 43.
that thou mightest charge some ] Rather certain persons slightingly, and indicating that he could name them if he would; the word for ‘charge,’ cf. 1Ti 1:5, is in St Paul’s mind in writing, and occurs seven times in this epistle.
no other doctrine ] Better, not to be teachers of a different doctrine, as in Gal 1:6, ‘a different gospel,’ i.e. different in kind; the word appears in our ‘heterodoxy,’ difference for the worse from the established view of things.
Fuente: The Cambridge Bible for Schools and Colleges
3 11. Timothy is exhorted to faithful Ministry. He is reminded first of the character of the true Gospel
Fuente: The Cambridge Bible for Schools and Colleges
As I besought thee to abide still at Ephesus – It is clear from this, that Paul and Timothy had been laboring together at Ephesus, and the language accords with the supposition that Paul had been compelled to leave before he had completed what he had designed to do there. See the Intro. Section 2.
When I went into Macedonia – Having been driven away by the excitement caused by Demetrius and his fellow-craftsmen; Act 20:1. See the Intro. Section 2, 3.
That thou mightest charge some – The word charge here – parangeiles – seems to mean more than is commonly implied by the word as used by us. If it had been a single direction or command, it might have been given by Paul himself before he left, but it seems rather to refer to that continuous instruction which would convince these various errorists and lead them to inculcate only the true doctrine. As they may have been numerous – as they may have embraced various forms of error, and as they might have had plausible grounds for their belief, this was evidently a work requiring time, and hence Timothy was left to effect this at leisure. It would seem that the wrath which had been excited against Paul had not affected Timothy, but that he was permitted to remain and labor without molestation. It is not certainly known who these teachers were, but they appear to have been of Jewish origin, and to have inculcated the special sentiments of the Jews respecting the law.
That they teach no other doctrine – That is, no other doctrine than that taught by the apostles. The Greek word here used is not found in the classic writers, and does not elsewhere occur in the New Testament, except in 1Ti 6:3 of this Epistle, where it is rendered teach otherwise. We may learn here what was the design for which Timothy was left at Ephesus.
(1) It was for a temporary purpose, and not as a permanent arrangement. It was to correct certain errors prevailing there which Paul would have been able himself soon to correct if he had been suffered to remain. Paul expected soon to return to him again, and then they would proceed unitedly with their work; 1Ti 4:13; 1Ti 3:15.
(2) It was not that he might be the Bishop of Ephesus. There is no evidence that he was ordained there at all, as the subscription to the Second Epistle declares (see the notes on that subscription), nor were the functions which he was to perform, those of a prelatical bishop. He was not to take the charge of a diocese, or to ordain ministers of the second rank, or to administer the rite of confirmation, or to perform acts of discipline. He was left there for a purpose which is specified, and that is as far as possible from what are now regarded as the appropriate functions of a prelatical bishop. Perhaps no claim which has ever been set up has had less semblance of argument than that which asserts that Timothy was the Bishop of Ephesus. See this clause examined in my Inquiry into the Organization and Government of the Apostolic Church, pp. 84-107.
Fuente: Albert Barnes’ Notes on the Bible
1Ti 1:3-4
As I besought thee to abide still at Ephesus.
Timothys charge
Our translators have supplied two words at the close of the fourth verse, in order to complete the sentence which the apostle left unfinished; but it would have been better had they inserted them earlier, for the meaning is more clear if we read, As I besought thee to abide still at Ephesus when I went into Macedonia, so I beseech thee now to remain there. It is an example of the way in which Pauls living thoughts leaped ahead of the words which might have clothed them.
I. The period to which he refers in the phrase, when I went into Macedonia, cannot be certainly fixed. There was, indeed, one occasion mentioned in Act 20:1, when, in consequence of the peril in which he was placed through the uproar raised by Demetrius, he did leave Ephesus for Macedonia; but in the chapter preceding that narrative we read that he had already sent Timothy and Erastus thither; and we know that he joined them there, because in the First Epistle to the Corinthians, written thence, he mentions Timothy as being then with him.
II. The mode of address to Timothy demands a word or two. I besought thee–not I commanded thee. No doubt this is expressive of the gentleness and affection with which Timothy was regarded, but it is also an indication of the kind of authority which was exercised by the apostles over their fellow-workers. There was nothing dictatorial about it, nothing of the military discipline which is so popular and effective in an aggressive section of the Church in our day. Influence then was that of character; authority was the outcome of inspiration; and even the chosen twelve were better pleased to rule by love than fear. It must be admitted this may give rise to abuses and perils.
III. The purport of Pauls entreaty was that Timothy should check the progress of false doctrine in the Ephesian Church. There was a ferment going on in the minds of men at that time, such as usually accompanies or follows a great religious movement. False notions of God, and of His law, arising from an imperfectly understood Judaism, combined with a speculative heathen philosophy, were threatening to destroy the simplicity of the gospel A sort of cabalistic system was being constituted in the Church, by an incongruous mixture of Jewish fancies with heathen speculations, and this threatened disaster–just as the ivy, climbing slowly but surely, thrusts in a root here and a tendril there, till the once strong wall has every stone loosened, and in the storm it falls.
IV. The reason given for opposing such teaching is, that it ministered questions rather than godly edifying. The Revised Version adopts another reading, and rightly so. The meaning is, that these questionings did not subserve Gods dispensation mills specific plan for admission to His kingdom, His method of salvation unfolded in the Gospel; for that dispensation consists in faith. And as a matter of experience we know that questions which merely excite the fancy, or even the intellect, tend to make the objects of faith distasteful. For example, a course of sensational novel reading, which peoples the mind with unrealities, does extrude earnest thoughts on spiritual realities. And this which is true of the rites of the Church is equally true of its organizations, and we have constantly to be on our guard lest the occupation of the mind with the details of Church work should divert us from the cultivation of personal Christian life. But the apostle here condemns chiefly the unhealthy practice of giving prominence to unimportant questions, whether it be in the sphere of philosophy or of religion. When a settler has to grow his own corn to provide himself with daily bread, he will let speculation on the strata beneath the surface wait till he has found time to sow and to reap. (A. Rowland, LL. B.)
The doctrine condemned in the Pastoral Epistles a Jewish form of Gnosticism: the Gnostics problem
It is of more importance to inquire what was the nature of the different doctrine which Timothy was to endeavour to counteract. And on this point we are not left in serious doubt. There are various expressions used respecting it in these two letters to Timothy which seem to point to two factors in the heterodoxy about which St. Paul is anxious.
1. The heresy is Jewish in character. Its promoters desire to be teachers of the Law (1Ti 1:7). Some of them are they of the circumcision (Tit 1:10). It consists in Jewish fables (Tit 1:14). The questions which it raises are fightings about the Law (Tit 3:9).
2. Its Gnostic character is also indicated. We are told both in the text and in the Epistle to Titus (Tit 1:14; Tit 3:9) that it deals in fables and genealogies. It is, empty talking (verse 6), disputes of words (1Ti 6:4), and profane babblings (1Ti 6:20). It teaches an unscriptural and unnatural asceticism (1Ti 4:3; 1Ti 4:8). It is Gnosis falsely so called (1Ti 6:20). A heresy containing these two elements, Judaism and Gnosticism, meets us both before and after the period covered by the Pastoral Epistles: before in the Epistle to the Colossians; afterwards in the Epistles of Ignatius. The evidence gathered from these three sources is entirely in harmony with what we learn elsewhere–that the earliest forms of Christian Gnosticism were Jewish in character. It will be observed that this is indirect confirmation of the genuineness of the Pastoral Epistles. The Gnosticism condemned in them is Jewish; and any form of Gnosticism that was in existence in St. Pauls time would almost certainly be Jewish. Professor Godet has pointed out how entirely the relation of Judaism to Christianity which is implied in these Epistles, fits in with their being the last group of epistles written by St. Paul. At first, Judaism was entirely outside the Church, opposing and blaspheming. Then it entered the Church and tried to make the Church Jewish, by foisting the Mosaic Law upon it. Lastly, it becomes s, fantastic heresy inside the Church, and sinks into profane frivolity. Pretended revelations are given as to the names and genealogies of angels; absurd ascetic rules are laid down as counsels of perfection, while daring immorality defaces the actual life. This is the phase which is confronted in the Pastoral Epistles: and St. Paul meets it with a simple appeal to faith and morality. It is quite possible that the fables, or myths, and genealogies ought to be transferred from the Gnostic to the Jewish side of the account. And thus Chrysostom interprets the passage. By fables he does not mean the Law; far from it; but inventions and forgeries, and counterfeit doctrines. For, it seems, the Jews wasted their whole discourse on these unprofitable points. They numbered up their fathers and grandfathers, that they might have the reputation of historical knowledge and research. The fables then, may be understood to be those numerous legends which the Jews added to the Old Testament, specimens of which abound in the Talmud. But similar myths abound in Gnostic systems, and therefore fables may represent both elements of the heterodox teaching. So also with the endless genealogies. These cannot well refer to the genealogies in Genesis, for they are not endless, each of them being arranged in tens. But it is quite possible that Jewish speculations about the genealogies of angels may be meant. Such things, being purely imaginary, would be endless. Or the Gnostic doctrine of emanations, in its earlier and cruder forms, may be intended. By genealogies in this sense early thinkers, especially in the East, tried to bridge the chasm between the infinite and the finite, between God and creation. In various systems it is assumed that matter is inherently evil. The material universe has been from the beginning not very good but very bad. How then can it be believed that the Supreme Being, infinite in goodness, would create such a thing? This is incredible: the world must be the creature of some inferior and perhaps evil being. But when this was conceded, the distance between this inferior power and the supreme God still remained to be bridged. This, it was supposed, might be done by an indefinite number of generations, each lower in dignity than the preceding one, until at last a being capable of creating the universe was found. From the Supreme God emanated an inferior deity, and from this lower power a third still more inferior; and so on until the Creator of the world was reached. These ideas are found in the Jewish philosopher Philo; and it is to these that St. Paul probably alludes in the endless genealogies which minister questionings rather than a dispensation of God. (A. Plummer, D. D.)
Speculations condemned
St. Paul condemns such speculations on four grounds.
1. They are fables, myths, mere imaginings of the human intellect in its attempt to account for the origin of the world and the origin of evil.
2. They are endless and interminable. From the nature of things there is no limit to mere guesswork of this kind. Every new speculator may invent a fresh genealogy of emanations in his theory of creation and may make it any length that he pleases. If hypotheses need never be verified–need not even be capable of verification–one may go on constructing them ad infinitum.
3. As a natural consequence of this () they minister questionings and nothing better. It is all barren speculation and fruitless controversy. Where any one may assert without proof, any one else may contradict with out proof; and nothing comes of this see-saw of affirmation and negation.
4. Lastly, these vain imaginings are a different doctrine. They are not only empty but untrue, and are a hindrance to the truth, they occupy the ground which ought to be filled with the dispensation of God which is in faith. Human minds are limited in their capacity, and, even if these empty hypotheses were innocent, minds that were filled With them would have little room left for the truth. But they are not innocent: and those who are attracted by them become disaffected towards the truth. The history of the next hundred and fifty years amply justifies the anxiety and severity of St. Paul. The germs of Gnostic error, which were in the air when Christianty was first preached, fructified with amazing rapidity. It would be hard to find a parallel in the history of philosophy to the speed with which Gnostic views spread in and around Christendom between a.d. 70 and 220. Throughout the Christian world, and especially in intellectual centres such as Ephesus, Alexandria, and Rome, there was perhaps not a single educated congregation which did not contain persons who were infected with some form of Gnosticism. Jeromes famous hyperbole respecting Arianism might be transferred to this earlier form of error, perhaps the most perilous that the Church has ever known: The whole world groaned and was amazed to find itself Gnostic. However severely we may con demn these speculations, we cannot but sympathize with the perplexities which produced them. The origin of the universe, and still more the origin of evil, to this day remain unsolved problems. No one in this life is ever likely to reach a complete solution of either. (A. Plummer, D. D.)
Fuente: Biblical Illustrator Edited by Joseph S. Exell
Verse 3. I besought thee] The apostle had seen that a bad seed had been sown in the Church; and, as he was obliged to go then into Macedonia, he wished Timothy, on whose prudence, piety, and soundness in the faith he could depend, to stay behind and prevent the spreading of a doctrine that would have been pernicious to the people’s souls. I have already supposed that this epistle was written after Paul had been delivered from his first imprisonment at Rome, about the end of the year 64, or the beginning of 65. See the preface. When, therefore, the apostle came from Rome into Asia, he no doubt visited Ephesus, where, ten years before, he had planted a Christian Church, and, as he had not time to tarry then, he left Timothy to correct abuses.
That thou mightest charge some] He does not name any persons; the Judaizing teachers are generally supposed to be those intended; and the term , some, certain persons, which he uses, is expressive of high disapprobation, and at the same time of delicacy: they were not apostles, nor apostolic men; but they were undoubtedly members of the Church at Ephesus, and might yet be reclaimed.
Fuente: Adam Clarke’s Commentary and Critical Notes on the Bible
Ephesus was a great city in Asia the Less, whither Paul came, Act 19:1; where Demetrius raised a tumult against him, which the town clerk appeased, as we read there. From thence he
went into Macedonia, Act 20:1-3. Upon this his motion into Macedonia (as divines judge) he left Timothy at Ephesus. The end of leaving him at Ephesus was, that he might
charge some that they preached no other doctrine, that is, none contrary to what he had preached, none contrary to the doctrine of the gospel, Gal 1:8,9. What power was here committed to Timothy is by some questioned; supposing (which is very probable) there were a greater number of disciples than could meet in one assembly, his power was more than pastoral, for he had a power over the teachers. Whether this power was extraordinary, or ordinary, and what God intended ever to continue in the chnrch, is the question. Those who make it to be such, make it to be episcopal; those that make it extraordinary, say it was the work of an evangelist, 2Ti 4:5. That there was such an officer in the primitive church appears from Act 21:8; Eph 4:11. That this was Timothys work appears from 2Ti 4:5. Nor is it a new thing, but very common in the settlement of all new governments, to authorize some special commissioners, and to give them an extraordinary power for a time, till the government can be settled and things brought into a fixed order. If we consider the words without prejudice:
I besought thee to abide still at Ephesus, they seem to signify that Timothy was not the established bishop of Ephesus; for to what end should the apostle desire a bishop to reside in his own diocess, which he could not forsake without neglecting his duty, and the offence of God? This were a tacit reflection, as if he were careless of his duty. And the word abide, prosmeinai, does not necessarily import his constant residence there; for it is used to signify continuance for some time only; as it is said of the apostle, that he remained many days at Corinth, Act 18:18, when his stay there was only for some months. The intention of the apostle seems to be that Timothy should continue for a while at Ephesus, and not accompany him in his voyage to Macedonia, as he was wont to do upon other occasions. And it is evident by the sacred history, that about six months after Timothy was with the apostle in Greece, that he went with him to Macedonia, and Troas, and Miletus, Act 20:1,4, where the apostle sent for the elders or bishops of Ephesus, to leave his last solemn charge with them. In short, if Timothy had been appointed the bishop of Ephesus, the apostle would probably have given this title of honour to him in the inscription of his Epistle. Upon the impartial considering of the whole matter, though the passion of prelacy is so ingenious as to discover so many mysteries and mitres in a few plain words, (viz. that Timothy was bishop of that city, metropolitan of the province, and primate of all Asia), yet it is most likely that Timothy was left only for some time with a kind of apostolical power in the church of Ephesus; of which power this was one branch, authoritatively to command seducers not to teach another doctrine than what was taught by the apostles, who were Divinely illuminated: a Divine rule, and most worthy of perpetual observation by all in the office of the ministry. And this showeth the mighty proneness of men, as to deviate in their conversations, from the right ways, so in their judgments from the truths of God, otherwise Paul had no need to have left Timothy for that end in this church so newly planted.
Fuente: English Annotations on the Holy Bible by Matthew Poole
3. Timothy’s superintendence ofthe Church at Ephesus was as locum tenens for the apostle, andso was temporary. Thus, the office of superintending overseer, neededfor a time at Ephesus or Crete, in the absence of the presidingapostle, subsequently became a permanent institution on the removal,by death, of the apostles who heretofore superintended the churches.The first title of these overseers seems to have been “angels”(Re 1:20).
As I besought thee to abidestillHe meant to have added, “so I still beseechthee,” but does not complete the sentence until he does sovirtually, not formally, at 1Ti1:18.
at EphesusPaul, in Ac20:25, declared to the Ephesian elders, “I know thatye all shall see my face no more.” If, then, as the balance ofarguments seems to favor (see Introduction),this Epistle was written subsequently to Paul’s first imprisonment,the apparent discrepancy between his prophecy and the event may bereconciled by considering that the terms of the former were not thathe should never visit Ephesus again (which this verseimplies he did), but that they all should “see his faceno more.” I cannot think with BIRKS,that this verse is compatible with his theory, that Paul did notactually visit Ephesus, though in its immediate neighborhood (compare1Ti 3:14; 1Ti 4:13).The corresponding conjunction to “as” is not given, thesentence not being completed till it is virtually so at 1Ti1:18.
I besoughta mild word,instead of authoritative command, to Timothy, as a fellow helper.
someThe indefinitepronoun is slightly contemptuous as to them (Gal 2:12;Jdg 1:4), [ELLICOTT].
teach no other doctrinethanwhat I have taught (Ga1:6-9). His prophetic bodings some years before (Act 20:29;Act 20:30) were now beingrealized (compare 1Ti 6:3).
Fuente: Jamieson, Fausset and Brown’s Commentary Critical and Explanatory on the Whole Bible
As I besought thee to abide, still at Ephesus,…. Where it seems he now was, being left here by the apostle, and where he was desired by him to continue:
when I went into Macedonia; not when he went his first journey there, for Timothy was then along with him, Ac 16:3 and so he seems to be in his journey through it, in Ac 20:3. It may be this may refer to a journey which Luke has given no account of:
that thou mightest charge some, that they teach no other doctrine; than the doctrine of Christ and his apostles; than what had been preached by the apostle at Ephesus, and the saints there had received; than what was agreeably to the Scriptures of truth, and was according to godliness; for all other doctrines must be divers and strange ones: nor would he have them teach in another way, in new words, but hold fast the form of sound words; for new words often produce new doctrines: the apostle perhaps by other doctrine chiefly respects the doctrine of justification by the works of the law. It seems as if there were some teachers in this place the apostle was suspicious of, or he had heard that they began to innovate in the doctrine of faith; wherefore he desires Timothy to continue a while, in order to be a check on these persons, and to charge them not to introduce any new doctrine; for it was only “some”, and not all that taught there, he was so to charge. Some refer this to hearers; and render, the words, “that they follow no other doctrine”; but it seems best to understand it of teachers; the Syriac and Arabic versions render the words as we do.
Fuente: John Gill’s Exposition of the Entire Bible
As I exhorted ( ). There is an ellipse of the principal clause in verse 4 ( so do I now not being in the Greek).
To tarry (). First aorist active infinitive of , old verb, attributed by Luke to Paul in Ac 13:43.
That thou mightest charge ( ). Subfinal clause with and the first aorist active subjunctive of , old verb, to transmit a message along () from one to another. See 2Thess 3:4; 2Thess 3:6; 2Thess 3:10. Lock considers this idiom here an elliptical imperative like Eph 4:29; Eph 5:33.
Certain men (). Dative case. Expressly vague (no names as in 1:20), though Paul doubtless has certain persons in Ephesus in mind.
Not to teach a different doctrine ( ). Earliest known use of this compound like of Clement of Rome. Only other N.T. example in 6:3. Eusebius has . Same idea in Gal 1:6; 2Cor 11:4; Rom 16:17. Perhaps coined by Paul.
Fuente: Robertson’s Word Pictures in the New Testament
Even as [] . An awkward construction, there being nothing to answer to kaqwv.
To abide [] . To continue on. The compound does not occur in Paul, but is found in Act 11:23; Act 13:43; Act 18:18.
When I went [] . Better, was going, or was on my way. The participle cannot refer to Timothy.
Might’st charge [] See on Act 1:4. Very common in Luke and Acts, but not in Paul. In 1st Timothy alone five times.
Some [] Note the indefinite designation of the errorists, and comp. verse 6; 1Ti 4:1; 1Ti 5:15, 24; 1Ti 6:21. The expression is contemptuous. It is assumed that Timothy knows who they are. This is after the Pauline manner. See Gal 1:7; Gal 2:12; 1Co 4:18; 1Co 14:12; 2Co 3:1; Col 2:4, 8.
That they teach no other doctrine [ ] . Better, not to teach a different doctrine. For eterov different, see on Gal 1:6. The verb Past o. o LXX o Class. The charge is not to teach anything contrary to the sound teaching (verse 10) or irreconcilable with it. Comp. Gal 1:6; 2Co 11:4; Rom 16:17.
Fuente: Vincent’s Word Studies in the New Testament
1) “As I besought thee to abide still at Ephesus.” (kathos parekalesa se prosmeinai en Epheso) “As I motivated you or entreated you to remain (stay behind) in Ephesus.” This appears specifically to refer to Act 20:1-4.
2) “When I went into Macedonia.” (poreuomenoseis makedonian) “(I) going into Macedonia,” or “when I was going into Macedonia.” The idea is “without a fixed itinerary,” but leaving the day by day door opening to the Lord.
