Exegetical and Hermeneutical Commentary of 1 Timothy 4:4
For every creature of God [is] good, and nothing to be refused, if it be received with thanksgiving:
4. every creature of God is good ] Creation in all its parts is meant, everything made by God; for this use of the word ‘creature’ from Lat. creatura compare the Communion Office in the Prayer-Book, ‘receiving these Thy creatures of bread and wine.’ All God’s workmanship ‘is good, and was so pronounced by God Himself at the moment of creation.’ Fairbairn.
‘We read in Gen 8:21, “I will not again curse the ground any more for man’s sake;” and the Psalms always speak of this earth and of all created things as if there was no curse at all on them; saying that “all things serve God, and continue as they were at the beginning;” and that “He has given them a law which cannot be broken;” and in the face of those words let who will talk of the earth being cursed, I will not; and you shall not if I can help it.’ Kingsley, Good News of God, p. 35.
‘Oh the yearning when one sees a beautiful thing to make someone else see it too! Surely it is of Heaven! Every creature of God is good if it be sanctified with prayer and thanksgiving! This to me is the master truth of Christianity! I cannot make people see it, but it seems to me that it was to redeem man and the earth that Christ was made man and used the earth.’ Kingsley, Letters, Abr. ed., 1. p. 72.
nothing to be refused ] The form of the Greek favours the making this a separate sentence as R.V., nothing is to be rejected.
Fuente: The Cambridge Bible for Schools and Colleges
For every creature of God is good – Greek, all the creatures, or all that God has created – pan ktisma: that is, as he made it; compare Gen 1:10, Gen 1:12, Gen 1:18, Gen 1:31. It does not mean that every moral agent remains good as long as he is a creature of God, but moral agents, human beings and angels, were good as they were made at first; Gen 1:31. Nor does it mean that all that God has made is good for every object to which it can be applied. It is good in its place; good for the purpose for which he made it. But it should not be inferred that a thing which is poisonous in its nature is good for food, because it is a creation of God. It is good only in its place, and for the ends for which he intended it. Nor should it be inferred that what God has made is necessarily good after it has been perverted by man. As God made it originally, it might have been used without injury.
Apples and peaches were made good, and are still useful and proper as articles of food; rye and Indian-corn are good, and are admirably adapted to the support of man and beast, but it does not follow that all that man can make of them is necessarily good. He extracts from them a poisonous liquid, and then says that every creature of God is good, and nothing to be refused. But is this a fair use of this passage of Scripture? True, they are good – they are to be received with gratitude as he made them, and as applied to the uses for which he designed them; but why apply this passage to prove that a deleterious beverage, which man has extracted from what God has made, is good also, and good for all the purposes to which it can be applied? As God made these things, they are good. As man perverts them, it is no longer proper to call them the creation of God, and they may be injurious in the highest degree. This passage, therefore, should not be adduced to vindicate the use of intoxicating drinks. As employed by the apostle, it had no such reference, nor does it contain any principle which can properly receive any such application.
And nothing to be refused – Nothing that God has made, for the purposes for which he designed it. The necessity of the case the exigency of the passage – requires this interpretation. It cannot mean that we are not to refuse poison if offered in our food, or that we are never to refuse food that is to us injurious or offensive; nor can it anymore mean that we are to receive all that may be offered to us as a beverage. The sense is, that as God made it, and for the purposes for which he designed it, it is not to be held to be evil; or, which is the same thing, it is not to be prohibited as if there were merit in abstaining from it. It is not to be regarded as a religious duty to abstain from food which God has appointed for the support of man.
If it be received with thanksgiving – see the 1Co 10:31 note; Eph 5:20 note; Phi 4:6 note.
Fuente: Albert Barnes’ Notes on the Bible
1Ti 4:4-5
For every creature of God is good.
Our charter of freedom
In meeting the heresy which he foresaw, the apostle asserted one of the noblest principles in our heritage as Christians: Every creature of God is good, and nothing to be refused if it be received with thanksgiving; for it is sanctified by the Word of God and prayer. In other words, a common meal may become a sacrament to us if it be rightly received: and to a true follower of Christ no relationship will prove more saintly than that between husband and wife; nothing more pure than fatherly and motherly love; nothing more promotive of spiritual life than the duties and responsibilities of sons and daughters to their parents. All things and all relationships may become holy to us. This was the teaching of Paul, and of his Lord and ours. You see, then, that Paul wisely meets the error by stating the truth, which must conquer it.
I. The explanation of this principle. The apostle maintained a truth, which being received will always save the Church from the old error, in whatever form it comes. He declared that everything was made by God, and that everything God made was good, and only became bad when used in a wrong spirit. Our heavenly Father would have us take His gifts as constituting a holy eucharist, bringing blessing to us and evoking praise and thanks to Him. A truth which condemns alike the ascetic in the Romish Church, and the Plymouth Brother, who thinks that business is worldly, social joys pernicious, and newspapers fatal to ones spiritual welfare. Be brave and be trustful in the use of all that God has given you. It was characteristic of the religious faith of the Hebrews that it maintained the doctrine, that all things were of God; that there was one Creator, all-wise and all-good.
II. The application of this principle.
1. In its application to the natural world it is doubtless generally believed amongst us. Flowers and fruits, and golden corn and waving trees, all originated in Gods thought, and are the products of His laws. But do not these words of Paul warrant us in going further? Is not the ever-living, ever-present God, who makes the flowers and rules the world, the ordainer of our lot, the appointer of our circumstances? And if this be so, does not belief in it give sacredness to earthly duties, and dignity to those which are most trivial?
2. Make application of this truth to the occupation of life. There are times when we feel as if we could do better work than falls to our share. In the depressed condition of commerce especially, well-educated men are forced to take up employment which leaves their best and most cultivated powers unused. But we believe that what God has ordained, as well as what He has created, will prove to be good and best in the long run that drudgery is as Divine as dignity; and that training for the hereafter is more valuable than triumph here. Everything depends on how you receive and do your work. You may go to your office as a grumbling slave, or you may go as Christs happy servant. No occupation (unless there be sin in it) is to be spurned, no creature of God is to be rejected, but we are to say with the apostle, I know, and am persuaded of the Lord Jesus, that there is nothing unclean of itself. Evil is not in the thing, but in the spirit which wrongly receives, or uses, the thing.
III. The testing power of this principle. Nothing is to be rejected if it be received with thanksgiving. But that implies that you ought to reject what you cannot receive with thanksgiving to God. Prayer and thanksgiving to God may be to you what the legendary Eastern king found his formula to be, for when a cup of poison was put within his reach, and he took it into his hand, he named the name of God and made the sign of the cross over it, according to his constant custom, and the poisoned chalice was suddenly shattered in his hand and all the poison was spilled. Name Gods name over everything doubtful, and no poison of sin shall hurt you.
IV. The twofold reason given for this principle. In the fifth verse the apostle explains more fully how common things are made sacred. I say advisedly made sacred, for the word he uses means just that. It does not signify that the things are declared to be holy, but that they are actually made holy by the Word of God and prayer.
1. Now the Word of God is not the utterance of His name over food as a sort of talisman. The allusion is to the Word, or command of God, which expressly gave permission and authority to man to use whatever was suitable for him in the vegetable and in the animal kingdom–Every moving thing that liveth shall be meat for you; even as the green herb have I given you all things. That Divine ordinance makes all things sacred for the use of man; but mans loyal and grateful acceptance of it must be combined with the ordinance, in order to make his use of things a right and not a usurpation. Hence the apostle says, everything is made sacred by the Word of God.
2. And prayer, and these which God has joined let no man put asunder. In the former phrase you see the top of the ladder which reaches heaven, in the latter you see the foot of it resting on the earth–and to a prayerless man it is only a vision of glory beyond his reach. Gods Word to you bestows the gift, but your word to God must appropriate the gift, or else it is not sacred and Divine. (A. Rowland, LL. B.)
Water the good creature of God
A minister who had lately occupied the pulpit of a brother was dining with the family of the absent minister, when the conversation turned upon the subject of teetotalism. The lady who presided at the table said, Ah! I do not like your doctrines; you go too far in refusing the good creatures of God. No notice was taken of the remark for some time; the minister kept on with his dinner, but at last he said, Pray, madam, can you tell me who made this? pointing to a glass of water that stood before him. The lady replied, Why, God, I suppose. Then, said the minister, Madam, I think you do us an injustice when you accuse us of refusing the good creatures of God. Silence again reigned. By and by he said, Madam, can you tell me who made yours? pointing to the glass of beer that the lady preferred. I cant exactly say I can. Then, madam, replied he, allow me to say there is some apparent inconsistency in your first remark. You prefer taking a thing man has made to that which God has bountifully provided, and yet you accuse me of rejecting Gods creatures, because I prefer water to beer. Madam, I leave the matter to your more serious consideration. The lady has since seen her error, and joined the ranks of the total abstainers. If it be received with thanksgiving.