3) “That thou mightest charge some.” (hina parangliles tisin) “In order that thou mightest charge certain persons.” Timothy was to meet “certain persons” head-on and charge or warn them as follows:
4) “That they teach no other doctrine.” (me etero didaskalein) “Not to teach differently.” Judaizers, legalists, salvation-by-good-works sects had infiltrated the Ephesus church. Timothy was left by Paul and instructed to charge these “certain persons” to teach no “new doctrine,” no other doctrine than what Paul had taught them; See also Gal 1:6-9; 2Jn 1:10-11; Rev 22:18-19.
COUNTERFEIT DOCTRINE
As he is a traitor to his prince who taketh upon him to coin money out of a base metal, yea, although in the stamp he putteth for a show the image of the prince; so he that shall teach any doctrine that cometh not from God, whatsoever he say for it, or what gloss over he set on it, is a traitor unto God, yea, a cursed traitor: though he were an angel from heaven.
–Spencer
WARNING MISUNDERSTOOD
A pilot guiding a steamer down the Cumberland saw a light, apparently from a small craft, in the middle of the narrow channel. His impulse was to disregard the signal and run down the boat. As he came near, a voice shouted, “Keep off, keep off!” In great anger he cursed what he supposed to be a boatman in his way. On arriving at the next landing he learned that a huge rock had fallen from the mountain into the bed of the stream, and that a signal was placed there to warn the coming boats of the unknown danger. Alas! Many regard God’s warnings in the same way, and are angry with any who tell them of the rocks in their course. They will understand better at the end.
Windows for Sermons
Fuente: Garner-Howes Baptist Commentary
3. As I besought thee Either the syntax is elliptical, or the particle ἵνα is redundant; and in both cases the meaning will be obvious. (3) First, he reminds Timothy why he was besought to remain at Ephesus. It was with great reluctance, and through hard necessity, that he parted with a companion so dearly beloved and so faithful, in order that he might laboriously hold the part of his deputy, which no other man would have been competent to fill; and, therefore, Timothy must have been powerfully excited by this consideration, not only not to throw away his time, but to conduct himself in an excellent and distinguished manner.
I wish that thou shouldst forbid any. Thus, by way of inference, he exhorts him to oppose the false teachers who corrupted pure doctrine. In the injunction given to Timothy, to occupy his place at Ephesus, we ought to observe the holy anxiety of the Apostle; for while he labored so much to collect many churches he did not leave the former churches destitute of a pastor. And indeed, as an ancient writer remarks, “To keep what has been gained is not a smaller virtue than to make new acquisitions.” The word forbid denotes power; for Paul wishes to arm him with power to restrain others.
Not to teach differently The Greek word ( ἑτεροδιδασκαλεῖν) which Paul employs, is a compound, and, therefore, may either be translated, “to teach differently,” or after a new method, or, “to teach a different doctrine.” The translation given by Erasmus, ( sectari ,) “ to follow,” does not satisfy me; because it might be understood to apply to the hearers. Now Paul means those who, for the sake of ambition, brought forward a new doctrine.
If we read it, “to teach differently,” the meaning will be more extensive; for by this expression he will forbid Timothy to permit any new forms of teaching to be introduced, which do not agree with the true and pure doctrine which he had taught. Thus, in the Second Epistle, he recommends ὑποτύπωσις, (4) that is, a lively picture of his doctrine. (2Ti 1:13.) For, as the truth of God is one, so is there but one plain manner of teaching it, which is free from false ornament, and which partakes more of the majesty of the Spirit than of the parade of human eloquence. Whoever departs from that, disfigures and corrupts the doctrine itself; and, therefore, “to teach differently,” must relate to the form.
If we read it, “to teach something different,” it will relate to the matter. Yet it is worthy of observation, that we give the name of another doctrine not only to that which is openly at variance with the pure doctrine of the gospel, but to everything that either corrupts the pure gospel by new and borrowed inventions, or obscures it by ungodly speculations. For all the inventions of men are so many corruptions of the gospel; and they who make sport of the Scriptures, as ungodly people are accustomed to do, so as to turn Christianity into an act of display, darken the gospel. His manner of teaching therefore, is entirely opposed to the word of God, and to that purity of doctrine in which Paul enjoins the Ephesians to continue.
(3) “The construction here is tortuous and elliptical. Πορευόμενος εἰς Μακεδονίαν must be construed between καθὼς and παρεκάλεσα, and the protasis at καθὼς is without its apodosis, οὕτως, which must be supplied. The simplest and most natural method is to understand οὕτω καὶ νῦν παρακαλῶ.” — Bloomfield.
(4) “ Il ne recommande pas simplement a Timothee de retener sa doctrine, mais il use d’un mot qui signifie le vray patron, ou vif portraict d’icelle.” — “He does not merely advise Timothy to hold by his doctrine, but employs a word which denotes the true pattern or lively portrait of it.”
Fuente: Calvin’s Complete Commentary
CRITICAL AND EXPLANATORY NOTES
1Ti. 1:3. Charge some that they teach no other doctrine.R.V. charge certain men not to teach a different doctrine. It is doctrine that differs in quality that was not to be taught. In his impassioned address to the Galatians St. Paul would anathematise even an angel from heaven who should dare to proclaim another gospel, different, from its commixture with an unedifying, vain, and morbid theosophy.
1Ti. 1:4. Fables and endless genealogies.Rabbinical fables and fabrications, whether in history or doctrinethese, according to Ellicott, are the fables, and the genealogies are to be taken in the proper sense with which, however, these wilder speculations were very probably combined. Most modern commentators refer the terms to the spiritual myths and emanations of Gnosticism. The which minister questions.The wordy wars in which the Christian community would be involved by these genealogies would be as long as they themselves, and as vacuous. Godly edifying.R.V. a dispensation of God. The A.V. is an impossible rendering of the word from which our economy comes. The translators followed another reading, and the Vulgate dificationem.
MAIN HOMILETICS OF THE PARAGRAPH.1Ti. 1:3-4
A Difficult Pastoral Charge.
I. A sphere of active and distracting heresies.Neither give heed to fables and endless genealogies, which minister questions, rather than godly edifying which is in faith (1Ti. 1:4). The Gnostic problem was now beginning to manifest itself, and to mingle with the development of the gospel. The heresy spread with marvellous rapidity between A.D. 70 and 220; and Eusebius tells us that as soon as the apostles and those who had listened to them with their own ears had passed away, the conspiracy of godless error took its rise through the deceit of false teachers, who endeavoured with brazen face to preach their knowledge falsely so called in opposition to the preaching of the truth. The Gnostic theory was that matter is eternal and that evil resides inherently in matter, so that there were two coeternal existencesGod and matter. This theory afterwards developed the creed that there are two coeternal and coequal powersgood and evil; and the doctrine of emanations from the supreme God of a series of inferior deities, the last being regarded as the creator of the world. Here was scope for the fables and endless genealogies which the apostle condemns and against which he warns Timothy. The existence of these confusing errors, which were rife in Ephesus, rendered the position of the young pastor both delicate and difficult. Not less difficult and anxious is the relation of the minister to modern speculations and doubts. The activity of the propagators of false ethics, of scepticism, theosophy, agnosticism, materialism, and a crude unformed socialism in the present day, creates concern in the breast of the earnest preacher of the gospel.
II. Requiring caution and fidelity in enforcing the true doctrine.As I besought thee to abide still at Ephesus that thou mightest charge some that they teach no other doctrine so do (1Ti. 1:3-4). The apostles specific for the errors of that day was not to advertise and spread them by injudicious controversy, but to teach with the more care and faithfulness no other doctrine than the gospel of Christ. Error must be slain by a clearer and more emphatic statement of the truth, of which it is a distortion and caricature. The same method is applicable to the times in which we live. The modern preacher must know and therefore study the theories of unbelief, however wild and extravagant they may seem, and much as he may recoil from the disagreeable and dangerous task. He must fight his own way through the wicked antagonisms of the truth to faith and certainty; but he must not introduce into his pulpit ministrations the details of the errors he seeks to refute. He need not expose the progressive steps by which he reaches his conclusions, but should use those conclusions in the most condensed and concrete form. Error is most effectually quenched by a faithful preaching of the truth as it is in Jesus, and insisting upon a holy and consistent life. Unbelief is more an obliquity of the heart than the head; and if the heart is to be reached and changed, we must teach no other doctrine than that which Timothy was exhorted to expound and enforce.
III. Retained with evident reluctance.As I besought thee (1Ti. 1:3). Timothy shrank from the formidable task proposed to him. He saw its vital importance and its difficulties too, and perhaps his natural timidity tempted him to exaggerate these. He was subject to moods of discouragement (compare 2Ti. 1:7-8; 2Ti. 2:1-13; 2Ti. 4:5). It was only after earnest and affectionate persuasion on the part of Paul that he at length consented to undertake the difficult work. It was impossible for him to resist the pleading of his father in the gospel; and, fearful and hesitating, his instinctive obedience led him to comply. When he parted from Paulprobably at Miletus, where he first received this chargeTimothy was in tears (Act. 20:36-38). Duty is not always easy: the more difficult it is, the greater the honour and the more distinguished the reward. St. Ambrose relates a legend that, when persecution arose in Rome, the Christians, anxious to preserve the life of Peter, advised him to flee. He was in the act of leaving the city when he met our Lord. Lord, whither goest Thou? asked the apostle. I go to Rome, was the answer, there once more to be crucified. Peter understood the rebuke, returned at once, and was crucified. Duty must be done whatever the result. We may safely leave that with God.
Lessons.
1. The minister should be awake to the tendency of modern error.
2. Faithful preaching of the truth is the best antidote to error.
3. The work of the ministry is beset with difficulties.
GERM NOTES ON THE VERSES
1Ti. 1:4. Godly edifying which is in faith. Moral-building.
I. The soul is edified only as it advances in godliness.
II. The materials for moral-building are supplied by the gospel.
III. Moral-building is hindered by the discussion of frivolous questions.
Fuente: The Preacher’s Complete Homiletical Commentary Edited by Joseph S. Exell
1. SOUND DOCTRINE 1:320
1.
DANGER TO SOUND DOCTRINE 1Ti. 1:3-11
a.
False Teachers. 1Ti. 1:3-7
Text 1:37
3 As I exhorted thee to tarry at Ephesus, When I was going into Macedonia, that thou mightest charge certain men not to teach a different doctrine, 4 neither to give heed to fables and endless genealogies, which minister questionings, rather than a dispensation of God which is in faith; so do I now. 5 But the end of the charge is love out of a pure heart and a good conscience and faith unfeigned: 6 from which things some having swerved have turned aside unto vain talking; 7 desiring to be teachers of the law, though they understand neither what they say, nor whereof they confidently affirm.
Thought Questions 1:37
7.
What seems to be the specific purpose of this letter to Timothy?
8.
How would Timothy know if the doctrine of certain men was false or true?
9.
Just imagine such teachers in our churches today; how could we carry out Pauls instructions?
10.
Why were such persons so interested in fables and genealogies? Where did they find them?
11.
Paul did not want questionings; he did want a dispensation of God; Explain the difference.
12.
What is meant by saying the end of the charge? Is Paul suggesting that some of the teachers in Ephesus did not have a pure heart?
13.
How could anyone teach that which he did not know? Explain,
14.
What were these men confidently affirming?
Paraphrase 1:37
3 As I entreated thee to continue in Ephesus, when I was going into Macedonia, I now, by commandment of God, require thee so to do; that thou mayest charge the Judaizers not to teach differently from the inspired apostles of Christ.
4 Nor to inculcate fabulous traditions, invented to prove that men cannot be saved unless they obey the law of Moses; and uncertain genealogies, by which every Jew endeavors to trace his descent from Abraham, and which by their uncertainty occasion disputes, rather than the great edification which is through a right faith only.
5 Now the scope of the charge to be given by thee to these teachers is, that instead of inculcating fables and genealogies, they inculcate love to God and man proceeding from a pure heart, and directed by a good conscience, and nourished by unfeigned faith in the gospel doctrine.
6 From which things some teachers having swerved, have in their discourses turned aside to foolish talking; talking which serves no purpose but to discover their own folly, and to nourish folly in their disciples.
7 As thou mayest know by this, that they set themselves up as teachers of the law of Moses, though they understand neither what they themselves say concerning it, nor the nature of the law they establish.
Comment 1:37
1Ti. 1:3. It is just as important to conserve the results as it is to obtain them. Paul was as concerned about the faith of the Christians in Ephesus after they became converts as he was before they accepted. The grevious wolves, and the perverse teachers from among the elders at Ephesus, had evidently arisen. (Act. 20:29-30). The purpose for Timothys stay in Ephesus was a doctrinal problem. He was to do a job of teaching. Paul felt it to be a very urgent matter. There was and is a norm of truth. Any deviation from this norm is serious and must be corrected. The correction is going to be authoritative. Timothy is to give orders as a superior officer in the army of God. Those in the army of God are to give heed. Any teaching, different from, or added to the one already delivered by the apostles, is to be rejected and corrected.
1Ti. 1:4. The particular (although evidently not the only) difficulty in the area of teaching, had to do with a certain type of pedigree tracing. Evidently it meant a great deal to be able to show that Abraham (or some other illustrious Jewish leader) was your great-great-great grandfather. In the attempt to trace such descent, certain stories would be discovered about your relatives, which were in truth but fables, Endless questions could be asked and discussed. For an example of this practice, the Jewish Book of Jubilees would be a good source. This did not help anyone-least of all did it promote the cause of Christ in Ephesus, It must be corrected!
1Ti. 1:5. Paul wants Timothy to know that he is not simply to authoritatively contradict such false teachers, but to, in the correction, produce pure hearts, good consciences, and unhypocritical faith. Could it be that such false teachers were teaching as they did because they had none of these virtues? It would seem then that their fine-spun name tracing was a smoke-screen for a sinful heart. How much false doctrine has moral implications, only God can know.
1Ti. 1:6. Paul specifically states in this verse that some of the teachers (elders?) had missed the mark. How easy it is to be caught up in some side issue and miss the purpose of God. Much class discussion today is as vain and empty as that described here by Paul. It needs correction for the same reason.
1Ti. 1:7. How could anyone confidently affirm that of which he was ignorant? It is not to be understood that these teachers were entirely ignorant of the law of Moses; indeed they professed to be specialists in the Law. They majored in minors and missed the whole purpose of the very subject they were professing to teach. Worse yet, they taught a different purpose than that intended by God. If these teachers understood the true meaning of these fables, they would never have taught them, It is sad and serious to be spiritually blind, but how tragic to observe the blind leading the blind to the ditch!
Fact Questions 1:37
7.
Why did Paul leave Timothy in Ephesus?
8.
If there was no New Testament in the day when Paul wrote to Timothy, what would Timothy use as a standard of truth?
9.
Why the great interest of some in genealogies?
10.
Why did the discussion about genealogies become unprofitable?
11.
What is the meaning of the phrase: the end of the charge?
12.
What was the mark or the target missed by these teachers?
Fuente: College Press Bible Study Textbook Series
(3) That thou mightest charge some.Some time after the first imprisonment at Rome, and consequently beyond the period included by St. Luke in the Acts, St. Paul must have left Timothy behind at Ephesus while he pursued his journey towards Macedonia, and given him the solemn charge here referred to. The false teachers who are disturbing the Church at Ephesus are not named. There is, perhaps, a ring of contempt in the expression some, but it seems more probable that the names were designedly omitted in this letter, which was intended to be a public document. The chief superintendent of the Ephesian community, doubtless, knew too well who were the mistaken men referred to.
That they teach no other doctrine.Otheri.e., other than the truth. When the Apostle and his disciple Timothy re-visited Ephesus, after the long Csarean and Roman imprisonment, they found the Church there distracted with questions raised by Jewish teachers. The curious and hair-splitting interpretation of the Mosaic law, the teaching concerning the tithing of mint and anise and cummin, which in the days of Jesus of Nazareth had paralysed all real spiritual life in Jerusalem, had found its way during the Apostles long enforced absence into the restless, ever-changing congregations at Ephesus.
Dangerous controversies, disputings concerning old prophecies, mingled with modern traditions, occupied the attention of many of the Christian teachers. They preferred to talk about theology rather than try to live the life which men like St. Paul had told them that followers of Jesus must live if they would be His servants indeed.
Unless these deadening influences were removed, the faith of the Ephesian Church threatened to become utterly impractical. The doctrine these restless men were teaching, and which St. Paul so bitterly condemns, seems to have been no settled form of heresy, but a profitless teaching, arising mainly, if not entirely, from Jewish sources.
Fuente: Ellicott’s Commentary for English Readers (Old and New Testaments)
PART FIRST.
THE APOSTOLIC CHARGE, 1Ti 1:1-20.
1. Safe-keeping of a pure gospel doctrine, 1Ti 1:3-11.
3. As More fully, according as; to which our translators have inserted so do, in Italics, in order to make a completed statement. Some, as Fairbairn, insert after Macedonia “so I do now;” but that would simply make Paul charge Timothy still to stay at Ephesus. Our so do is preferable, applying it to the charge of this verse. Paul’s meaning is, Do now as I charged thee when I left Ephesus. His verbal charge he would now make a recorded charge.
Went into Macedonia This going from Ephesus into Macedonia cannot be identified with that mentioned in Act 20:1; for, as appears from Act 19:22, he had before that going into Macedonia sent Timothy to Corinth. And, as there appears no going to Macedonia and leaving Timothy at Ephesus apparently possible before Paul’s first imprisonment, so this passage requires a second imprisonment. See Introduction.
Some A reprehensive word, implying that these teachers were a certain few, not to be named here, but too well known to Timothy. Note on 1Ti 1:20.
Teach no other doctrine In Paul’s Greek a newly coined and very expressive single Greek word, to-be-otherwise-teachers. It expresses the idea that the original gospel of Jesus, as purely and genuinely transmitted through the apostles, must be retained unmixed with any other elements, and without variation.
Fuente: Whedon’s Commentary on the Old and New Testaments
Timothy Is Called On To Charge The Church Leaders To Be Faithful To The Truth And Not To Heed False Teachers ( 1Ti 1:3-5 ).
Paul’s first concern is with some foolish teaching which has crept into the church. That is one reason why Timothy is there, to seek to put an end to it and have it excised from the church. The centrality of the Gospel must be maintained in its purity.
Fuente: Commentary Series on the Bible by Peter Pett
‘As I exhorted you to stay awhile at Ephesus, when I was going into Macedonia, so that you might charge certain men not to teach a different doctrine, nor to give heed to fables and endless genealogies, which minister questionings, rather than a household management of God which is in faith; so do I now. But the end of the charge is love out of a pure heart and a good conscience and faith unfeigned,’
‘As I exhorted you to stay awhile at Ephesus.’ Timothy had been ministering in Ephesus, and Paul had exhorted (or ‘requested’) him to stay there for the good of the church. It would appear that Timothy felt that it was time that he left there, for he would be well aware that he was young and inexperienced, but Paul was asking him to remain there in order, among other things, to combat this foolish teaching in so important and influential a church. And when Paul made a request to a godly young man like Timothy it was in the nature of a command, for he would be seen as speaking in God’s name.
‘When I was going into Macedonia.’ All this tells us is that Timothy knew that Paul was going into Macedonia. It does not tell us what his starting point had been. There is therefore no reason for assuming that Paul had been in Ephesus just prior to the letter. (Its force depended simply on the information that Timothy had. There is no ‘natural’ way of reading it apart from that, and we do not know what Timothy’s information was). So Paul reminds Timothy how he (Timothy) had been in Ephesus, while Paul was going to Macedonia, and how he had exhorted him to remain there for a while. Timothy had clearly wanted to leave Ephesus, finding the going a little hard for one who was sensitive, as well as being young and relatively inexperienced, and feeling insufficient in himself. But Paul asked him to remain there in order to combat foolish teaching, and he did so. It is a reminder that the pathway of our choosing is not necessarily the one that will be the best for the work of God.
It should be stressed that Paul does not say that he himself had been at Ephesus. He simply states his destination. Paul’s previous exhortation might have been by letter or through messengers as he was organising the activities of his missionary band throughout Asia Minor and Greece. By means of messengers he kept in close touch with his ‘assistants’, and indeed sometimes they were his messengers.
Some, reading into it that Paul is saying that he had been at Ephesus with Timothy, have pointed out that Paul had told the Ephesian elders in Act 20:22 that they would see his face no more. But that statement may in fact simply have meant ‘not in the near future’ simply because he knew of the trials that lay ahead of him. For that time at least, and for the foreseeable future, he wanted them to know that he would not be travelling again through Asia Minor, with the consequence being that they must not depend on his coming to them again. But that was not to close the door on him ever coming again to them. Paul knew only too well that his life was being directed for him. It was not therefore for him to determine the distant future. He knew only of what lay close at hand, and wanted the elders to become God-sufficient.
Besides Paul would not be the first person to have said, ‘you won’t be seeing me again’, only for circumstances to change. Such a statement can only ever mean, ‘not this time around’. But however that might be Paul may not even have been at Ephesus this time. He may simply have sent Timothy there to give encouragement and teaching, and to pass on his love and concern for their welfare while he was active elsewhere. With a rapidly extending church he could not be everywhere, and the world was a large place and the Christian resources spread thinly.
‘So that you might charge certain men not to teach a different doctrine, nor to give heed to fables and endless genealogies, which minister questionings.’ One reason that Paul had wanted Timothy to remain at Ephesus was in order to counter some spurious teaching that was in vogue there. He had wanted him to put straight some of the elders and teachers who were straying into false ideas (in a young church with no New Testament it was inevitable that some would begin to speculate, especially in view of a tendency among some to interpret Scripture symbolically and the kind of ideas that were constantly floating around in the wider world). Thus Timothy was to put their doctrine straight, and ensure that they stuck firmly with the main essentials and did not stray into speculative and unimportant lines of thinking. It was important rather that the church be solidly based on a foundation of the central truths.
‘Certain men.’ That the erring teachers were probably elders of the house-churches in Ephesus comes out in that they saw themselves as ‘teachers of the law’ (1Ti 1:7. See also 1Ti 3:2; 1Ti 5:17). Also by the fact that it was Paul himself and not the church leadership who dealt with the main offenders (1Ti 1:20 – it would appear that it required his authority). Note too the repeated concern shown about the leadership in this letter, both in regard to their qualifications (1Ti 3:1-13), and to their behaviour (1Ti 5:20) and original appointment (1Ti 5:22).
‘Not to teach a different doctrine, nor to give heed to fables and endless genealogies, which minister questionings.’ He especially wanted to persuade them not to get involved in ‘fables and endless genealogies which minister questions’, that is, ideas which were based on the inventiveness of the human mind and were speculative (compare 1Ti 4:7), and led to further questionings which would lead nowhere. They were ‘endless’ because there is no limit to the fertility of the human mind when unrestrained. Furthermore the word ‘genealogies’ is a word which may well include family histories as a similar word does in Genesis (compare its use in Gen 37:2 where it is not strictly connected with a genealogy and RSV translates as ‘family history’). 1Ti 1:7 suggests that these were in some way connected with teaching the Law. Such speculations were very prevalent in Judaism, especially Hellenistic Judaism.
Genealogies were indeed especially important to the orthodox Jews, whose leaders considered that good descent was everything. A number of Christian Jews may well thus have been emphasising the need for those of ‘pure descent’ to remain ‘true’ to Jewish practises, and by the use of invented or exaggerated genealogical thinking have been ‘proving’ how many were included in that definition (see Tit 1:14; Tit 3:9 which specifically connects these things against which Paul is speaking with the Jews, while 1Ti 1:6-7 below confirm a connection with ‘the Law’).
Or they may have become involved in some of the fantasies about genealogies found in those who had been influenced by Philo’s more extravagant teaching issuing from among the Jews of Alexandria. Among other things with him the names in the genealogies represented the various conditions of the soul. Others built up stories around them, and then speculated on them. We all know of those today who can use and interpret names in genealogies and build stories around them in order to build up a picture which is simply an invention of their own minds, and pure speculation, but can sound convincing until it is examined by someone who knows what they are talking about. There is no need to see incipient Gnostic speculation here, although such may well have been going on at the time, for the seeds of Gnosticism were clearly around when Paul wrote Colossians. So it is probably with a view to countering such uses of ‘genealogies’ as are described above that Paul was writing. For one example of how genealogies were used among Jews in the wider sense see the Book of Jubilees with its mythical fables and histories. But the problem was that the use of genealogies in this way limited the truth in men’s minds rather than expanding it, and made it dependent on useless inventions which came from small minds. Whichever way it was it had to be stopped, for it was leading into the kind of questioning and speculation that was distinctively unhelpful, and was diverting men from the truth. (Those with a scholastic bent were clearly equally as inventive then as they are now, and with less restraints. But the problem that Paul had with it there was that it was being fed to the ordinary people as though it was the Gospel). The impression being given is not of a dangerous heresy, but of things which were a foolish waste of time, simply diverting people from the central truths. They may often have appeared more interesting than sound doctrine, but they gave no genuine basis for faith, which if it was to be genuine had to be founded on reasonably rational ideas and related to true life situations. Sound doctrine always has a good rational and historical basis.
Interestingly Rabbi Benjamin echoes Paul’s description (admittedly in 11th century AD) when he refers to some Jews in his time, who were Rechabites, and were very numerous, and had a prince over them of the house of David; and, adds that they have a genealogical book “and extracts of questions” (Massaoth, p. 83). Compare Paul’s ‘genealogies which minister questions’. Such throwbacks to the past might well have preserved very ancient tradition so that this may be seen as helping to confirm that the phrase itself has a Jewish background.
‘Rather than a household management (oikonomia) of God which is in faith.’ He wanted rather to ensure that their teaching was more positive and that it established the ‘household’ of the people of God in their faith, and kept them looking to and trusting in God. It was the responsibility of the elders and teachers to ‘manage the household and dispense truth’. And they must do so on the foundation of what all true Christians saw as ‘the faith’, the basic central doctrines which the Apostles had taught. Or alternately he was suggesting that the people’s faith in Christ must be what was emphasised and encouraged. What they were not to be involved with were speculations into irrelevancies invented by men, not based on genuine history and on Apostolic teaching.
‘So do I now.’ This phrase is actually not there in the Greek text. Paul had tailed off without finishing his sentence, as he often did (something which sticks out more in a translation than in the original Greek). So the sense has to be read in. It is clear that Paul saw the charge as still effective.
‘But the end of the charge is love out of a pure heart and a good conscience and faith unfeigned.’ He then makes clear what the purpose behind his ‘charge’ is (‘charge’ is a military term indicating ‘command’ and refers to the responsibility that he was putting on Timothy which he had to pass on to the elders and teachers). It was in order that first Timothy, and then the elders and teachers, and then the whole congregation, might maintain love from ‘a pure heart, a good conscience and a faith that was genuine (and not simply a show)’. Philosophical speculation does not on the whole tend to result in practical love, but Christian doctrine was supposed to do precisely that. Paul was concerned that true and genuine love, love towards God, towards each other, and towards the world, which was central to the Gospel, was being set aside because of these speculations.
‘Love from a pure heart –.’ This meant love towards God Himself (not towards mythical ideas), love to all men, and love for one another, each of which was central to the Gospel (Deu 6:5; Mat 5:42-48; Mat 22:37-39; Joh 13:34-35). The purity of heart included sound doctrine which would result in sound living. If the eye was full of light then so would their ways be (Mat 6:22). Those whose hearts were sound in that way would then live in full purity of life which was the second aspect of a pure heart (Psalms 15). Let the heart but be stayed on Christ, and the life would fall into place. But let the vision of Christ be dimmed, and then anything could happen. True morals rested on true faith, and that was the source of love.
‘A good conscience.’ That is a conscience that was satisfied that it was not straying from the truth, and one that could be satisfied that it was abiding by Christ’s teaching as depicted, for example, in the Sermon on the Mount. It was the conscience of a person whose heart was fixed on Christ, and who ‘walked in the light’ by following Him. The word means literally ‘a knowing along with’. It may thus mean ‘knowing that one’s behaviour is in line with that of their fellows’ or ‘a knowing of oneself’, an inner knowledge with the mind thinking along with the spirit. But its connection with ‘the truth’ in Paul’s eyes comes out in 1Ti 4:2, where the speaking of lies acts as a brand on the conscience, demonstrating that it is false. To be valid conscience has to be satiated in truth.
‘A genuine faith (faith unfeigned).’ Faith had to be properly and rightly fed if it was to remain genuine. And it was necessary to ensure that it really was faith in Christ Himself, and what He had taught, and not in endless speculations built up around His Name. For a similar use of ‘unfeigned’ see 2Co 6:6; Rom 12:9.
‘Oikonomia.’ A typical Pauline word which, apart from its use in Luk 16:2-4, is found only in 1Co 9:17; Col 1:25; Eph 1:9; Eph 3:9; and here.
Fuente: Commentary Series on the Bible by Peter Pett
Paul’s Initial Charge To Timothy ( 1Ti 1:3-17 ).
Timothy is first reminded why he is in Ephesus and what his task is.
a He has been called on to charge the church leaders to be faithful to the truth and not to heed false teachers, some of whose teachings are indicated as being connected with ‘fables and endless genealogies which raise questions’ (1Ti 1:3-5).
b Paul then gives his verdict on those false teachers. They desire to be ‘Teachers Of The Law’ but in fact lack the understanding necessary for the task with the result that they are going astray along false paths and missing the target (1Ti 1:6-7).
c With this in mind he describes the true purpose of the Law and explains Whom it is aimed at. It is for sinners (1Ti 1:8-11).
d He then gives thanks for God’s grace and mercy shown towards himself, pointing out that God has appointed him to His service and how as a sinner he had been graciously taken up by His grace in spite of what he had been and fully enabled for the task (1Ti 1:12-14).
c This leads him on to describe what the true Gospel is, it is that Christ Jesus to save sinners like himself, for he is the very chief of them (1Ti 1:15).
b He then explains that God had raised him up in order that he might be a true illustration of the active grace and longsuffering compassion of Jesus Christ even to the chief of sinners, and thus a pointer given to all who believe in Jesus Christ with eternal life in mind (1Ti 1:16).
a He finally closes the section with a paean of praise to the ‘King of the ages’, stressing His ‘otherness’, that is, His unlikeness and utter superiority to anything connected with the world (1Ti 1:17).
It will be noted that this follows a kind of chiastic pattern. In ‘a’ he commences with the fantastic speculations of false teachers, and in the parallel reveals what is the real truth about God. In ‘b’ he demonstrates that these false teachers desire to be Teachers of the Law but are going astray, while in the parallel they are in contrast to him, for he has been raised up as a true representation of what the Gospel really is. In ‘c’ he defines the purpose and significance of the Law, and in the parallel he defines the essential foundation of the Gospel. Centrally in ‘d’ he gives thanks for what God had done for him, and explains that he had been appointed by God for His service in spite of what he had been, and that it was through His abundant grace that he had been enabled and made what he was (the Apostle of Jesus Christ).
It will be noted from this analysis that, at least at this point, the main contrast is between false speculations based on the Old Testament (the Law), and the central message of God’s present action in the word through Jesus Christ as the One Who has come to save men from their sins, the one based on men’s interpretations and inventions (fables and genealogies) the other based on the grace and activity of the infinite but historical God, the King of the ages, through Christ Jesus.
Fuente: Commentary Series on the Bible by Peter Pett
The Commission In 1Ti 1:3-4 Paul gives Timothy his initial charge to remain in Ephesus in order to establish the believers in the doctrines of Jesus Christ.
1Ti 1:3 As I besought thee to abide still at Ephesus, when I went into Macedonia, that thou mightest charge some that they teach no other doctrine,
1Ti 1:3
1Ti 1:3 Comments – Man needs leadership and organization or chaos will result. A congregation as well as an individual needs a direction and vision to focus on so as not to go astray. Titus is instructed by Paul in a similar way that he instructs Timothy by telling both to set the church in order (1Ti 1:3, Tit 1:5).
Tit 1:5, “For this cause left I thee in Crete, that thou shouldest set in order the things that are wanting, and ordain elders in every city, as I had appointed thee:”
1Ti 1:4 Neither give heed to fables and endless genealogies, which minister questions, rather than godly edifying which is in faith: so do.
1Ti 1:4
Comments on “neither give heed to” – In the Greek text, the phrase in 1Ti 1:4 that reads “neither give heed” can be translated as a result clause, “so that they not give heed to (or, pay attention to).” In other words, when a believer is not correctly taught the Word of God, it results in him following a different path that is not building him up in the faith. Paul will point out in 1Ti 1:19-20 a number of people that Timothy is familiar with who have departed from the faith because of giving heed to vain teachings. Paul is trying to protect these young believers from being led astray. We do the same thing with our precious children. We control their environment and do not allow them to get exposed to unclean influences. This is what Paul is endeavoring to have Timothy do with the believers so that they will be able to grow up with proper teaching. God created a child to be shaped and molded by his environment. It is a parent’s job to manage this environment so that the children will grow up as strong Christians.
Comments on “fables and endless genealogies” – The churches of Asia Minor were largely Gentile churches with a mixture of Jewish converts. Both cultures had their superstitions and fables.
Fables – Paul’s warning against fables in 1Ti 1:4 may refer to the Greek and Roman myths that pervaded this culture. However, the common view is to interpret this statement to mean Jewish fables. Paul will later refer to “old wives’ fables” (1Ti 4:7) and also to “Jewish fables” (Tit 1:14). Chrysostom says, “By fables he does not mean the Law; far from it; but inventions and forgeries, and counterfeit doctrines. For, it seems, the Jews wasted their whole discourse on these unprofitable points. They numbered up their fathers and grandfathers, that they might have the reputation of historical knowledge and research.” ( Homilies on the First Epistle of St. Paul to Timothy, Homily 1). [89] Thus, we can interpret these fables to be those about which the Jewish Talmud abounds.
[89] John Chrysostom, The Nicene and Post-Nicene Fathers, vol. 13, Chrysostom: Homilies on Galatians, Ephesians, Philippians, Colossians, Thessalonians, Timothy, Titus, and Philemon, ed. Phillip Schaff (electronic edition), in Libronix Digital Library System, v. 2.1c [CD-ROM] (Bellingham, WA: Libronix Corp., 2000-2004), comments on 1 Timothy 1:4.
Endless Genealogies – In addition, Paul’s warnings against endless genealogies seems to refer to the Jewish culture, which placed great importance upon their individual ancestral records. We see the important of such genealogies in the book of Ezra when the Jews returned from Babylonian Captivity. Ezra and the other Jewish leaders used these genealogies to establish the order and duties of each Jewish tribe. But such an approach does not work in the New Testament Church.
Illustration – One day while looking in a bookstore for books to purchase as gifts for my young niece and nephew, the Lord quickened two verses to me. He quickened this verse and Pro 22:6. So I knew these make-believe stories and fairy tales and fruitless readings were against God’s will for me to purchase.
Also, the word “fables” not only involves reading materials, but made-up stories on television and verbal communication, etc. God does not want us to fill our minds with these nor to train up our children with these vain ideas.
Pro 22:6, “Train up a child in the way he should go: and when he is old, he will not depart from it.”
1Ti 1:4 “which minister questions, rather than godly edifying which is in faith: so do” Word Study on “edifying” Strong says the Greek word “edifying” ( ) (G3622) means, “administration (of a household or estate), an economy.” BDAG says it means, “training.” Thayer says it means, “the (knowledge of the) dispensation of the things by which God has provided for and prepared salvation, which salvation must be embraced by faith.” While a number of English translations translate this word as “edification,” ( KJV, RSV, YLT), most of them understand it to refer to the fulfillment of divine service that every believer has been entrusted with.
ASV, “neither to give heed to fables and endless genealogies, which minister questionings, rather than a dispensation of God which is in faith; so do I now.”
NAB, “or to concern themselves with myths and endless genealogies, which promote speculations rather than the plan of God that is to be received by faith.”
NASB, “nor to pay attention to myths and endless genealogies, which give rise to mere speculation rather than furthering the administration of God which is by faith.”
NCV, “Tell them not to spend their time on stories that are not true and on long lists of names in family histories. These things only bring arguments; they do not help God’s work , which is done in faith.”
NIV, “nor to devote themselves to myths and endless genealogies. These promote controversies rather than God’s work –which is by faith.”
NLT, “Don’t let them waste their time in endless discussion of myths and spiritual pedigrees. These things only lead to meaningless speculations, which don’t help people live a life of faith in God.”
Rotherham, “Not to be teaching otherwise, nor yet to be giving heed to stories and endless genealogies, the which, bring, arguings, rather than that stewardship of God which is with faith;”
RSV, “nor to give heed to fables, and endless genealogies, which occasion disputes rather than godly edification , which is through faith.”
YLT, “nor to give heed to fables and endless genealogies, that cause questions rather than the building up of God that is in faith.”
Comments – The phrase “minister questions” stands in contrast to godly edifying in the Christian faith. A questioning mind is a mind filled with doubt. Thus, Paul is contrasting doubt with faith. If a minister is teaching and preaching the doctrine of the Bible, then the church members will be built up in the faith in this process. God’s doctrine brings this edification about in a believer’s life. Note:
Rom 10:17, “So then faith cometh by hearing, and hearing by the word of God.”
Comments – God’s plan is that every man should learn to walk by faith, to live a life of godliness (Eph 4:12-13).
Eph 4:12-13, “For the perfecting of the saints, for the work of the ministry, for the edifying of the body of Christ: Till we all come in the unity of the faith, and of the knowledge of the Son of God, unto a perfect man, unto the measure of the stature of the fulness of Christ:”
1Ti 1:4 Comments – In 1Ti 1:4 Timothy is instructed to teach the church leaders not to “pay attention” to fables and endless genealogies. When a teacher focuses his mind upon a particular subject it naturally comes out in his teaching. So, when someone focuses his attention upon vain information, his words and teaching follow this vanity. This is the very thing that Paul will say in 1Ti 1:6 of this passage of Scripture, “From which some having swerved have turned aside unto vain jangling; desiring to be teachers of the law; understanding neither what they say, nor whereof they affirm.” Thus, if they “give heed to fables and endless genealogies,” they inevitably become teachers of other things.
Fuente: Everett’s Study Notes on the Holy Scriptures
Paul’s Initial Charge – In 1Ti 1:3-11 Paul explains to Timothy why he left him in Ephesus when he traveled to Macedonia. He left this young man behind to set this church in order by establishing sound doctrine. For Timothy to be able to establish sound doctrine he was going to have to prevent other doctrines from being taught in the church (1Ti 1:3-4). Paul then explains that the goal of church doctrine was to bring the believers into a walk of love (1Ti 1:5); for sound doctrine was necessary for divine training towards walking in perfect love. Unfortunately, some teachers had strayed from this goal and their teachings were causing confusion and doubt among the congregation, being filled with useless knowledge that caused questions, rather than edifying the believer (1Ti 1:6-7). Paul then takes a moment to the original purpose and intent of the Law (1Ti 1:8-11), which was to discipline the ungodly.
Outline Here is a proposed outline:
a) The Commission 1Ti 1:3-4
b) The Goal of the Commandment 1Ti 1:5-7
c) The Purpose of the Law 1Ti 1:8-11
Paul the Apostle Commissioned to Establish the Doctrine of the New Testament Church – In the first nine Pauline epistles, which I call the Church Epistles, the Apostle lays down the doctrines of the New Testament Church. He was given this unique calling, as no other apostle added to or took away from this doctrine in the General Epistles. Paul’s church doctrine builds upon the foundational doctrines laid down by our Lord Jesus Christ in the Gospels. Thus, when Paul tells Timothy to “charge some that they teach no other doctrine ” (1Ti 1:3), he was referring to the doctrines laid down by Jesus Christ and built upon by himself in the nine Church Epistles. He wrote the three Pastoral Epistles last, so the Church Epistles had already been laid down. So, Paul was very specific about which doctrine he was referring to. This is one reason why the Pastoral Epistles naturally follow the Church Epistles. Paul deposited this doctrine into the Church when we wrote the Church Epistles, but he defines and establishes the doctrines of the New Testament Church within the Pastoral Epistles.
These false teachers were using the same Old Testament Scriptures that Paul and Timothy taught from, but with a different objective, having strayed from the goal of edifying the believers in faith. Therefore, Timothy was going to have to be strong enough to confront certain problem individuals. Paul ends this Epistle with a similar statement to his opening charge:
1Ti 6:20-21, “O Timothy, keep that which is committed to thy trust, avoiding profane and vain babblings, and oppositions of science falsely so called: Which some professing have erred concerning the faith. Grace be with thee. Amen.”
We find that just as Jesus commissioned His disciples when sending them out by twos and when He gives them the Great Commission at the end of the Synoptic Gospels, so does Paul commission Timothy. It is this divine commission to set the church in order that will ensure the preservation of the Church of the Lord Jesus Christ. Paul and Timothy and others had spent three years in Ephesus establishing this church. Just as the city of Ephesus influenced the region around it, so did the church influence its neighbouring churches. Thus, the Ephesian church was an important church and Paul saw the need to get it well established. So, he took his most faithful co-worker and set him over this task.
In 1Ti 1:3-11, Paul contrasts the importance of indoctrination into God’s Word with the tragedy of being indoctrinated into false teachings. God created every human being to be molded and shaped by the process of indoctrination so that every human being is indoctrinated into something, whether it is correct or incorrect. The Muslim and Hindu religions are examples of false indoctrination. The nations who embrace these doctrines become dysfunctional; but thank God, we have been given a free will to choose what to believe.
The establishment of this church in Ephesus involved the establishment of its doctrine. Paul delivered the doctrine of the Church in his nine Church Epistles (Rom thru 2 Thess). In the Pastoral Epistles Paul is establishing the order of the Church so that these doctrines can be preserved and passed down through the generations. As these doctrinal principles are handed down, each church has the freedom to adapt these teachings to their particular culture and society. However, each church must be built upon these doctrines without compromise. Each pastor has to deal with a diverse culture of people. Now he can build rules and guidelines to deal with a variety of social and moral issues. Each church can be unique and focus upon a particular need in society. Some churches will emphasize evangelism. Others will emphasize expository preaching, or children’s ministry or youth, or street ministry, or government and community issues, but they all must be built upon the unchanging doctrines of the New Testament church laid down in Paul’s nine Church Epistles.
If any other teachings are embraced, the church will become dysfunctional and lose its calling an anointing. For the goal of each church is love (1Ti 1:5). This goal can only be reached by godly edifying in the faith of the one doctrine of the Church (1Ti 1:4). This edification will develop a congregation of people that have a pure heart, a good conscience and a sincere faith (1Ti 1:5). Other doctrines will lead them astray (1Ti 1:6) and bring them into deception while only having the appearance of a church (1Ti 1:7).
These false teachers were using the same Scriptures that Paul and Timothy taught from, but with a different objective in mind. These ill-motivated people had diverted from the purpose of the Law (1Ti 1:6) and were causing questions and sowing doubts among the congregation, rather than providing godly edifying that produces faith in God (1Ti 1:4).
Since Ephesians was a leading church in Asia Minor, it had the potential to influence all churches. Once the church in Ephesus was set in order, the other churches would naturally follow its structure, creeds and conduct. The order that Paul established in his first epistle to young Timothy was crucial to these sister churches. The church of Ephesus later became the “mother church” of Asia Minor. It was here that John the apostle abode as the last living apostle of the Lamb and oversaw the other churches during the latter part of the first century. This took place because Timothy had followed Paul’s instructions on church order.
Fuente: Everett’s Study Notes on the Holy Scriptures
Paul’s Commission to Timothy – In order to establish and organize the church in Ephesus there has to be sound leadership. Thus, the appointment and development of godly leadership was Paul’s primary charge in this Epistle to young Timothy; for without Timothy’s presence in Ephesus, strong-willed individuals would rise up and take positions of leadership. For example, within any society or group of people, it is natural for leadership to arise. In the case of the Church, there would be those who “desired to be teachers of the law” (1Ti 1:7), whether they were qualified or not. Such selfish desires stand in contrast to those who “desire the office of a bishop” from a pure heart. In other words, there will be those who want to be leaders, but are not qualified. Thus, it was Timothy’s job to put down such self-appointment, and to scope out godly leadership. In this passage of Scripture Paul gives Timothy his initial charge (1Ti 1:3-4), explains the goal of the commandment (1Ti 1:5-7), points out the purpose of the Gospel amidst conflicting error (1Ti 1:8-11), testifies to Timothy how God also entrusting him with the care of the Gospel (1Ti 1:12-17), and commissions Timothy with the custodianship of the Gospel (1Ti 1:18-20). Within these last two verses Paul gives Timothy an example of how to deal with adversaries.
Outline Here is a proposed outline:
1. Paul’s Initial Charge 1Ti 1:3-11
2. Paul as an Example of a Genuine Minister 1Ti 1:12-17
3. Paul Commissions Timothy 1Ti 1:18-20
Fuente: Everett’s Study Notes on the Holy Scriptures
The Judaizing Teachers.
v. 3. As I besought thee to abide still at Ephesus, when I went into Macedonia, that thou mightest charge some that they teach no other doctrine,
v. 4. neither give heed to fables and endless genealogies, which minister questions, rather than godly edifying which is in faith; so do.
v. 5. Now the end of the commandment is charity out of a pure heart, and of a good conscience, and of faith unfeigned,
v. 6. from which some, having swerved, have turned aside unto vain jangling;
v. 7. desiring to be teachers of the Law; understanding neither what they say, nor whereof they affirm. Without further introductory remarks the apostle here takes up one of the most urgent matters that demanded his attention. So great is his anxiety to have Timothy take up at once the matter broached by him that he does not finish his sentence: Even as I besought thee to abide at Ephesus, while I journeyed into Macedonia, that thou mightest charge some men to teach no strange doctrines nor to apply themselves to myths and endless genealogies, such as cause questionings rather than stewardship toward God (so do). At a meeting with Timothy, which had probably taken place at Miletus when Paul was on his way from Crete to Macedonia, or when he was making the journey directly to Philippi, after the first imprisonment, the apostle had given this charge to Timothy. It seems that the latter had found his position in Ephesus too difficult and had made some attempt to convince the apostle that he was not the man for the position. But Paul had not agreed with him, bidding him rather persevere, hold out, continue in his work. He did not come to the assistance of his young fellow-laborer, but continued his journey into Macedonia. Note: Difficulties in the work of the Church often tend to discourage younger pastors, and in such a case a word of encouragement from an older and more experienced pastor may serve to keep an important post supplied.
Instead of yielding to Timothy’s wishes, the apostle had rather given him some specific commands regarding certain people in Ephesus that were probably the reason for his discouraged attitude. These people were to be told not to teach a doctrine different from that which had been delivered by Christ and the apostles, different from that which Paul had taught. It seems that there were indications of an unhealthy movement within the congregation. Certain men, who may have been, as Luther suggests, very able men and pupils of the apostles themselves, were beginning to emphasize secondary doctrines and various questions which drew the minds away from the central doctrine of redemption and justification. The general tendency of their teaching seems to have been Judaizing, and they insisted on the necessity of the Law for man’s salvation. The apostle’s prophecy, given to the elders of Ephesus, was being fulfilled now. Paul’s apprehension was aroused especially by the fact that these teachers were paying such decided attention to myths, rabbinical legends, and genealogies as they were found in the Old Testament and in tradition. It was a favorite pastime of the Jewish teachers of those days to be engaged in crafty speculations in genealogical tables, upon which they placed a great deal of weight. But discussions concerning these questions were endless, infinite, they could not lead to a definite conclusion. Instead of satisfying minds that were anxious for the knowledge of the truth they caused questionings, violent disputings. The number of Jewish rabbinical authorities being so large and their schools differing widely in their understanding of Scripture and tradition, all discussions about the matters introduced by these Judaistic teachers were bound to result in greater divergencies in the congregation than ever. And these vain disputes took the place of the stewardship of God in faith. God’s activity as steward of His own mysteries which He carries out through His ministers realizes its object in faith by which people are added to the Christian Church. Naturally, the work of God’s spiritual economy is hampered or outright hindered if preachers within the Church replace the old Gospel-truth with subtleties of various kinds, purporting, at the same time, to be the acme of wisdom. Note: This text fits the activity of many so-called ministers in our day, since many of them apparently have a veritable mania to discover doctrines and topics which have only the most remote connection with the fundamental doctrines of the Bible. Thus did Timothy receive his orders to combat the Judaizing teachers and to serve the cause of the Church of Christ.
The apostle, however, is not satisfied with mere criticism and condemnation, desiring rather that people should learn the way of true sanctification: But the purpose of the Law is love out of a pure heart and a good conscience and sincere faith. The end and purpose of the entire content of Christian doctrine, of the preaching of the New Testament, particularly in so far as it contains precept and admonition, is love, Joh 13:34; 1Co 13:1-13. The apostle designates the fruit of the tree, which serves as a proof for its life and fruitfulness. He therefore also modifies the term “love” by adding that it must he out of a pure heart, a heart free from all impure motives and objects; out of a good conscience, one that is conscious of its justification through the redemption of Christ and desires to serve the Lord in humble love; out of sincere faith, a faith free from hypocrisy, based with definite confidence upon the Savior, no vain and empty imagination, but spiritual light and spiritual life. All this flows out of the proper preaching of sin and grace.
Having thus indicated briefly wherein the ministry of the Sew Testament properly consists, the apostle directs his attention again to the errorists: From which certain individuals have erred and have turned aside to empty talking, desiring to be masters of Scripture, though they understand neither what they say nor whereof they affirm. The men to whom the apostle here refers had swerved aside, they had missed the mark; they may originally have had in mind love and a good conscience and faith, but because they followed their own ideas as to the attainment of these virtues instead of being directed only by the Word of God, they had gone in an altogether false direction and landed far from the goal. By placing their historical and genealogical speculations into the center of teaching instead of the simple Gospel-truths, they had lost sight of their object. And the next step naturally was that they lost their way entirely. They ended up with vain jangling, empty talk, discourses without sense. See Tit 1:10. They desired indeed to be masters of Scripture; they thought, in their own mind, that they were penetrating into its truths more deeply than the apostle. But Paul’s verdict in their case is that they had no idea what they were really talking about, that they did not possess the faintest notion as to what their affirmations really amounted to. Their own assertions with regard to the Law and its purposes were not clear to them; their arguments, intended to make an impression upon the unlearned, were not understood by themselves. Note: This is invariably the case when men despise the foolishness of preaching, as found in the Gospel, and substitute human wisdom. All the so-called moral Christianity and the social gospel of our day belongs into this category, and the discourses that are delivered in its name, and the books that are printed for its propagation, reflect only too well the truth of Paul’s judgment.
Fuente: The Popular Commentary on the Bible by Kretzmann
1Ti 1:3-4 . The apostle reminds Timothy, in the first place, of a previous exhortation, obviously for the purpose of impressing it more deeply on him.
The most natural construction of the sentence appears to be, to take it as an anacolouthon, to connect with , to refer to the subject of , and to make dependent on . . . This construction is held by most expositors to be the only admissible one. The missing apodosis cannot, however, be supplied before , because is closely connected with what precedes; we may insert with Erasmus “ita facito,” or with Beza “vide,” or with most expositors “ ” (Winer, p. 530 [E. T. p. 592]). The peculiarity in such an involuntary (Buttm. p. 331) anacolouthon is, that the grammatical connection is not established by inserting the omitted apodosis. The most simple course is to suppose that the apostle had “ ” or “ ,” in mind, but the place for it was lost in the abundance of the thoughts that streamed in on him.
Several expositors depart from the construction commonly accepted. Matthies takes as “stay,” not as “remain behind,” refers not to the subject of , but to (making an unjustifiable appeal to Eph 3:17-18 ; Eph 4:1-2 ; Col 3:16 [40] ), and explains the whole thus: When Timothy was intending to travel to Macedonia, Paul had charged him to stop at Ephesus and remain there. Schneckenburger (see his Beitrge z. Einl. pp. 182 ff.) arbitrarily changes the infin. into the partic. , and refers to the following clause: . Otto treats in the same way, at the same time connecting with , taking in an absolute sense, making the apodosis begin with , and translating: “Just as I exhorted you to stand firm in Ephesus, so shalt thou on the journey to Macedonia command the people not to give attention to strange teachers, nor to hold them in esteem,” etc. This construction is, however, so artificial, that it is obviously incorrect to every one who is not blinded by the desire of placing the date of the composition of the epistle in a period of the apostle’s life known to us.
[40] In the passages quoted, Paul adds the participles to the previous clauses in the nom., and these participial clauses thus acquire the independence due to them according to the context. But in these passages the relation of the participial clause to the preceding main clause is quite different from what it is here, where there is no reason whatever for departing from the regular construction.
REMARK.
In order to justify his view of the sentence, Otto tries to prove the incorrectness of the usual construction, and to get rid of the objections to his own. The hypothesis of an ellipsis he rejects on account of the rule that the emphatic word can never be omitted, and that if we supply the apodosis by “ ,” the emphatic words are . But these words are not by any means the most emphatic. The apostle might be using them not specially of the contrast between past and present, but only to give point to his former exhortation; hence he might easily omit the apodosis. Otto further maintains, that in the usual construction , which always denotes a material, actual correspondence, even to identity of motives, and further, of material contents, does not get its full force. On this point we indeed grant that the peculiar meaning of (as distinguished from ) is not distinctly marked by the expositors; but it is not at all necessary in the usual interpretation to weaken arbitrarily the force of , since the apostle’s former exhortation could not but be his guide in the present one. Still less difficulty, however, is presented by , if we choose to supply (as Hofmann does), since the meaning then is, that Timothy’s conduct is to be conformed to the exhortation already given by the apostle.
Otto tries further to show that in the usual explanation the participle is not in its proper place. The rules which Otto lays down on the subject of participial clauses in order to support his assertion are, on the whole, not incorrect. The passages he quotes from the N. T. certainly show that the participle following a finite verb mostly defines it more precisely; that it either explains more precisely the verbal notion, or gives the accompanying circumstances of the verb. But Otto has overlooked the departures from this rule which occur in the N. T.; comp. Luk 4:40 with Mar 1:31 ; Mat 12:49 with Act 26:1 ; Mat 22:15 with Mat 12:14 ; further, Luk 24:17 . [41] It cannot be denied that the participle following sometimes gives simply the time in which the action of the finite verb takes place; that here, therefore, the may simply denote the time of the former exhortation. [42] Otto quotes the passage in Act 12:25 as supporting the rule that the participle following should serve to explain the verbal notion, and justifies this by saying that the participle gives the motive of the return. But to give the motive is no explanation. In this passage, however, the position of the participle after the finite verb is justified in this way, that it gives the motive for the action expressed by the finite verb. So, too, in the passage here there is nothing to be said against the connection of with , so soon as we suppose that the journey was the occasion for Paul giving Timothy the exhortation in question. Lastly, Otto attacks the usual construction from the notion of , because this word is explained in the construction to be equivalent to “remain, stay;” whereas, when not connected with a dative (or with a participial clause representing a dative), but standing absolutely, it has the meaning: “to maintain the position hitherto possessed, to stand firm.” Hence, if any definition of place is added, it is not as a completion of the verbal notion, but only indicates where the standing firm takes place. Otto infers from this: “accordingly here does not complete , but rather is absolute, and gives the place at which the whole sentence, viz. , took place.” This inference is obviously incorrect, since from Otto’s premises it only follows that, if belongs to , the place is thus given where Timothy is to stand fast, in particular against the heretics, it does not follow that may be connected with . Besides, from Act 18:18 , it is clear beyond dispute that does occur in the N. T. in the weakened sense of “remain, stay.” [43] Otto does not disguise the objections to his view, but he thinks that when thoroughly weighed they are more apparent than real. In this, too, he is wrong. It is indeed right to say that in the N. T. a sentence often begins with without any verb preceding on which it depends, and this not only in cases where the governing verbal notion is easily supplied from what precedes, as in Joh 1:8 ; Joh 9:3 ; Joh 13:18 , 2Co 8:7 , but also when that is not the case, so that the clause beginning with stands as an imperative clause, as in Eph 5:33 ; Mar 5:23 (comp. Buttm. pp. 207 f.). But in all passages where is used elliptically, this is shown clearly and distinctly by the form of the sentence, which is not the case here. It is right also to say that emphatic parts of the clause construed with are often placed before , so that , therefore, might very well be connected with the clause following ; but this, too, is always indicated clearly by the form of the sentence. Wherever words standing before are to be referred to what follows , these words cannot possibly be connected with what precedes them, and the part of the sentence following is incomplete in itself, so that it has to be taken along with the part before . It is wrong to maintain that the participial clause . becomes emphatic by contrast with , inasmuch as what took place in Ephesus is now to take place also on the journey to Macedonia; for the two things are not at all the same. In Ephesus (according to Otto’s view), Paul exhorted Timothy to stand firm; but on the journey to Macedonia, Timothy is to encounter those who had been led astray. Lastly, it is right to assume that the sender of a letter, if he has anything to say of the place from which the letter is sent, may speak of it by name, comp. 1Co 15:32 ; 1Co 16:8 , so that might convey to us that Paul was himself in Ephesus while writing; but we must take into consideration the special circumstances of the case. According to Otto, our epistle is a paper of instructions which the apostle put into Timothy’s hands in Ephesus, where he wrote it before setting out for Macedonia. In that case it was improper to mention the place by name. We cannot understand, then, why Paul in such a paper of instructions should have laid special stress on the exhortation he had imparted to Timothy in the very place where he put that paper into his hands.
[41] Otto tries to weaken the force of this passage against him by assuming a rhetorical inversion, because, he says, it is declared “that taking a walk and holding solemn dispute are inconsistent with one another” (!).
[42] In his groundless denial of this, Otto thinks that if be joined to it must be assumed to be a circumstance accompanying the , but that this assumption is impossible, since a continuing fact (part. pres.) cannot be regarded as the accompanying circumstance of a concluded fact (part. aor.). But Otto overlooks the fact that in this connection is not to be understood in the sense of continuing a journey, but in the sense of beginning one, of setting out.
[43] In this passage, also, Otto claims for , as a vox militaris, the meaning: “keep one’s ground,” remarking, “for the circumstances in Corinth were such that they might well have induced Paul to cease his labours and depart.” But this assertion is in contradiction with Luke’s statement, that the attack attempted by the Jews through Gallio was decisively warded off. Otto’s explanation, too, becomes all the more unsuitable, since, according to it, Luke would charge the apostle with not holding his ground more, and with abandoning his post. Further, Otto seems to hesitate whether to take in the present passage as really absolute, or whether to supply with it the dative . After finally deciding for the former, he then explains as “keeping ground along with the leader appointed by God in the struggle against all the attacks of the heretic,” and thus in self-contradiction returns to the latter, since this leader is the Apostle Paul.
Some expositors take the whole section 1Ti 1:5-17 to be a parenthesis, and 1Ti 1:18 to be the apodosis corresponding to . The awkwardness of this construction is obvious; but Plitt thinks that, though it is not without its difficulties, most may be said for it. He is wrong, however, since , in 1Ti 1:18 , does not resume the .
If we avoid all subtleties, we cannot but explain it: Even as I exhorted thee to remain in Ephesus when I set out for Macedonia, that thou mightst command certain men not to teach false doctrine even so do (or: even so I exhort thee also now ). [44] Regarding the meaning of and , see the above remark.
] Chrys.: , , , , , ; . Towards Titus, however, Paul uses the expression (Tit 1:5 ), although he was not less friendly towards him than towards Timothy.
] “when I went away, from Ephesus to Macedonia;” has in itself the general meaning of going, but it is also used of going away from a place, both absolutely (Mat 11:7 ) and connected with (Mat 24:1 ; Mat 25:41 ; Mat 19:15 : ; Luk 13:31 : ). Otto explains it: “on the way to Macedonia,” which is grammatically correct, but opposed to the connection of ideas. There is no ground whatever for thinking that Paul, in this expression, had in mind one particular place on the way to Macedonia, viz. Corinth. We can see no reason why Paul should have expressed himself indefinitely. Otto, indeed, is of opinion that Timothy could not have been uncertain about the meaning of the expression; and that the apostle chose it in order to spare the feelings of the Corinthians, and that he might not confess to the heretics how they had provoked his apostolic opposition to an exceptional degree. But the first reason proves too much, since Paul, if he refrained from the definite expression because Timothy knew his wishes without it, would also have refrained from the indefinite expression. The other two reasons are weak, because if Timothy was to labour successfully against the heretics, he must necessarily appeal to the authority of the apostle in whose name he was to labour. Besides, such playing at hide-and-seek as Otto imputes to the apostle, is in entire contradiction with Paul’s frank character.
. . . ] gives the purpose for which Timothy was to remain in Ephesus. The theory that this gives at the same time the purpose of the whole epistle (Matthies), which opinion de Wette brings forward as proving the epistle not to be genuine, is wrong.
] does not necessarily involve the suggestion of publicity which Matthies finds in it.
] The same indefinite term is used for the heretics also in 1Ti 1:6 ; 1Ti 1:19 ; 1Ti 4:1 ; 1Ti 5:15 , etc.: “certain people whom the apostle is unwilling to designate further; Timothy already knows them” (Wiesinger).
] The word, which is not made up of and (= ), but is derived from , occurs in the N. T. only here and in 1Ti 6:3 (comp. in 2Co 6:14 ). In there is not seldom the notion of different in kind, strange , something not agreeing with something else, but opposed to it. Accordingly, in the apostle’s use of the word, a is a teacher who teaches other things than he should teach, who puts forward doctrines in opposition to the gospel; and here means nothing else than to teach something opposed to the gospel (Heb 13:9 : ); comp. 2Co 11:4 ; Gal 1:6 : . Wiesinger, in order to favour his theory that heresy proper is not spoken of, weakens the meaning into “teach otherwise,” so that according to him it signifies “teaching things which lie apart from .” This is incorrect, for in that case some more precise definition would have been given.
Even in classic Greek, , in composition, often has the meaning alleged by us; thus = diversae opinionis esse; comp. Plato, Theaet. p. 190 E: . According to Otto, means: “to have another teacher, to follow another teacher.” Otto wrongly appeals for this to Euseb. Hist. Eccles. iii. 32, where does not mean false teachers, but “such members of the church as had abandoned the teaching of the apostles and become attached to strange teachers;” and also to Ignat. ad Polycarp. chap. 3, where has the same meaning. [45] Otto also makes appeal to the Greek usage, according to which, in composite nouns, the concluding word, if it be a noun, does not contain the subject of the fundamental thought in such composite words, but the nearer or more distant object. But this rule is only valid with adjectival forms. In composite substantives , on the contrary, the concluding word (if it be an unaltered substantive) may also denote the subject, which is only defined more precisely by the word that precedes. [46]
There is no ground whatever for Schleiermacher’s opinion, that the verb suggests the idea of a hierarchy.
To there is added a second point: . . . , which Timothy is to forbid to . [47] Except in the Pastoral Epistles, does not occur in Paul. Here, as in Tit 1:14 , it includes the notion of agreement; so also in Act 8:6 .
] The is to be taken epexegetically; we can neither join the two expressions as an hendiadys (fabulosae genealogiae, Heumann), nor regard them as denoting different things. The notion of has been limited too narrowly by many expositors, as by Theodoret, who understands by it the traditional supplements to the law; or by others, who take it as denoting the allegorical system of interpretation, or the Jewish stories of miracles (such as occur in the pseudo-epigrapha or the Apocrypha), or even the Gentile mythologies. Leo is wrong in agreeing with Theodoret’s exposition, appealing to Ignatius ( Ep. ad Magnes. chap. 8), and alluding to 1Ti 1:7 . From that verse it is certainly clear that heretics had peculiar views regarding the law, which were in contradiction with the gospel; but it is a mere assertion to say that here refers to these views, all the more that the word stands closely connected with . De Wette limits the meaning of the word in another fashion, inferring from 2Pe 1:16 : , that the here meant, formed the definite element in an artificial system; the notion of something artificial is obviously imported. Other expositors take the expression quite generally in the sense of “false doctrine,” as Suidas explains the word: , ; this is too indefinite. Paul rather employs it because it was used to denote false ideas regarding the nature of the Godhead. The word that follows defines the nature of these more precisely.
On the , see Introd. sect. 4. Wiesinger’s view, that they denote the genealogies in the O. T., as well as that of Hofmann, that they are the historical facts in the Thora, are both to be rejected. Credner’s view, that the genealogies of Christ are meant, is quite arbitrary. So, too, with Chrysostom’s explanation: , , . It is very far-fetched to refer to the Kabbalistic Sephiroth. The application of the expression to the Essenic doctrine of angels (Michaelis), is contradicted by the fact that theories of emanations cannot be proved to have existed among the Essenes. The view upheld by most expositors, that the apostle was thinking of the series of emanations in the speculation of the heretics, must be considered the right one. It is confirmed by the addition of the adjective . The genealogies are “unlimited,” since there was no necessity for them to stop at any point whatever. The conclusion was altogether arbitrary: hence, in the various systems, the genealogies of the aeons differ from one another in all sorts of ways.
] is not simply an attributive relative; it gives at the same time the reason of the foregoing exhortation “as those which” (comp. Soph. Oed. R. 1184; Pape, Handwrterbuch der griech. Spr. See the word ).
] Both notions: and . , may be taken either subjectively or objectively . If be taken objectively , it is “points of controversy, questions of dispute;” if subjectively , it is “investigations, controversies, disputations” (“each one trying to maintain his arbitrary fictions,” Matthies). If is taken objectively , it is “the salvation of God” (“the salvation grounded historically in Christ and publicly preached by means of His apostles,” Matthies; or according to others, “the ministry of the gospel;” or, lastly, “the divine gift of grace,” i.e. the divine influence on individuals by which they are brought to the faith). If it is taken subjectively , it is “the work of man as an ;” de Wette: “the work of a steward of God in the faith (to be awakened or to be furthered).” This latter may be taken, in a general sense, as meaning, “the Christian activity, the Christian exercise of the divine gifts of grace,” [48] or, more narrowly: “the maintaining, the strengthening in Christianity, the nourishment in the faith by the spiritual food of Christianity, which the teachers as stewards of God distribute,” Zachariae. The meaning of is also modified according to the interpretation of these two notions. If they are interpreted objectively, is “reach forth, present;” if subjectively, it is “cause, bring about” (so Gal 6:17 ; also frequently in classic Greek and in the Apocrypha of the O. T.; comp. Wahl, Clav. libr. V. T. apocryph. , under the word). is not identical with ; is indeed used in the sense of “office of steward,” but denotes “the preparation, the arrangement made by God” (comp. Eph 1:10 ; Eph 3:9 ), and never “the divine salvation.” Hence the subjective interpretation (Hofmann) is to be preferred to the objective (as formerly in this commentary; also Wiesinger, Plitt, Oosterzee). In any case, Matthies is wrong in taking subjectively and objectively, and then assuming that is used in a zeugma. Otto’s explanation is purely arbitrary. He explains by “speculations,” and by “a system of divine order in the universe ( sc. creation and government), resting on faith, grounded in faith, the cosmogony and physics of the Jewish gnosis.” Of the latter phrase, he says that Paul “adopts the hypocritical name which the claimed for their system, so that the form the real , the . , on the contrary, the pretended contents of the and .” By the addition of , the labour of the is defined more precisely as one in the sphere of faith (not “causing faith,” Hofmann).
] as in several passages of the N. T., Joh 3:19 , Act 27:11 , 2Ti 3:4 , stands here in the sense of denying the thought contained in the following member, so that (with Suidas) it is equivalent to . [49]
With the reading (or ) , we must interpret, “the edifying in the faith as decreed by God” (Luther, inaccurately: “the improvement towards God in the faith”).
[44] Hofmann is wrong in asserting that Paul, when he wrote (not ), could not have had in mind “any expression of which the writer was the subject, but only an exhortation as to what Timothy was to do.”
[45] The first passage runs: (viz. after the apostle’s death) , . The relative clause shows most clearly that the word means nothing else than false teachers. The second passage is: ; in which, also, false teachers, heretics, are meant, as is evident from the injunction: . . ., as well as from the exhortation that follows.
[46] The adj. certainly does not denote “a halting foot,” but “one who has a halting foot.” On the contrary, is not “one who has a bad slave,” but “a bad slave.” Comp. also , , and others; in the N. T., especially the expressions: ( , , ), 2Pe 2:1 , and , Tit 2:3 . It is to be noted, also, that in Sextus Empiricus, Adv. Rhet. 42, does not mean “to have a bad teacher,” but “to teach what is bad.”
[47] Without grounds in usage or in fact, Hofmann asserts that “ is not an expression applicable to a teacher, and that therefore the . was to be applied to some, and the . . . to others.”
[48] Thus Reiche: ista commenta non exhibent, praebent, efficiunt dispensationem (distributionem) bonoram quae Deus Christo misso in nos contulit.
[49] Hofmann wrongly applies this form of expression in order to dispute the reference of to the series of aeons, saying: “How could it occur to the apostle to treat the question only as a possible one, whether these follies of their own invention could not in some measure be useful to what he calls ? Such a possibility is not indicated by .
Fuente: Heinrich August Wilhelm Meyer’s New Testament Commentary
II
Occasion for the writing of this Epistle.Preliminary description and condemnation of the heretical teachers who had appeared at Ephesus, who misunderstood equally the nature both of the Law and of the Gospel
1Ti 1:3-11
3As8 I besought thee to abide still at Ephesus, when I went into Macedonia, that thou mightest charge some that they teach no other doctrine, 4Neither give heed to fables and endless genealogies, which minister questions [questionings], rather than godly edifying [the dispensation of God]9 which is in faith: so do. 5Now the end of the commandment is charity out of a pure heart, and of a good conscience, and of faith unfeigned: 6From which some haying swerved have turned aside unto vain jangling; 7Desiring to be teachers of the law; understanding 8[considering] neither what they say, nor whereof they affirm. But we know that the law is good, if a man use10 it lawfully; 9Knowing this, that the law is not made [set forth = posita] for a righteous man, but for the lawless and disobedient, for the ungodly and for sinners, for the unholy and profane, for murderers of fathers and murderers of mothers,11 for man-slayers, 10For whoremongers, for them that defile themselves with mankind, for men-stealers, for liars, for perjured persons, and if there be any other thing that is contrary to sound doctrine: 11According to the glorious gospel [the gospel of glory] of the blessed God, which was committed to my trust [which I have been entrusted with].
EXEGETICAL AND CRITICAL
Ver.3. Besought. For the occasion and object of this exhortation, see the Introduction. Timothy must remain at Ephesus, (the same word occurs in Act 18:18), in order, by his presence, to oppose the evil which was becoming apparent there. The simplest explanation of this somewhat singular phrase, is, that Paul had already, at Ephesus, given this injunction to Timothy, and had then left him in order to set out on his journey to Macedonia. According to Chrysostom, the form in which this admonition is couched is a proof of the friendly spirit of the Apostle towards Timothy: : , , , ; .Some. In Other places, also, the Apostle speaks, without any personal designation, of those whom he calls upon Timothy to oppose (1Ti 1:6; 1Ti 1:19; 1Ti 4:1; 2Ti 2:18). Timothy knew them from his own experience, and needed, therefore, no more exact advice. He was to charge them, not at once publicly (Matthies), yet in an earnest and emphatic way, to teach no other doctrine than that which the Apostle had before delivered. (comp. 1Ti 6:3; Tit 1:13). The word indicates the strange elements that may mingle with the teaching of the gospel, and easily assume a character hostile to it. The same warning Paul bad already given, in another form, to the elders of the church (Act 20:29). The pure doctrine, in which men must steadfastly abide, is naturally, in his thought, identical with his gospel (2Ti 2:8).
1Ti 1:4. Fables and endless genealogies (comp. Tit 1:14; 1Ti 4:7; 2Ti 4:4; Tit 3:9). It is difficult to know with certainty what and are here specially meant. From all that we gather, however, in this Epistle, it is most probable that reference is made to fables of Jewish form and origin, which were endlessly spun out, and had called forth much dispute in the church. Although there were many fables among the heathen, yet the Apostle has in special view the Jewish traditiones; for it was asserted that Moses had not written down all the mysteries revealed by God, but had given much orally to the elders, by whom they were handed down as a traditional law, or Kabbala, although these Jewish notions were mostly of their own invention, and in part, too, drawn from heathen philosophy; Starke. The genealogical records here mentioned appear also to have been mainly of Jewish origin, and, as we know, were held in high repute, and gave occasion for many useless and curious questions; although we need not entirely exclude a reference to the doctrine of Emanation, taught by the heretical schools. The are nothing but the foolish questions (Tit 3:9), which lead to strife and discord. This love of fables and genealogies is held by the Apostle in such great aversion, because it furnished such material for dispute, rather than for a right knowledge of the essential way of redemption (). , non semper comparationis sed spius correctionis et oppositionis nota est (comp. 2Ti 1:4); Glassius. Most commentators agree that the clause which begins the third verse should be understood to close at the end of the fourth verse, with an , which certainly might be most fitly inserted in this place. Otherwise it must be supposed that the Apostle, after a long digression (1Ti 1:5-7), takes up again, at 1Ti 1:18, the thread of the broken exhortation; 1Ti 1:5 or 1Ti 1:12 forms no perfect conclusion.
1Ti 1:5. The end of the commandment. It is a question, whether reference is made to the command given by Paul, in 1Ti 1:3, to Timothy, or, in a wider sense, to the Divine commandment in general, which Timothy is to impress upon his hearers. The latter is the more probable, since the Apostle begins forthwith to oppose a false view of the Mosaic law. , practical teaching as the chief element of the ; a contract to the ; De Wette.End; Luther: The sum, as this word designates that to which we are chiefly to look, and toward which we are to strive. The ultimate aim of all the admonitions of the Christian preacher should be practicalto call out a true love; Olshausen. Even to Timothy, Paul writes very little of the mysteries of Christianity, that, by his example, he may yet more put to shame this germinal Gnosticism.Charity out of a pure heart, &c. Love, the bond of all Christian virtues, the fruit of the tree, whose root, faith, is presupposed as already existing, and commended at the close of the exhortation. This love can only spring out of a pure heart, cleansed from all selfishness and evil desires; out of a good conscience, which, being free from the guilt of sin, and reconciled with God, can then first love in truth; and from an unfeigned faith.Unfeigned, ; that is, no empty thought or fancy, but a spiritual light and spiritual life not consisting in words, but in a living assurance of the heart, and proving its life in its fruits. Without real faith there is no good-conscience; without a reconciliation of the conscience there is no pure heart; without a pure heart there is no true Christian love conceivable. Thus all are blended in the closest union. [Alford: It is faithnot the pretence of faith, the mere Scheinglaube of the hypocrite. Wiesinger well remarks, that we see that the general character of these false teachers, as of those against whom Titus is warned, was not so much error in doctrine, as leading men astray from the earnestness of the loving Christian life to useless and vain questionings, ministering only strife.]
1Ti 1:6. From which vain jangling., that is, from the Christian dispositions and virtues mentioned in 1Ti 1:5. The polemic character of the Epistle of Paul appears immediately after the statement of the . The heretics were separatists, ; they had failed of the end which the Apostle has set forththe same word occurs in 1Ti 6:21; 2Ti 2:18and were thus astray in a false path, because they had turned . The etymology indicates the meaning of this word, which, besides, is found only here. (Tit 1:10, occurs). Here is suggested that waste of words, that empty talk, in which there can be found no rational sense, no unity of conviction. Compare the (1Ti 6:20), and the (1Ti 4:7; Tit 3:9). The character of this vain jangling is more exactly defined by what immediately follows, in 1Ti 1:7.
1Ti 1:7. Teachers of the law, , not in a good, but in a bad, unevangelical sense of this word; men who so mixed together law and gospel, that the latter was weakened, and who would likewise force a Mosaic system upon the Christian, in the notion that they themselves had pierced deeper than others into its nature and spirit. It is the same Jewish legalism, which, in its special relation to the Gentiles, the Apostle opposes in Rom 12:17 and Gal 6:12; because, in its inmost spirit, it is in irreconcilable conflict with Christian truth and freedom. In the keenest way, throughout the following verses, it is held up to view in its utter nakedness, , … Bonus doctor debet esse intelligent, simulque certus: istis, inquit Paulus, utrumque deest; Bengel. They themselves understand not what they say, nor whereof they affirm. If we may draw a distinction between these two expressions, the former seems to mean the subjective opinions, the expressed ideas, the fictions of these men; while the second designates the objective views, the material, on which they based their convictions with the greatest confidence, but into which, according to the assertion of Paul, they had no clear insight. So also Raphelius: Qui neque ea, qu loquuntur satis intelligant, neque quibus de rebus loquantur, considerant. What these held as to the unaltered authority of the Mosaic law, rested on their plain ignorance of the very purpose of the law; which is therefore, in the 8th and following verses, designedly placed by the Apostle in its true light. It appears, also, from this whole argument, that these heretics were not already separated from the community, or in opposition to itin which case Timothy could have had no further influence over thembut they were still within its pale. It is worthy of note, too, that they continually sought authority in the writings of the Old Testament for their half-heathen speculations.
1Ti 1:8. But we know. An authoritative apostolic , of quite other worth than that of the Scribes and Pharisees (Joh 9:29; Joh 9:31). The Apostle places the declaration of his knowledge, which he had learned in the school of the Holy Ghost, against the arrogant view of the false Gnosis. Perhaps its advocates had thought to raise a suspicion against him, as if he despised the law, or, at least, denied it any real worth. He opposes to this his doctrine, which he fully knows will be received by Timothythat the law is good (properly, beautiful, ), and in itself blameless (comp. Rom 7:12); yet only on condition that every man use the same lawfully, , which was not done by these heretics. A play upon the word; as if to say, that the law must be fulfilled according to law. We have special cause to be thankful that the true definition of the law has been so fully stated by Paul in the Epistles to the Romans and Galatians, as rightly to explain 1Ti 1:8-10. is the use of the law by the man who allows it to exercise its proper office, who is brought by it to a knowledge of his own sin and liability to punishment. This knowledge will give us its spirit and intentnot room for idle questions and subtleties, nor for self-deception through a feigned and outward righteousness. This lawful use of the law is meant by Christ, when He promises life to those who keep the law (Luk 10:28; Luk 18:20, et seq;) Von Gerlach. It is self-evident, also, that Paul in this place speaks not of the hearer or the reader of the law, but solely of its application by its teachers, who may well reflect on the verses which follow.
1Ti 1:9. That the law is not made for a righteous man. It is not strange that this passage should at first awaken surprise in many readers, and that, at the time of the Reformation, it should have been controverted by Agricola. The first question is, whom the Apostle means by this righteous mana question which is at once answered by the antithesis following it, , … In distinction from this, the person meant by may be one whose life is righteous and moral according to the requirements of the law. But since, according to the invariable doctrine of the Apostle, all who are under the law are also under the curse of the law, so that by the works of the law no flesh can be justified (Gal 3:10; Rom 3:20), it follows, that by the righteous Christian man must be meant one who has been justified by faith in Christ, and wholly renewed by the Holy Spirit (justus per justificationem, et per sanctificationem). Of such a man Paul says, that the law is not made for him, . As the article is wanting before , it may be thought that only a general proposition is stated as to the nature and purpose of any moral code (Chrysostom, Brentano). But the mention of the gospel in contrast with the law (1Ti 1:11), and the argument against the (1Ti 1:7), imperatively requires us here to understand the Mosaic law alone. On the omission of the article, see WinersGrammar, in loco. This law, then, is not made for the righteous man; that is, it is not given to him, as such. When De Wette says, This view of the law seems foreign to the Apostle, he seems to forget entirely such passages as Gal 5:18-23. The thought, that the letter of the Mosaic law possesses no more binding force for the redeemed in Christ, is so entirely Pauline, that it forms one of the main pillars of his whole doctrinal structure. It certainly gives also a fulfilment of the law from the Christian standpoint, as it is announced in Rom 3:31; Rom 8:4, and in other places. But in this passage the Apostle expressly shows its meaning for the wholly unconverted, in order to expose more clearly the folly of those heretics who will put the law by the side of, or even above the gospel, for the Christian. [Augustin on Psalms 1 : Justus non est sub lege, quia in lege Domini est voluntas ejus; qui enim in lege est, secundum legem agitur; ille ergo liber est; hic servus. Hooker, Eccl. Pol., B. 1, c. 8. A law is a directive rule unto goodness of operation. The rule of Divine operation is the definitive appointment of Gods own wisdom set down within Himself. The rule of natural agents that work by necessity is the determination of the wisdom of God, known to God, but not unto them. The rule of voluntary agents on earth is the venture that reason giveth concerning the goodness of those things which they are to do. Neither must we suppose that there needeth one rule to know the good, and another the evil by. For he that knoweth the straight, doth even thereby discern the crooked. Goodness in actions is like unto straightness; wherefore, that which is done well, we term right.W.]But for the lawless. In contrast to this true spirit of law, the Apostle now names a long list of evildoers, for whom the law remained in full force; a list in which one familiar with the Pauline writings will not expect completeness, systematic order, or logical strictness, in its various conceptions; yet which by no means lacks connection, and has clearly this thought at the bottom, that they who are most zealous for the law often most grossly transgress it (comp. Rom 2:20). He names, at the outset, two by two, six classes of wicked men ; that is, such as care nothing for the law, and have altogether refused obedience to it (comp. Tit 1:6-10); , godless (comp. Tit 2:12) and gross sinners, who have no fear of God in their hearts (comp. Rom 4:5; Rom 5:6). Here the hostile attitude toward God becomes more prominent, while the preceding two are violators of the law in general. blend both the first conceptions, as the irreligious and profane, here depicted, are alike despisers of the Holy God, and of His holy law. Here follow, more in detail, certain specimina mali, from which we may suppose that, with the exception of the last vitium, , the various statutes of the second table passed before the mind of the Apostle. He names the murder of father and motherthose who violate the first commandment with promise (Eph 6:2), and grossly abuse their parents (; , ; Hesychius). Murderer, consequently a breaker of the sixth commandment, ; in the New Testament an . Further, those who sin against the seventh commandment, commit fornication with women (), or with the male sex (), comp. Rom 1:27; both natural and unnatural crime (comp. Leviticus 19, 23). Then follow transgressions of the eighth commandment, here wholly concerning menthe sin of man-stealing, specially forbidden in Exo 21:16; Deu 24:7; , plagiariis. It was, besides, no rare crime among the Greeks to steal boys or girls, that they might be sold into slavery. Lastly follow those who break the ninth commandment, , ; such as deliberately speak falsehood, or swear to a falsehood, or break an oath already taken. By the following , …, we may suppose meant transgression against the tenth commandment, which is here omitted. We find, however, in this catalogus-criminum, no orderly reference to the commandments of the first table; and Bengel has clearly gone too far, when he writes, Paulus pro ordine decalogi hic nominat injustos. This is true only of the second half of the decalogue.And if there be any other thing that is contrary to sound doctrine. Sound doctrineone of the expressions characteristic of the Pastoral Epistles (comp. 2Ti 4:3; Tit 2:1, and elsewhere). Not healthful doctrine is meant (Luther), nor a sound morality (Leo), but the Christian teaching in general is approved in its inner soundness, as opposed to the of the heretics. This phrase is used also to express those symptoms of disease which St. Paul saw with grief springing up in the church (comp. 2Ti 2:17). [It is observable that the word wholesome occurs nine times in the Pastoral Epistles, and always in reference to doctrine; Wordsworth.W.]
1Ti 1:11. According to the glorious gospel committed to my trust. is not used here for the more exact definition of sound doctrine, as some have thought; for, in that case, would have to be repeated before ; nor need it be supposed in apposition to , which would give a very awkward conclusion. 1Ti 1:11 is an addition, which refers to the whole preceding line of thought, and means that, according to the gospel of Paul, the law has no other purpose than that fully explained in 1Ti 1:6-10. The Apostle would have us understand, that his view of the law is not the fruit of his private opinion, but rather the true summary of the gospel committed to him. This qualification of the gospel is really apologetic. The gospel of glory, , not signifying (Heydenreich), in the sense of blessed, glorious doctrine, but the gospel by which the glory of God in Christ has become manifest to the world; whose especial and chief substance is this Divine glory (2Co 4:4), and indeed the glory of the blessed God, (comp. 1Ti 6:15). If God Himself be blessed, then the revelation of His glory, which has been proclaimed, not through the law, but through the gospel, will be full of blessing. Perhaps the repeated use of the epithet in this Epistle has a certain reference to the system of ons taught by the heretics. This gospel is committed in trust to Paul, . A peculiarly Pauline construction, on which, comp. Winer, Gramm. N. T., p. 40. In other places, too, the Apostle speaks with warmth of this his dear prerogative; as Rom 15:16; Eph 3:8; Col 1:25. Those who oppose the genuineness of the Pastoral Epistles, are therefore wrong in thinking such emphatic reference to his person and his office at all extraordinary. The consciousness which Paul had of his high calling, rises with redoubled power as he contends with the heretics; and in this letter to his friend and scholar he follows the warm outpouring of his spirit, not in a logical order, yet in harmony with his whole thought, as we read in 1Ti 1:12-17.
DOCTRINAL AND ETHICAL
1. Two opposite views, in regard to the character and condition of the early Christian Church have prevailed, with more or less success, in our time, both of which are disproved in the opening verses of the first Pastoral Epistle. In the one view, it is thought that the apostolic age was a kind of paradisaic state of the young communitya state full of love, and innocence, and purity; in contrast with which the post-apostolic age seems a fall, like that of our first parents (Thiersch, and others). In the other view, there was at first only a chaos of manifold parties and tendencies, out of which there gradually rose, in the second century, after many conciliatory efforts, the harmonious structure of the Catholic church (Tbingen school). But the little we have already learned from the Epistle to Timothy neither favors the one nor the other view. It is apparent that already, soon after A. D. 60, heresies and factions sprang up in the church, hostile to the original spirit of Christianity, which the Apostle believed that he must oppose with all his energy. We find that the germs of Gnosticism, whose formal development we can trace in the second century under manifold shapes, were already broadcast in the second half of the first century. But, on the other hand, this error appears only as a fleck of rust on the pure metal of that truth, earlier taught and fully acknowledged. We see the Apostle, clothed with an authority which no one can defy with impunity, and rising high above the strife of parties. His gospel is no other in substance than that proclaimed by his fellow-Apostles, and by his and their coworkers. His word becomes the sharp but healthful corrective of the errorists, who have gained head so early; and it remains the norm of its development for the church, in the second and the succeeding centuries.
2. The characteristic marks of the heretics of the first century rise here already to our view. A sickly search after the discovery of the unattainable, with a thankless misconception of simple truth; an undue valuing of lesser things, with a depreciation of the essentials of Christianity; a striving after their own honor, while they cared little for the edification of believers; a fastening of their own philosophic theories on the falsely-interpreted letter of the Scriptures, whose spirit they sadly misconceived; a denial of the practical nature of Christianity, while its real freedom is abused as an allowance to the flesh; a falsehood as to the special relation between the law and the gospel of Christ;all these symptoms of disease are found anew, in countless forms, among the sectaries and heretics of later days.
3. The Apostle is alike removed from the one-sided view either of a love without faith, or of a faith without love. He will neither have the fruit without the tree, nor the tree without the fruit. He knows only the one requirement of the gospellove; yet only the love blossoming in a heart purified through faith. Here, as afterwards more frequently, purity of faith and purity of conscience are linked in their inmost relationship.
4. Love, out of a pure heart, &c. In this Statement of the chief requisite of Christianity there is confirmed the essential unity of theology and morality, whose arbitrary separation so often does unmeasured injury to each, and has kept many from the right understanding of the gospel.
5. We have here a weighty help toward answering the question, how far the Mosaic law has a binding power. But fully to understand the Apostles mode of thought upon this subject, the Epistles to the Romans and Galatians must be specially compared. Here, also, Paul appears the same glowing and zealous advocate, as he had before shows himself, of the right of Christian freedom. While he exalts the worth of the law in its own proper sphere, beyond any disparagement, he shows its entire insufficiency whenever it is placed by the side of, or above the gospel.
6. We find the chief forms of Judaism in the time of our Lord, again existing in His earliest churchPharisaism and Sadduceeism. Against this united power of self-righteousness and unrighteousness, the disciple no less than the Master is pledged to bear the sword of the Spirit with all power (Mat 16:6).
7. A precept, of the first importance in pastoral theology, is here given by the Apostle to the preachers of the Word. It is not enough to preach the truth free from all error; but they are also bound to contend with every energy against error. Persecution of heretics is indeed unchristian and unevangelical, and its frightful traces remain on many a page of Church history, marked with blood and tears. Yet he would be no less to blame, who, like Timothy a ruler in the church, capable of large in fluence, should allow the errorist to go unchecked, and remain satisfied, if not himself corrupted by the leaven of error. The bee which has lost its sting can produce no more honey. The saying of Calvin is that of every true witness of Jesus Christ: A dog barks loudly when one seizes his master; and should I be silent when the truth of God is assailed? Polemics against leading heretics ought not to be the chief staple of gospel preaching; nor should this be wholly and always lost sight of.
HOMILETICAL AND PRACTICAL
No doctrine should be permitted or preached in the church but the unadulterated apostolic doctrine.The relation of Mythology to Christianity.The difference between the holy mystery of the gospel, and a sickly mysticism.A sermon whose first and last fruit is strife and dispute, instead of the promotion of the Divine way of redemption, is thereby self-condemned.The sum of the commandment: (1) No Christianity without love; (2) no Christian love without purity of heart; (3) no purity of heart without a good conscience; (4) no good conscience without an unsullied faith.How far we may swerve from the end of the Divine revelation, even when we believe ourselves very near to it.The attitude of the Christian toward the law.Among the confessors of the gospel there were and are at all times (1) some, who are neither under the law nor under grace; (2) others, who are indeed under the law, but not yet under grace; (3) others, who are under grace, and no more under the law.The worth of the law as a bar, as a mirror, as a seal. [German: Riegel, Spiegel, u. Siegel.]For whom the law is given, and for whom not.The Christian redeemed from the curse of the law, so that the righteousness required by the law is fulfilled in him.Every gross or slight, open or concealed immorality, is directly opposed to sound doctrine.A noble eulogy of the gospel: (1) The gospel of the glory of God; (2) this God, the blessed God; (3) through this blessed God, the ministry of the gospel is entrusted to a man like Paul.Every estimate of the law that does not accord with the gospel of Paul deserves to be rejected.The ceaseless alternation of Legalism and Antinomianism in the Christian Church: (1) Its traces; (2) its causes; (3) its import; (4) its only remedy.[Ignatius: , . Faith the beginning, but love the end, or final cause.W.]
Starke: Osiander: The pure doctrine is a great gift of God, therefore it is to be guarded well; a costly loan, therefore to be well laid out.Langes Opus Bibl.: Pure doctrine and a godly life must always go together.Hedinger: What helps not growth in godliness, we ought to banish from church and school.Anton: If the enemy cannot else lead us astray in our Christianity, he sings to us of high things, which common Christians do not know.Langes Op.: Theologians must especially care that they do not become loose talkers, and thus corrupters of others.In nothing is pride more perceptible, more hurtful, and perilous, than in spiritual things.Every preacher of the gospel is also a teacher of the law; for the gospel shows how man can and ought to hold the law of God in the gospel way.Quesnel: Gospel doctrine does not so hold up faith as to bend the law (1Co 9:21).Sins must not be judged by human fancy, but according to the law and the gospel.Sins that are forbidden in the law, are also contrary to the gospel (Rom 3:31).Anton: In the office of preacher, the whole aim must be to know the gospel as a gospel of the glory of God (2Co 4:6).
[Cudworth, Sermon I.: Christ came not into the world to fill our heads with mere speculations, to kindle a fire of wrangling and contentious dispute, whilst, in the mean time, our hearts remain all ire within toward God. Christ was vit magister, not schol; and he is the best Christian whose heart beats with the purest pulse toward heaven; not he, whose head spinneth out the finest cobwebs. Ink and paper can never make us Christianscan never beget a new nature, a living principle in uscan never form Christ, or any true notions of spiritual things, in our hearts. A painter that would draw a rose, though he may flourish some likeness of it in figure and color, yet he can never paint the scent and fragrancy.Donne, Sermons: As the soul is infused by God, but diffused over the whole body, and so there is a man; so faith is infused from God, but diffused into our works, and so there is a saint. Practice is the incarnation of faith; faith is incorporate and manifest in a body by works.W.]
Footnotes:
[1][Latin: Incipit ad Timotheum prima. English Version: The First Epistle of Paul the Apostle to Timothy; which is a translation of the title in the Recepta.
[2]1Ti 1:1.[ , instead of . ., the reading of the Recepta, and of Lachmann also. The Sinaiticus has .E. H.]
[3]1Ti 1:1.[ . So all the authorities. The Sinaiticus has = according to the promise, &c.; cf. 1Ti 1:1. But the true reading, doubtless, is the received.E. H.]
[4]1Ti 1:1.[ ; the order of these words varies much in the later MSS. See Tischendorf; so Huther.E. H.]
[5]1Ti 1:1.Received text: Lord Jesus Christ. [Omitted by Lachmann and Tischendorf; found in the Sinaiticus. In the Minuscules, is left out, or placed sometimes before , according to Huther.E. H.]
[6]1Ti 1:2.[; in the Recepta, but to be omitted; is omitted by our author in his text.E. H.]
[7]1Ti 1:2.[ ; so Lachmann and Tischendorf, supported by the weightiest authorities. The Sinaiticus the same.E. H.]
[8]1Ti 1:3.[No apodosis to . Lachmann brackets 1Ti 1:5-17; but this scarcely meets the case. Perhaps we had better supply, with our author, at the end of 1Ti 1:4, so now also I exhort thee. So likewise Conybeare and Howson.E. H.]
[9]1Ti 1:4.Dispensation (Haushaltung), according to the reading , instead of the of the Recepta, which has scarcely any critical confirmation at all. The reading is supported by such weighty authorities (now also by the Sinaiticus), that its accuracy cannot be doubted. Matthi says: , ita omnes omnino mei, ac ii quidem, qui scholia habent, etiam in scholiis uti quoque interpretes editi. nihil nisi error est typothetarum Erasmi, cum confuso nisi Erasmus deliberate ita correxerit ad latinum: dificationem; Huther.
[10]1Ti 1:8.[Lachmann, on the authority of A., reads ; the rest have . So also the Sinaiticus.E. H.]
[11]1Ti 1:9.[, . Lachmann, Tischendorf, Sinaiticus, instead of ., .E. H.]
Fuente: A Commentary on the Holy Scriptures, Critical, Doctrinal, and Homiletical by Lange
(3) As I besought thee to abide still at Ephesus, when I went into Macedonia, that thou mightest charge some that they teach no other doctrine, (4) Neither give heed to fables and endless genealogies, which minister questions, rather than godly edifying which is in faith: so do. (5) Now the end of the commandment is charity out of a pure heart, and of a good conscience, and of faith unfeigned: (6) From which some having swerved have turned aside unto vain jangling; (7) Desiring to be teachers of the law; understanding neither what they say, nor whereof they affirm. (8) But we know that the law is good, if a man use it lawfully; (9) Knowing this, that the law is not made for a righteous man, but for the lawless and disobedient, for the ungodly and for sinners, for unholy and profane, for murderers of fathers and murderers of mothers, for manslayers, (10) For whoremongers, for them that defile themselves with mankind, for menstealers, for liars, for perjured persons, and if there be any other thing that is contrary to sound doctrine; (11) According to the glorious gospel of the blessed God, which was committed to my trust.
I consider what the Apostle hath here said on the subject of the law, to be one of the most decisive and unanswerable determinations, (and from inspiration itself,) which ever hath been, or can be given, to quiet the minds of the faithful respecting it. And sure I am, if it were attended to, under the divine teaching, it would put an end to all the disputes with which the people of God have been disturbed on the point, by the vain arguments and reasoning’s of men. A moment’s attention will place the Apostle’s statement of the subject, concerning the law, in a clear light.
First. The Apostle sets down the great excellency of the law, as it is in itself. We know, (saith he,) that the law is good. And the holiness, perfection, and everlasting blessedness of all that is good, confirms every tittle of the law. Sooner, saith Christ, shall heaven and earth pass, than one tittle of it to fail. Luk 16:17 . The law is the very transcript of the mind of God. And, therefore, when Christ came in the purity of his nature to fulfil the law, he sums up the infinite blessedness of it in these words: I delight to do thy will, O my God; yea, thy law is within my heart; or, as the margin of the Bible renders it, in the midst of my bowels; meaning, that his whole human nature was formed in the perfect holiness of it, and wrapped up in it. Psa 40:8 . Seen in this point of view, how truly blessed is it! Well might Paul say, we know that the law is good!
Secondly. Paul qualifies the character of the law, as it relates to a poor sinner who hath broken the whole of it, by adding, that it is good, if a man use it lawfully. That is, if in a conscious sense of the infinite purity of the law itself, and its demands of unsinning obedience, with condemnation to every son and daughter of Adam who breaks it, we so use it, as those who are conscious of having sinned, and come short of God’s glory, we lay hold of Christ, as the end of the law for righteousness to everyone that believeth. In this sense the law is good indeed, and this is to use it lawfully. For by Christ’s perfect obedience to the whole law, in our room and stead, and as the Head of his body the Church, we are accepted as holy in him. And this comes up to what the Lord said by the Prophet; Surely shall one say, in the Lord have I righteousness and strength. In the Lord shall all the seed of Israel be justified, and shall glory. Isa 45:24-25 .
Thirdly. The Apostle next proceeds to define the purposes of the law. Knowing this, that the law is not made for a righteous man. The law, which was delivered on Mount Sinai, the Holy Ghost informs the Church, was added because of transgressions. Gal 3:19 . And Paul, in his own experience, declares, that he should not have known sin but by the law; for he should not have known lust, except the law had said; Thou shalt not covet. Rom 7:7 . Hence we learn, that as from the fall of the first man, none was righteous before God, the law was designed to teach sinners God’s holiness, and their total depravity. And this became a blessed way to set forth the holiness of the God-man Christ Jesus, who only could, and did, obey the whole law of God. And how blessedly in him is seen, that all his seed are considered righteous and holy before God.
Fourthly. The Apostle closeth this part of the subject, with showing for whom the law was made, and whom it universally condemns, being out of Christ. And a melancholy catalogue it forms! The law against all such stands unrepealed, unalterable, and everlastingly fixed. And in confirmation, Paul adds, according to the glorious Gospel of the blessed God! Reader! ponder the vast subject. Behold! how universally condemning the law is against all unrighteousness and ungodliness of men! See, the only possible safety from its condemnation is in Christ! Call to mind that every man by nature is in this state of condemnation, until called by sovereign grace! And when you have duly pondered the subject, and heard the unalterable sentence of all that live and die in the unregenerated state of the unrenewed mind, then ask your heart whether you yourself, personally considered, are interested in the blessed deliverance from it, which Paul describes: And such were some of you: but ye are washed, but ye are sanctified, but ye are justified in the name of the Lord Jesus, and by the Spirit of our God. 1Co 6:11 .
Fuente: Hawker’s Poor Man’s Commentary (Old and New Testaments)
3 As I besought thee to abide still at Ephesus, when I went into Macedonia, that thou mightest charge some that they teach no other doctrine,
Ver. 3. That they teach no other doctrine ] Either for matter or manner, for substance or circumstance. What hideous heresies are today broached and preached among us in city and country. See Mr Edwards’ Gangrena, the first and second part.
Fuente: John Trapp’s Complete Commentary (Old and New Testaments)
3 20 .] From specifying the object for which Timotheus was left at Ephesus ( 1Ti 1:3-4 ), and characterizing the false teachers (5 7), he digresses to the true use of the law which they pretended to teach (8 10), and its agreement with the gospel with which he was entrusted (11): thence to his own conversion, for the mercies of which he expresses his thankfulness in glowing terms (12 17). Thence he returns to his exhortations to Timotheus (18 20). On these repeated digressions, and the inferences from them, see Prolegg. ch. vii. i. 36 f.
Fuente: Henry Alford’s Greek Testament
3 .] The sentence begins As I exhorted thee , &c., but in his negligence of writing, the Apostle does not finish the construction: neither 1Ti 1:5 , nor 12, nor 18, will form the apodosis without unnatural forcing.
] Chr. lays stress on the word, as implying great mildness , , , , ; . This has been met (Huther, al.), by remarking that he says to Titus, Tit 1:5 . The present word however was the usual one to his fellow-helpers, see reff.: and there refers rather to a matter of detail ‘as I prescribed to thee.’
The sense of , to tarry , or stay at a place, is sufficiently clear from ref. Acts. The – implies a fixity when the word is absolutely used, which altogether forbids the joining with understood of Timotheus, as some have attempted to do. The aorist refers to the act of remaining behind when the Apostle departed; the present would have marked an endurance of stay . Various endeavours have been made to escape from the difficulties of the fact implied. Schneckenburger would read : others would take as imperative, most unnaturally. No one can doubt, that the straightforward rendering is, As I besought thee to tarry in Ephesus, when I was going to Macedonia . And on this straightforward rendering we must build our chronological considerations. See the whole subject discussed in the prolegomena, ch. vii. ii.: and cf. Ellicott’s note here.
, present, when I was on my way .
, &c. object of his tarrying.
, see reff.
] so constantly (reff.) in these Epistles: sometimes Tit 1:9 , or ib. Tit 1:10 . Huther infers from , that the number at this time was not considerable: but this is hardly safe. “The indefinite pronoun is more probably slightly contemptuous: ‘le mot a quelque chose de mprisant,’ see Arnaud, on Jud 1:4 , compare Gal 2:12 .” Ellicott.
] There seems to be in -, as in 2Co 6:14 , the idea of strange , or incongruous , not merely of different: cf. also , 1Co 14:21 . And the compound – , not – , brings in the sense of ‘ acting as a teacher :’ not to be teachers of strange things . Eusebius has the substantive, H. E. iii. 32 , in the sense of heretical teachers which however is too fixed and developed a meaning to give here. We have , Tit 2:3 . The meanings of ‘other teaching’ and ‘false teaching,’ when we remember that the faith which St. Paul preached was incapable ( Gal 1:8-9 ) of any the least compromise with the errors subsequently described, lie very close to one another.
, to give attention to: see reff.: “as it were, a mean term between and , compare Polyb. iv. 84. 6, ; Jos. B. J. vii. 5. 3, .” Ellicott.
] We can only judge from the other passages in these Epistles where the word occurs, what kind of fables are alluded to. In Tit 1:14 , we have . In our ch. 1Ti 4:7 , they are designated as . In 2Ti 4:4 , they are spoken of absolutely, as here. If we are justified in identifying the ‘fables’ in Tit. with these, they had a Jewish origin: but merely to take them, as Thdrt., for the Jewish traditional comments on the law ( , ( , mischna)), does not seem to satisfy the . And consequently others have interpreted them of the gnostic mythology of the ons. So Tert. adv. Valentinianos, ch. 3, vol. ii. p. 515: ‘qui ex alia conscientia venerit fidei, si statim inveniat tot nomina onum, tot coniugia, tot genimina, tot exitus, tot eventus, felicitates, infelicitates dispersae atque concisae divinitatis, dubitabiturne ibidem pronuntiare, has esse fabulas et genealogias indeterminatas, quas apostoli spiritus his iam tunc pullulantibus seminibus haereticis damnare praevenit?’ And Iren., in his prf., p. 1, assumes these words in the very outset, almost as his motto . , , . Others again (as Suidas’s definition, , , ) would give an entirely general meaning to the word, ‘false teaching’ of any kind. But this is manifestly too lax: for the descriptions here (1Ti 1:7 , e.g.) point at a Jewish origin, and a development in the direction of . It does not seem easy to define any further these , but it is plain that any transitional state from Judaism to gnosticism will satisfy the conditions here propounded, without inferring that the full-blown gnosticism of the second century must be meant, and thus calling in question the genuineness of the Epistle. On the whole subject, see Prolegg. ch. vii. i. 8 ff.
. . ] De W. in his note on Tit 1:14 , marks out well the references which have been assigned to this expression: “ cannot be 1) properly genealogical registers , either for a pure genealogico-historical end (Chr., c., Thl., Ambr., Est., Calov., Schttg., Wolf), or for a dogmatico-historical one, to foster the religious national pride of Jews against Gentiles, cf. Phi 3:4 f. (Storr, Flatt, Wegsch., Leo), or to ascertain the descent of the Messiah (Thdrt., Jer., Wegsch.: according to Nicol. Lyr., to shew that Jesus was not the Messiah), least of all genealogies of Timotheus himself (Wetst.), for all this does not touch, or too little touches religious interests: nor are they 2) gentile theogonies (Chr. gives this as well as the former interpretation: also c., Thl., Elsn.); nor again 3) pedigrees of the cabalistic sephiroth (Vitring. Obss. 1, 1Ti 1:13 ; see Wolf), which will hardly suit .: nor 4) Essenian genealogies of angels (Mich., Heinr., al.), of the existence of which we have no proof; nor 5) allegorizing genealogies , applications of psychological and historical considerations to the genealogies contained in the books of Moses; as in Philo (Dhne, Stud. u. Krit. 1853, 1008), a practice too peculiar to Philo and his view: but most probably 6) lists of gnostic emanations (Tert. contr. Val. 3, prscr. 33, Iren, prf. (see above), Grot., Hamm., Chr., Mosh., Mack, Baur, al.), &c.”
But again, inasmuch as are coupled in Tit 3:9 with , it seems as if we must hardly understand the ripened fruits of gnosticism, but rather the first beginnings of those genealogies in the abuse of Judaism. See Prolegg. “It is curious that Polybius uses both terms in similarly close connexion, Hist. ix. 2. 1.” Ellicott.
may be used merely in popular hyperbole to signify the tedious length of such genealogies. The meaning ‘ profitless ’ (Chr., , , , and so Thdrt.; see below) would be a natural deduction from the other, and is therefore hardly to be so summarily set aside as it has been by De W., al.
, of the kind which .
] objective, questions : not subjective, ‘ questionings :’ see reff. in these Epistles, in which are not themselves, but lead to, , , &c.
] minister , as E. V., is the best rendering: ‘ afford ,’ ‘ give rise to ,’ ‘ furnish :’ see below.
is a mild way of saying : see reff.
] This has been taken two ways: 1) objectively: the dispensation (reff.) of God (towards man) which is (consists) in (the) faith : in which case must bear something of a transferred meaning, zeugmatic, as the grammarians call it, as applied to , implying, “rather than they set forth ,” &c. And to this there can be no objection, as the instances of it are so common. This meaning also suits that of in the reff., even 1Co 9:17 , where the is the objective matter wherewith the Apostle was entrusted, not his own subjective fulfilment of it. 2) subjectively: ‘ the exercising of the stewardship of God in faith :’ so Conyb.: or as paraphrased by Storr (in Huther) , . But to this there is the serious objection, that in this subjective sense, ‘ the fulfilment of the duty of an ,’ wants example: and even could this be substantiated, , in the sense required, would seem again questionable. I would therefore agree with Huther and Wiesinger (and Ellicott) in the objective sense the dispensation of God . Then has also been variously taken. Chrys. says, , , . . And Thdrt.: , , . But the words will hardly bear either of these. The only legitimate meaning seems to be which is in faith , i.e. finds its sphere, and element, and development among men, in faith. Thus stands in contrast to , in which the does not consist; and the way for the next sentence is prepared, which speaks of as one of the means to the great end of the Gospel.
Fuente: Henry Alford’s Greek Testament
1Ti 1:3-7 . THE MOTIVE OF THIS LETTER: to provide Timothy with a written memorandum of previous verbal instructions, especially with a view to novel speculations about the Law which sap the vitality of the Gospel; the root of which is sincerity, and its fruit, love.
Fuente: The Expositors Greek Testament by Robertson
1Ti 1:3 . : The apodosis supplied at the end of 1Ti 1:4 in the R.V., so do I now , is feebler than the so do of the A.V. We need something more vigorous. St. Paul was more anxious that Timothy should charge some , etc., than that he should merely abide at Ephesus . This is implied in the A.V., in which so do = stay there and be a strong ruler .
An exact parallel occurs in Mar 1:2 . Similar anacolutha are found in Rom 5:12 , Gal 2:4-6 , Eph 3:1 .
: It is far-fetched to regard this word as specially expressive of a mild command, as Chrys. suggests. constantly occurs, and with very varying meanings, in the Pauline Epistles. is used in the corresponding place in Tit 1:5 , because there the charge concerns a series of injunctions.
: ut remaneres (Vulg.). The word (see Act 18:18 ) naturally implies that St. Paul and Timothy had been together at Ephesus, and that St. Paul left Timothy there as vicar apostolic.
refers to St. Paul, not to Timothy, as De Wette alleged. The grammatical proof of this is fully gone into by Winer-Moulton, Gram . p. 404, “If the subject of the infinitive is the same as that of the finite verb, any attributes which it may have are put in the nominative”.
It is unnecessary here to prove that it is impossible to fit this journey of St. Paul to Macedonia, and Timothy’s stay at Ephesus connected therewith, into the period covered by the Acts.
: is intentionally vague. The writer has definite persons in his mind, but for some reason he does not choose to specify them. To do so, in this case, would have had a tendency to harden them in their heresy, “render them more shameless” (Chrys.). The introduction of the personal element into controversy has a curiously irritating effect. For this use of see 1Co 4:18 , 2Co 3:1 ; 2Co 10:2 , Gal 1:7 ; Gal 2:12 , 1Ti 1:6 ; 1Ti 1:19 ; 1Ti 5:15 ; 1Ti 6:10 ; 1Ti 6:21 , 2Ti 2:18 .
: This compound occurs again in 1Ti 6:3 , and means to teach a gospel or doctrine different from that which I have taught . certainly seems to connote difference in kind . Gal 1:6 , , , and 2Co 11:4 , illustrate St. Paul’s language here. The heresy may have been of recent origin, and not yet completely systematised heresy of course does not aim at finality but St. Paul does not mean to deal gently with it. It was to him false and accursed ( cf. Gal 1:8-9 ). His forebodings for the church in Ephesus (Act 20:29-30 ) were being fulfilled now. Hort ( Judaistic Christianity , p. 134) compares the of Heb 13:9 .
St. Paul elsewhere uses compounds with , e.g. , 2Co 6:14 , ; and more remarkably still, when quoting Isa 28:11 in 1Co 14:21 , he substitutes for of the LXX. The word is found in Ignat. ad Polyc . 3, .
Fuente: The Expositors Greek Testament by Robertson
NASB (UPDATED) TEXT: 1Ti 1:3-7
3As I urged you upon my departure for Macedonia, remain on at Ephesus so that you may instruct certain men not to teach strange doctrines, 4nor to pay attention to myths and endless genealogies, which give rise to mere speculation rather than furthering the administration of God which is by faith. 5But the goal of our instruction is love from a pure heart and a good conscience and a sincere faith. 6For some men, straying from these things, have turned aside to fruitless discussion, 7wanting to be teachers of the Law, even though they do not understand either what they are saying or the matters about which they make confident assertions.
1Ti 1:3 “Ephesus”
1. It was the largest city of the Roman province of Asia Minor. It was not the capital, though the Roman governor lived there. It was a commercial center because of its excellent natural harbor.
2. It was a free city, which allowed it to have its own local government and many political freedoms, including no garrison of Roman soldiers.
3. It was the only city which was allowed to hold biannual Asian Olympic games.
4. It was the site of the Temple to Artemis (Diana in Latin), which was one of the seven wonders of the world of its day. It was 425′ by 220′ with 127 columns which were 60′ tall, of which 86 were overlaid with gold (see Pliny’s Hist. Nat. 36:95ff). The image of Artemis was thought to have been a meteor which resembled a many-breasted female figure. This meant that there were many cultic prostitutes present in the city (cf. Acts 19). It was a very immoral, multicultural city.
5. Paul spent more than three years in this city (cf. Act 18:1 ff; Act 20:13). He stayed there longer than any other place.
6. Tradition asserts that it became the Apostle John’s home after Mary’s death in Palestine.
7. Paul and Timothy must have traveled here together after Paul was released from Roman imprisonment in Rome. It is the first geographical information about Paul’s fourth missionary journey. Notice he was moving on to Macedonia.
8. Eusebius (a third century church historian) relates the tradition that Timothy was later stoned in Ephesus because of arguments with the followers of Diana.
“so that” This is a hina (purpose clause), which means “in order that” (1Ti 1:10; 1Ti 1:18; 1Ti 1:20; 1Ti 2:2; 1Ti 3:15; 1Ti 4:15; 1Ti 5:7; 1Ti 5:16; 1Ti 5:20-21; 1Ti 6:1; 1Ti 6:19).
“may instruct” This is a military term “to give strict orders” (cf. 1Ti 1:5; 1Ti 1:18; 1Ti 4:11; 1Ti 5:7; 1Ti 6:13; 1Ti 6:17). Paul is directing Timothy as his Apostolic delegate.
“certain men not to teach strange doctrines” Normally Paul, like all first century writers, would include a prayer of thanksgiving, an expected introductory item of Greek letters. However, in both Galatians and 1 Timothy the situation (i.e., opposing false teachers) demanded a deviation from the normal pattern. There is much modern academic speculation about these false teachers. They seem to combine aspects of Jewish and Greek thought (like the false teachers of Colossians). In this context (1Ti 1:3-4) they are characterized by
1. strange doctrines
2. attention to myths
3. attention to endless genealogies
4. mere speculation
Some commentators relate these to Gnosticism’s aeons or angelic spheres (plrma) between a high good god and lesser gods/angels, the least of which molded/formed evil matter. See Special Topic: Gnostics at Tit 1:1.
The Jewish element is obvious in:
1. “teachers of the Law” (1Ti 1:7-10)
2. “Jewish myths” (Tit 1:14; 2Ti 4:4)
3. “disputes about the Law” (Tit 3:9)
4. “those of the circumcision” (Tit 1:10)
5. possibly the origins of the Messiah in Tit 3:9 a
NASB”to teach no other doctrine”
NKJV”to teach different doctrine”
NRSV”teaching false doctrine”
TEV”teaching false doctrine”
NJB”to spread wrong teaching”
This is a present infinitive of a compound term heteros (another of a different kind) plus didakalin (the thing taught). The adjective heteros is also used to describe inappropriate teaching in Act 17:21; 2Co 11:4; and Gal 1:6-7. 1Ti 6:3 is a good parallel.
In The New International Biblical Commentary, p. xiv, one of my favorite commentators, Gordon Fee, asserts that this verse is crucial in interpreting the purpose of 1 Timothy. In his opinion it is not primarily a “manual of church discipline,” but a refutation of false teachers/teaching (and I agree).
1Ti 1:4 “nor to pay attention to myths and endless genealogies” Because of the references to Jewish Law (1Ti 1:7-10 and Tit 3:9 b), to circumcision (Tit 1:10), and Jewish myths (Tit 1:14 and in 2Ti 4:4), it seems obvious that these teachings were Jewish in nature. It is possible that it refers to the speculative origins of the Messiah (cf. Tit 3:9 a).
Irenaeus and Tertullian thought Paul was prophetically speaking to later Gnosticism’s aeons or angelic levels between the holy god and a lesser god (or Elohim/angel) who formed matter. Gnosticism is a system of thought that is known from writings from the middle of the second century. See Special Topic: Gnostics at Tit 1:1. From these writings we know of their extensive lists of angelic levels between a high good god and the lesser spiritual beings. However, these Gnostic lists are never characterized in contemporary Christian, Jewish, or Gnostic literature by the terms “myths” or “genealogies.”
The subject of Gnosticism has been greatly advanced by the archaeological discoveries of Gnostic texts such as Nag Hammadi. These writings are now available in English, The Nag Hammadi Library by James M. Robinson and Richard Smith.
NASB”give rise to mere speculation”
NKJV”which cause disputes”
NRSV”that promote speculations”
TEV”which only produce arguments”
NJB”only foster doubts”
It is possible to get so involved in the study of Christianity academically that we forget why we are studying God’s word (cf. Tit 3:8; Mat 28:19-20). Just because a text could mean this or that does not mean that it does mean that. Check the historical setting and larger context.
This is exactly the reason that Pietism developed out of the Reformation tradition. Mind and heart must both be yielded and energized by God’s Spirit.
NASB”rather than furthering the administration of God”
NKJV”rather than godly edification”
NRSV”rather than the divine training”
TEV”they do not serve God’s plan”
NJB”instead of furthering God’s plan”
This is the term for “household manager” (oikonomian, found in MSS , A, D2, F, G) used for believers’ stewardship of the gospel message. It refers to God’s gracious plan for all mankind’s salvation through faith in Christ (cf. Gen 3:15; 2Co 5:21; Eph 2:8-10; Eph 2:11 to Eph 3:13). See Special Topic: YHWH’s ETERNAL REDEMPTIVE PLAN at 1Ti 4:10.
The NKJV’s “edification” (oikodomn) follows MS D* and the Greek texts used by Irenaeus and the Latin text used by Theodore. The UBS4 gives “household manager” an “A” rating (certain).
The NET Bible gives 1Ti 2:3-6; 2Ti 1:9-10 and Tit 3:4-7 as the theological elements of God’s eternal redemptive plan (p. 2176).
SPECIAL TOPIC: EDIFY
“which is by faith” There is a real difference between “myths,” “genealogies,” “speculations,” and faith. Faith is based on the historical truth of the gospel, not theories. Faith comes from the promises of God (cf. Gal 3:14; Gal 3:16-18; Gal 3:21-22; Gal 3:29), not the philosophical preponderance of humans (cf. 1Co 1:18-31). One is based on revelation, the other on human speculation. One honors God and the other magnifies the human thinker.
This is not meant to depreciate godly scholarship, but to differentiate divine revelation from human reason, speculation, and discovery. Believers are called to love God with their “minds” (cf. Jesus’ quote of Deu 6:5 in Mat 22:36-37; Mar 12:28-30; Luk 10:27) and to pass these truths on to their children (cf. Deu 6:7; Deu 6:20-25).
1Ti 1:5 “love from a pure heart” The goal of Paul’s charge to believers in 1Ti 1:5 had a three-fold component.
1. love from a pure heart
2. love from a good conscience
3. love from a sincere faith.
In Hebrew “heart” was used for the seat of the intellect, emotions, and will (cf. Deu 6:5-6). It stood for the whole person.
SPECIAL TOPIC: THE HEART
“a good conscience” There is not an OT counterpart to the Greek term “conscience” unless the Hebrew term “breast” implies a knowledge of self and its motives. Originally the Greek term referred to consciousness related to the five senses. It came to be used of the inner senses (cf. Rom 2:15). Paul uses this term twice in his trials in Acts (cf. Act 23:1; Act 24:16). It refers to his sense that he had not knowingly violated any expected duties toward God (cf. 1Co 4:4).
Conscience is a developing understanding of believers’ motives and actions based on (1) a biblical world-view; (2) an indwelling Spirit; and (3) a knowledge of the word of God. It is made possible by the personal reception of the gospel.
Paul uses this term twice in chapter 1, once in relation to his own developed sense of the will of God (cf. 1Ti 1:5) and once in relation to the willful rejection of the false teachers (cf. Tit 1:15), including Hymenaeus and Alexander (cf. 1Ti 1:19). These false teachers have had their consciences seared (cf. 1Ti 4:2).
“a sincere faith” Paul uses this adjective three times in his writings to describe (1) faith (cf. 1Ti 1:5; 2Ti 1:5) and (2) love (cf. 2Co 6:6 and also 1Pe 1:22). It has the connotation of genuine, real, or sincere which is opposite of “counterfeit” which describes the false teachers (cf. 1Ti 1:19-20).
1Ti 1:6-7 These verses further characterize the false teachers in very Jewish categories
1. they strayed from the goal of ethical teachings (cf. 1Ti 1:5)
2. they turned aside to
a. “fruitless discussion” (NASB)
b. “idle talk” (NKJV)
c. “meaningless talk” (NRSV)
d. “empty speculation” (NJB)
3. they wanted to be teachers of the Law
4. they do not understand the Law
5. they make confident assertions about things they do not understand
6. 1Ti 1:9-10 seem to reflect the Ten Commandments
The tragedy of false teachers is either
1. their spiritual blindness, which is often expressed by insincerity
2. their willful rejection of light, not just ignorance
3. they lead others into error and ruin
Fuente: You Can Understand the Bible: Study Guide Commentary Series by Bob Utley
besought. App-134.
abide. Greek. prosmeno See Act 11:23.
at. App-104.
into. App-104.
that = in order that. Greek. hina
charge. Greek. parangello. See Act 1:4.
some, App-124.
that they, &c. = not (App-105) to teach otherwise (Greek. heterodidaskaleo. Only here and 1Ti 6:3).
Fuente: Companion Bible Notes, Appendices and Graphics
3-20.] From specifying the object for which Timotheus was left at Ephesus (1Ti 1:3-4), and characterizing the false teachers (5-7), he digresses to the true use of the law which they pretended to teach (8-10), and its agreement with the gospel with which he was entrusted (11): thence to his own conversion, for the mercies of which he expresses his thankfulness in glowing terms (12-17). Thence he returns to his exhortations to Timotheus (18-20). On these repeated digressions, and the inferences from them, see Prolegg. ch. vii. i. 36 f.
Fuente: The Greek Testament
1Ti 1:3. , even as) The Protasis; the Apodosis is at 1Ti 1:18. [In the meantime Paul refutes those who taught other doctrine, by the very striking example of his own conversion.-V. g.]
There are three divisions of this epistle:
I. The Inscription, 1Ti 1:1-2.
II.The Instruction of Timothy in regard to the holy administration of the church affairs at Ephesus in the absence of Paul: where
1)In general, he commits to him a charge to he delivered to those who erroneously taught the law, the sum of the Gospel being established and confirmed by his own example, 1Ti 1:3-4; 1Ti 1:8-9; 1Ti 1:11-12; 1Ti 1:18-19.
2)In particular,
1)He prescribes the order of prayer, 1Ti 2:1-2, chiefly to men, ver. 8; moreover to women good works, 1Ti 2:9-10, with modesty, 1Ti 2:11-12.
2)He enumerates the requisite qualifications of a bishop, 1Ti 3:1-2.
And also the duties of deacons and women, 1Ti 3:8-9; 1Ti 3:11-13.
3)He explains what Timothy ought to teach, after he had very weightily set forth the most momentous points, 1Ti 3:14 to 1Ti 4:3; in 1Ti 4:4-5, also what he ought to avoid, and what he ought to follow, 1Ti 4:7-8; 1Ti 4:12-13 :
Then how he should deal with men and women, 1Ti 5:1-2;
With widows, 1Ti 5:3-4; 1Ti 5:9-12; 1Ti 5:16;
With elders, 1Ti 5:17-18;
With offenders, 1Ti 5:20-21;
With Timothy himself, 1Ti 5:22-23;
With those of whom he is in doubt, 1Ti 5:24-25;
With servants, 1Ti 6:1-2.
4)Those who teach otherwise are reproved, 1Ti 6:3-4; 1Ti 6:6-7; but Timothy is admonished and incited forward, 1Ti 6:11-12, and a charge is given to him, 1Ti 6:13-14; and precepts are prescribed to be enforced upon the rich, 1Ti 6:17-18.
III.The Conclusion.
-, to abide) The same word occurs in Act 18:18. The presence of good men is a restraint upon the wicked. Timothy at Ephesus, Titus at Crete, were not bishops, but were directors of the bishops, and, so to speak, Vicars Apostolic.- , to teach no other doctrine) than that which I have taught. Let them not substitute anything else for it, let them not add [liter, impart by rubbing, affricent] aught to it. Comp. the address of Paul to these same Ephesians, Act 20:28-30. The same word occurs, ch. 1Ti 6:3, where those things which are contrary [to wholesome doctrine] are condemned, just as at the beginning of the epistle, the things which are good are commended. Even the things which seem to be only different (other doctrine), carry with them something which is positively contrary [to the true doctrine]. They taught the law, in opposition to the Gospel, 1Ti 1:7; 1Ti 1:11.
Fuente: Gnomon of the New Testament
1Ti 1:3
As I exhorted thee to tarry at Ephesus, when I was going into Macedonia,-When Paul left Ephesus, he left there to restrain certain teachers who taught differently from Paul.
that thou mightest charge certain men not to teach a different doctrine,-The teachers were doubtless the Judaizers who insisted that the Gentiles could not be saved unless they were circumcised and kept the law of Moses.
Fuente: Old and New Testaments Restoration Commentary
at: Act 19:1-10
when: Act 20:1-3, Phi 2:24
charge: 1Ti 4:6, 1Ti 4:11, 1Ti 5:7, 1Ti 6:3, 1Ti 6:10, 1Ti 6:17, Gal 1:6, Gal 1:7, Eph 4:14, Col 2:6-11, Tit 1:9-11, 2Jo 1:7, 2Jo 1:9, 2Jo 1:10, Rev 2:1, Rev 2:2, Rev 2:14, Rev 2:20
Reciprocal: Lev 8:35 – keep Act 17:14 – but Act 18:19 – Ephesus 2Co 11:3 – so Eph 6:23 – and love 1Th 5:27 – I charge 1Ti 4:16 – unto the 2Ti 1:18 – Ephesus 2Ti 3:10 – my 2Ti 4:12 – to Tit 1:5 – General Tit 3:9 – avoid 1Pe 1:22 – a pure Rev 1:11 – Ephesus
Fuente: The Treasury of Scripture Knowledge
1Ti 1:3. Timothy was selected by Paul to travel with him (Act 16:1-3), and he was in his company much of the time. However, at times the apostle appointed him to certain tasks, while he went on to other territories. Such special journeys were made by Paul on more than one occasion, hence we are not informed when the one occurred referred to in this verse. But this item is not essential to our study and conclusions upon the matters mentioned. When Paul was ready to depart from Timothy, lie requested him to remain at Ephesus for the purpose of defending the truth against false teachers. And now in this epistle he refers to the matter and repeats the program he expects the evangelist to follow. This repetition of the instructions constitutes them virtually as an order. Teach no other doctrine than what was taught by the apostles. The false doctrine- has special reference to that being circulated by the Judaizers, namely, that the law of Moses was binding on all Christians. There was also a mixture of traditions from the pretenders of learning that was injected into the ordinances of the law, and pressed upon disciples as items necessary to salvation.
Fuente: Combined Bible Commentary
1Ti 1:3. As I besought thee to abide at Ephesus. See Introduction as to the occasion thus referred to. On the assumption of the conclusion there arrived at, it would be at the close of St. Pauls last visit to Ephesus, after his first imprisonment at Rome. He had seen, as the Epistle shews, much that made him anxious there, and eager as Timothy was to accompany him, bitter as were his tears at parting (2Ti 1:4), he besought him to abide there. There was, as the word implies, probably some reluctance on the part of the young disciple to leave the apostle whom he loved so devotedly, and with whom he had for so many years travelled in the closest companionship.
To teach no other doctrine. Better no different (or strange) doctrine. The first part of the word implies (as in 2Co 6:14) unequally yoked, something discordant and out of harmony. Found only here and in 1Ti 6:3, it is probably a word coined by St. Paul.
That thou shouldest charge some. The undefined way in which St. Paul usually speaks of his Judaizing opponents and others whom he condemns (Gal 1:7; Gal 2:12; 1Ti 1:6; 1Ti 1:19, 1Ti 4:1, 1Ti 5:15, 1Ti 6:10). Timothy would know whom he had in view. Hymenus, Alexander, Philetus, are afterwards singled out for special mention.
Fuente: A Popular Commentary on the New Testament
Note here, 1. The tender care which St. Paul took of the new planted church at Ephesus; when his office called him into Macedonia, he leaves Timothy behind him at Ephesus, to water what he had planted, and to build upon that foundation which he had laid; When I went into Macedonia, I besought thee to abide still at Ephesus.
Note, 2. The charge and command which St. Paul left with Timothy at his departure from him, to take care that no new or strange doctrine be taught, or any other doctrine received by the church, than what was delivered by him: Charge some that they teach no other doctrine.
But who are these?
Very probably they were the judaizing teachers, who strenously endeavoured to corrupt the purity, and deprave the somplicity of the gospel.
Thence learn, 1. That though the doctrine of Christ and his apostles was abundantly sufficient to salvation, yet the church of Christ, even in the earliest days of Christianity, were in very great danger of being corrupted early by other doctrines than those delivered by them.
Learn, 2. That it is the great duty, and ought to be the special care, of the ministers of God, that no new or strange doctrine be broached in the church of Christ; I besought thee–that thou mightest charge some that they teach no other doctrine.
Fuente: Expository Notes with Practical Observations on the New Testament
Charging Others to Teach No Other Doctrine The word “urged” carries the idea of pleading or begging, according to Spain. It is an encouraging word that leaves the person with a sense of dignity. Timothy needed to stay in Ephesus while Paul went on to Macedonia because some urgently needed to be instructed to preach only the doctrine of Christ.
Remember, Paul had warned the Ephesian elders of the coming of false teachers ( Act 20:28-32 ). They also needed to be warned not to pay attention to false stories and constant searching through genealogies ( Tit 1:14 ; 2Pe 1:16 ). The result of looking at such false stories and tracing lineage back to Abraham led only to disputes. Lipscomb says that Herod the Great destroyed the genealogies because he could not trace his line back to Abraham. God kept the lines clear until the true Savior came. Now, one could come claiming to be the savior but could have no clear proof. Instead of that which tore down, Paul would have Timothy urge them to the study of things that would produce godly edifying and thus enhance their faith ( 1Ti 1:3-4 ).
Fuente: Gary Hampton Commentary on Selected Books
1Ti 1:3-4. As I besought thee , I entreated thee. It is observed by Beza, that by using this soft expression the apostle hath left a singular example of modesty, to be imitated by superiors in their behaviour toward their inferiors in the church. When I went into Macedonia, (Act 20:1,) that thou mightest charge some Who appeared to be inclined to introduce their own corrupt notions into the church; that they teach no other doctrine Than I have taught. Let them put nothing in the place of it, add nothing to it. These teachers were probably Judaizers, and members of the church at Ephesus; for with other teachers Timothy could have little influence. In not mentioning the names of these corrupt teachers, the apostle showed great delicacy, hoping that they might still be reclaimed. The same delicacy he had observed in his treatment of the false teacher or teachers at Corinth, and of the incestuous person there. Neither give heed to fables To fabulous Jewish traditions, so as either to teach or regard them; and endless genealogies Questions about their genealogies. The apostle does not speak of those recorded in the Scriptures, but of the long intricate pedigrees whereby many of the Jews strove to prove their descent from certain persons: which minister questions Which lead only to useless and endless controversies; rather than godly edifying The promotion of holiness, which leads men to God; which is in faith Which edification is by faith in the great truths of the Scriptures, and in Christ, of whom the Scriptures testify as the Redeemer and Saviour of lost sinners.
Fuente: Joseph Bensons Commentary on the Old and New Testaments
3. As I call thee to abide in Ephesus, going into Macedonia. I am satisfied Paul never wrote this letter when over in Asia while Timothy was with him, as he left him there; but after crossing the Aegan Sea, and landing in Europe, he dictated it to Luke while stopping and preaching in some of those Macedonian Churches; i.e., Philippi, Thessalonica, or Berea. In order that you may command certain ones not to teach heterodoxy.
Orthodoxy is the simple, unsophisticated Word of God. Everything else is heterodox. These words have been awfully abused by unspiritual preachers, and frequently given even a reverse interpretation. The preachers who confine themselves to the pure and unadulterated Word are this day like angels visits.
Fuente: William Godbey’s Commentary on the New Testament
(b) 1Ti 1:3-20. Reminder of Pauls Verbal Charge.
1Ti 1:3-11. The False Teaching, and a Digression on the Law.Some years before, Paul had foretold that error would assail the Church in Asia (Act 20:29 f.). His fear had now been realised. On his recent visit to Macedonia (Intro. 5) he had already given Timothy instruction concerning it, and this he here renews. The authority of the errorists to teach is not disputed. Perhaps all Christian men could engage in teaching; Zahn, INT, ii. 96: it is the content of their doctrine that is challenged. This seems to have taken the forra of a speculative Judaismits exponents posed as teachers of the lawdealing with legendary matter (e.g. the Haggadah) alien to the Gospels purpose. Such doctrine is (a) evil in tendency, leading to vain talking and aimless discussions (including, perhaps, the trivial casuistry which constituted no small part of the HalachaHort) (cf. Tit 1:10); (b) irrelevant, missing the true end of the Christian teachingnot useless controversy, but love (1Ti 1:5)and so constituting a different doctrine (1Ti 1:3); (c) ignorant, its propounders understanding neither their own assertions nor their subject-matter (1Ti 1:7). This disparaging reference to self-styled teachers of the law, howeverhere follows a brief digression (1Ti 1:8-11)does not imply condemnation of the Law itself. It is only its misuse that Paul deprecates. The Law is good if a teacher builds on knowledge of its true design, the restraining of wrongdoers. Such a view of the Law, indeed, is that which harmonises with Pauls own Gospel of Gods glory.
1Ti 1:5. conscience and faith: viewed throughout the Pastorals as closely inter-related.
1Ti 1:6. swerved: perhaps failed or forgotten (Exp. VII, vi. 373).
1Ti 1:8. good: the Gr. word signifies beauty as well as goodness (cf. Rom 7:16).
1Ti 1:9. law: either the Mosaic Law or law in general, probably the former if the accompanying list of sins follows, as some hold, the order of the Decalogue. For supplementary view, see Rom 5:20. Moffatt (INT, p. 410) needlessly sees in this paragraph proof of the writers sub-Pauline environment.murderers: more probably smiters (mg.).
1Ti 1:10. sound: contrast 2Ti 2:17. This apt metaphor (cf. mg.), not found in Paul outside the Pastorals, was common in ancient Gr., and must have been familiar to him.doctrine: the conception, found in the Pastorals, of a system of belief to be accepted and guarded, has erroneously been declared un-Pauline. Not only was it an inevitable development in the Churchs thought, but it is revealed in Pauls earliest epistles (1Th 4:1, 2Th 2:15, 1Co 15:2 f., etc.).
Fuente: Peake’s Commentary on the Bible
Verse 3
Charge some, &c. The false teachers condemned in this passage (1 Timothy 1:3-7) were evidently those who insisted strenuously upon the obligations of the Jewish law. This class of men seem to have been a very general source of difficulty in the churches; their attempts to encumber Christianity with the burden of Mosaic rites, often occasioned the apostle great solicitude, and are the subject of severe rebuke in many of his Epistles.
Fuente: Abbott’s Illustrated New Testament
CHAPTER 3
We now shift gears from the glories of Christ and His Fathers salvation, to those that might teach other than the truth.
A couple years ago there was a theology board on the internet that had some real contenders for the faith. Just what faith some of them were contending for was the difficult question. There were radical charismatics, there were moderate charismatics, there were reformers, there were baptismal regenerationists (even thought they denied that title), there were good logical minds, there were nonsensical minds, there was a man that thought he was the Beast of the book of Revelation and there was Dennis Clough. He was one of the sane voices on the board. I would love to give a big hello to Dennis if he happens to read this someday – Hi Dennis, and a big thank you for the following!
At one point when the false doctrine was flying way too thick, Dennis posted the following:
To Quasi Theologians:
“I don’t study, it gets in my way, Nevertheless, I’ve still got plenty to say.
“Peter and Paul were oh, so wrong, It’s a good thing for you I came along.
“I am sent by me to edit His Word, to define good news you thought you heard.
“So it’s not by grace after all, It’s not enough on Him to call, on your boot straps you must haul!
“It’s true that Jesus came to die for sin, but in my system, the cross doesn’t fit in.
“We must save ourselves by our works, People who only believe are really jerks!
“I know my message is really true, Cause I made it up, with scissors and glue.
“It came to me in the middle of the night, my toes tingled and my head felt light.
“It makes me feel good to be able to bless, To take confusion and add to the mess.
“I don’t care about truth or context, as long as I take some into the vortex!
“Please don’t bother me with Scripture, Of such things, MY doctrine is pure.
“So come and go with me, I know not where, But be sure, there won’t be any Christians there!
“Dedicated to all who deviate from the “faith once delivered to the saints”! Dennis Clough”
1Ti 1:3 As I besought thee to abide still at Ephesus, when I went into Macedonia, that thou mightest charge some that they teach no other doctrine,
This verse is the basis for some thinking the book was written from Macedonia.
Paul had given Timothy authority to begin setting things in order in the church at Ephesus.
To the point of teaching of false doctrine: Paul states, “charge some that they teach no other doctrine. . . .” Charge according to Vine is “strictly used of commands received from a superior and transmitted to others.”
This passage, it would seem to me, gives the church leadership the right, indeed, the obligation to see to it that there is no doctrine other than correct doctrine taught in the church.
That my friend, is a tall order. How can church leaders fulfill this responsibility?
It will require knowing the teachers. Don’t ever allow anyone to teach your people without knowing some of their background. This includes fill in pastors, this includes Sunday school teachers, this includes missionaries, and this includes all that would teach doctrine in the church over which you have leadership.
Know those that you invite in among the sheep. I have seen missionaries from questionable missions invited in only because they grew up in the church. That is not the criterion to determine speakers on.
It will require not allowing some to teach. If you don’t have the proper information to make a decision – don’t allow it! If you have to say no to aunt Tillie’s favorite nephew, the missionary then so be it. Don’t allow it.
It will require correcting those that are in error. If you find that someone in your church is teaching false doctrine, then action must be taken. It will be embarrassing and it will be hard but it must be done. They must be corrected or removed.
It will require some serious prayer time before getting into the situations that you will get into. Pray for wisdom concerning what is going on. Be sure that you are correct in your facts. Be sure that all is correct and that God is in the lead before you move.
It will require knowing your Sunday school curriculum and checking it from time to time. The Sunday school publishers are in constant flux. What was a good company ten years ago may be very poor in their curriculum today. Many of the Sunday school publishers are now owned by secular companies. One of the fundamental publishers changed its name to widen its customer base, then was purchased by another publisher which in turn was purchased by another publisher – from fundamental and denominational to evangelical and nondenominational in about fifteen years.
Review your materials every year or so, ask your teachers to evaluate every year or so – be sure the materials are still sound.
It will require knowing your entire church and its programs. What is being taught to your children, what is being taught to your youth, what is being taught to your adults?
As I talk about this, I am not talking about the differences of opinion about minor doctrines, but major variances from the major doctrines of the church. We can have differences of opinion on where I Timothy was written, but not about whether I Timothy is a part of the Bible. We can have differences of opinion on how we approach the book of Revelation, but as to the identification of the Lamb we should be in accord.
Church leadership is not a fun office that gives us a good concept of ourselves. It is work. It is responsibility. It is accountability to the Lord for how we did. It is thankless at times. It is NEEDED!
I personally think when Paul speaks of men that “desire” the office of bishop in 3:1; he means they know up front what they are getting into and still want to fulfill the office. We will take a longer look at this when we get to chapter three.
It is of interest that the church where Timothy is ministering is one that Paul had planted. Indeed, Paul stayed three years in this church seeing to its teaching personally. It went down hill! What can we learn from this?
Don’t condemn a man that plants a church for how it turns out in a few years. The former pastors may be at fault or they may not be at fault. God will sort out all the details when the time comes.
Realize that most Christian organizations and institutions head downhill soon after they are started. Not that they need to, but many do.
Most of the schools that I have attended were in the process of decline while I was attending. Some are way down the road and others are doing very well. One is in the extremes of Evangelicalism and on a cash only basis with suppliers due to their very poor stewardship.
It is also of interest to notice that Paul knew that this would happen. He mentions it in Act 20:29-31, “For I know this, that after my departing shall grievous wolves enter in among you, not sparing the flock. Also of your own selves shall men arise, speaking perverse things, to draw away disciples after them. Therefore watch, and remember, that by the space of three years I ceased not to warn every one night and day with tears.”
Notice that Paul not only warns of trouble entering in, (speaks to being careful in the area of accepting church members) but also mentions men from within the church will arise “speaking perverse things.” He knew the world and he knew human nature.
Notice “after my departing” It is indicated that only after he leaves will they come in and rise up. Is it possible they knew Paul could not be fooled? Is it possible they knew Paul was not one to argue doctrine with? Is it possible they knew Paul was a force to be reckoned with?
Note his last comment – “I ceased not to warn every one night and day with tears.” It would seem that warnings were keeping the false out and from rising up – CONSIDER THAT CAREFULLY!
And so what are you going to tell that person the next time they say doctrine isn’t important? Paul thought it was very important and if we want a strong church we had better pay attention to it as well.
Keeping a church or organization straight is a full time job. It takes constant watching for possible down hill trends and problems. A serious problem can creep in, seemingly overnight if watch is not kept.
I’m sure this is one of the frustrations of pastors as they leave a ministry. They can assume fairly safely that trouble will come with either the new pastor or from within the assembly sooner or later.
A very sound pastor left a medium sized church in Nebraska. Within a year the new pastor and part of the board were at odds with the rest of the board and ultimately the church split with the pastor taking the majority of the people with him to begin another church in the same town of about three thousand people.
A pastor that sees this happen after a number of years of struggle, sweat, commitment, heartache and tears must really hurt!
“When I went” literally means “while departing. This was the last admonition that Paul left with Timothy. AND NOW HE IS REPEATING it in his letter – sounds to me that this is kind of important!
Question: WHAT IS FALSE DOCTRINE? Might I suggest anything that contradicts the clear teaching of Scripture?
Paul mentions the same thought in his second letter to Timothy in 2Ti 2:15-16, “Study to shew thyself approved unto God, a workman that needeth not to be ashamed, rightly dividing the word of truth. But shun profane and vain babblings: for they will increase [or grow] unto more ungodliness.” The Word is the key! Notice the word “more” – the profane and vain babllings are ungodly – if you don’t shun them there will be MORE ungodliness.
Fuente: Mr. D’s Notes on Selected New Testament Books by Stanley Derickson
1:3 {2} As I besought thee to abide still at Ephesus, when I went into Macedonia, that thou mightest charge some that they teach no other doctrine,
(2) This whole epistle consists in admonitions, in which all the duties of a faithful pastor are plainly set out. And the first admonition is this, that no innovation is made either in the apostle’s doctrine itself, or in the manner of teaching it.
Fuente: Geneva Bible Notes
II. TIMOTHY’S MISSION IN EPHESUS 1:3-20
In chapter 1 Paul charged Timothy to remain faithful to the task with which Paul had entrusted him in Ephesus. He began by reminding Timothy what that task was and how he should carry out his chief duty. Then he exhorted Timothy to be faithful. He reminded his young protégé of God’s power to transform lives and warned him of the danger of acting contrary to his own spiritually sensitive conscience.
"The absence of . . . [a thanksgiving] here supports the observation . . . that 1 Timothy is really for the sake of the church as much as, or more than, for Timothy himself; what is taking place in the church gives no cause for thanksgiving." [Note: Fee, p. 39.]
This feature also marks Galatians and Titus.
Fuente: Expository Notes of Dr. Constable (Old and New Testaments)
A. The task Timothy faced 1:3-11
Paul penned these opening words to remind Timothy to correct teachers in the Ephesian church who were majoring on minor matters in their Bible teaching. In so doing he reminded Timothy of his own responsibility as a communicator of God’s truth.
"That the false teachers were . . . probably elders [of the house-churches in Ephesus] is supported by several items from 1 Timothy: their presuming to be ’teachers of the law’ (1Ti 1:7), a responsibility of the elders (1Ti 5:17; cf. 1Ti 3:2); the fact that two are named and excommunicated by Paul (1Ti 1:19-20), not by the church as in 2Th 3:14 and 1Co 5:1-5; and the repeated concern about elders in this letter, both as to their qualifications-with no mention of duties-in 1Ti 3:1-7 and their discipline and apparent replacement in 1Ti 5:19-25." [Note: Ibid., p. 40.]
Fuente: Expository Notes of Dr. Constable (Old and New Testaments)
Paul’s geographical movements, to which he referred here, probably took place between his first Roman imprisonment and the writing of this epistle. We cannot fit them into the chronology of Acts. Acts concludes with Paul’s first Roman imprisonment. The apostle had left Timothy in Ephesus for the general purpose of acting as his special representative. He was under Paul but over the elders of the church in his authority. [Note: Mounce, p. lvii.] As such Timothy occupied a position unique to the apostolic period of church history. The earliest instance of only one elder (bishop, presbyter) being in charge of one local church appears in the middle of the second century. Before then the testimony of the New Testament writers and the early church fathers is that local churches typically had more than one elder. [Note: Cf. Earle, p. 363.]
"Paul repeats in writing what he had outlined orally for Timothy in order that Timothy might have it black on white and that he might present it as written evidence to those who objected to Timothy’s activities . . ." [Note: Richard C. H. Lenski, The Interpretation of St. Paul’s Epistles to the Colossians, to the Thessalonians, to Timothy, to Titus, and to Philemon, p. 498.]
The error of the objects of Paul’s criticism seems to have been more in their emphasis than in their content. "Strange doctrines" (Gr. heterodidaskalein) is a general term that contrasts their novel teaching with what is edifying. It also suggests that a recognized standard of Christian doctrine existed when Paul wrote.
"Some see in this [strange] teaching the influence of Gentile gnostic philosophy with its speculative views of religious beliefs and practices. Such incipient gnostic elements did circulate in Asia during the latter half of the first century and may have been present here. But that the false teaching combatted [sic] in the Pastorals had already become Gnostic in character is doubtful. The Jewish character of the teaching here denounced is obvious." [Note: Hiebert, p. 30. Cf. Titus 1:14.]
In particular, these teachers seem to have been emphasizing extra-biblical stories that had become part of the traditions of Judaism that grew out of the genealogies of the Old Testament (cf. 1Ti 4:7; 2Ti 4:4; Tit 1:14; Tit 3:9). "Myths" and "endless genealogies" evidently describe two aspects of one aberration rather than two separate problems. Certain myths about what Jesus did are an example of this ear-tickling entertainment, though these specific myths were not the subject of these false teachers. One of these was that when Jesus was a child he formed a bird out of clay, blew on it, it came to life and flew away. This myth appears in the Koran, which was written several centuries after this epistle.
"The lists of bare names in Old Testament genealogies were easily expanded into fictitious histories, supposed to illustrate God’s dealings with His people and an example is still preserved to us in the apocalyptic Book of Jubilees. The practice, indeed, was so common that the word ’genealogy’ was often used in the sense of mythical history, and this would seem to be its meaning in the present verse." [Note: E. F. Scott, The Pastoral Epistles, p. 8. See also Jerome D. Quinn, The Letter to Titus: A New Translation with Notes and Commentary and an Introduction to Titus, I and II Timothy, the Pastoral Epistles, p. 245.]
This kind of emphasis, Paul warned, simply generated questions for which there are no real answers rather than contributing to the spiritual maturation of believers (cf. Eph 4:11-16). John Bunyan reportedly said, "Some love the meat; some love to pick the bones." [Note: Harry A. Ironside, Timothy, Titus, and Philemon, p. 18.] Growth is God’s goal for Christians, and it involves the exercise of our "faith" (cf. Rom 1:17).
Examples of similar errors in teaching today would be overemphasis on typology, numerology, or the details of exegesis along with a failure to emphasize the point of the passage being expounded. This failure to emphasize what the writer of Scripture emphasized and to emphasize something else seems to be at the heart of the problem Paul addressed here. [Note: See Fee, p. 7.]
"I am personally of the opinion that one of the causes of weakness in the churches today is the virtual disappearance from our pulpits of sound, steady, Scriptural, expository teaching, and that a widespread return to that desirable practice is essential to the solid building-up of our members in the faith." [Note: Guy H. King, A Leader Led, p. 19.]