Grace at meals
I. What the scriptures teach.
1. That it consecrates food to a holy use (1Sa 9:13; Mat 15:36; 1Co 10:30-31; 1Ti 4:4-5).
2. That danger or the need of utmost haste should not interrupt it. Act 27:35.
3. That it is a religious duty (Rom 14:6; Col 3:17; 1Ti 4:3).
4. That we do not live by bread alone (Mat 4:4).
II. Reasons for saying grace.
1. Because we have health.
2. Because we have appetite.
3. Because we have food.
4. Because we depend upon Gods bounty for the providential supply of daily food (Psa 145:15-16).
5. Because analogy confirms its practice.
When we receive presents from friends, it is a pleasure to express our thankfulness; how much more to acknowledge our gratitude to God for food to nourish us and for temporal comforts.
III. What its omission shows.
1. That we are unrenewed in heart.
2. Or, that we are thoughtless and ungrateful.
How base a thing is ingratitude. How inconsistent in a professor of religion.
IV. benefits.
1. It sets a good example and lets others know that we are the Lords.
2. It promotes gratitude.
3. It promotes morality and religion in the family. (L. O. Thompson.)
.
A lesson in thanksgiving
King Alphonso X., surnamed The Wise, succeeded to the throne of Leon and Castile in 1252. On learning that his pages neglected to ask the Divine blessing before partaking of their daily meals, he was deeply grieved and sought diligently to point out to them the evil of this omission. At length he succeeded in finding a plan. He invited the pages of his court to dine with him. A bountiful repast was spread, and when they were all assembled around the table the king gave a signal that all was in readiness for them to begin. They all enjoyed the rich feast, but not one remembered to ask Gods blessing on his food. Just then, unexpectedly to the thoughtless guests, entered a poor, ragged beggar, who unceremoniously seated himself at the royal table, and ate and drank undisturbed, to his hearts content. Surprise and astonishment were depicted on every countenance. The pages looked first at the king, then gazed upon the audacious intruder, expecting momentarily that his majesty would give orders to have him removed from the table. Alphonso, however, kept silence; while the beggar unabased by the presence of royalty ate all he desired. When his hunger and thirst were appeased he rose, and without a word of thanks departed from the palace. What a despicable, mean fellow! cried the boys. Calmly the good king rose, and with much earnestness said: Boys, bolder and more audacious than this beggar have you all been. Every day you sit down to a table supplied by the bounty of your heavenly Father, yet you ask not His blessing, and leave it without expressing to Him your gratitude. Yes, each and all of you should be heartily ashamed of your conduct, which was far worse than was the poor beggars.
Fuente: Biblical Illustrator Edited by Joseph S. Exell
Verse 4. For every creature of God is good] That is: Every creature which God has made for man’s nourishment is good for that purpose, and to be thankfully received whenever necessary for the support of human life; and nothing of that sort is at any time to be refused, , rejected or despised. We find a saying very similar to this in Lucian’s Timon: . The gifts which are from Jove ought not to be DESPISED. This appears to have been a proverbial saying among the heathens.
Fuente: Adam Clarke’s Commentary and Critical Notes on the Bible
For every creature of God is good; not only good in itself, as all was which God made, Gen 1:1-31, but lawful to be used, pure, Tit 1:15, there is no uncleanness in it.
And nothing to be refused; and therefore nothing upon that account is to be refused, as unclean and defiling.
If it be received with thanksgiving; only it must be made use of in such a manner as in and by the use of it we may glorify, and express our thankfulness to, God.
Fuente: English Annotations on the Holy Bible by Matthew Poole
4, 5. Translate as Greek,“Because” (expressing a reason resting on an objectivefact; or, as here, a Scripture quotation)”For” (areason resting on something subjective in the writer’smind).
every creature . . . good(Gen 1:31; Rom 14:14;Rom 14:20). A refutation byanticipation of the Gnostic opposition to creation: the seeds ofwhich were now lurking latently in the Church. Judaism (Act 10:11-16;1Co 10:25; 1Co 10:26)was the starting-point of the error as to meats: Oriental Gnosisadded new elements. The old Gnostic heresy is now almost extinct; butits remains in the celibacy of Rome’s priesthood, and in its fastsfrom animal meats, enjoined under the penalty of mortal sin, remain.
if . . . withthanksgivingMeats, though pure in themselves, become impure bybeing received with an unthankful mind (Rom 14:6;Tit 1:15).
Fuente: Jamieson, Fausset and Brown’s Commentary Critical and Explanatory on the Whole Bible
For every creature of God is good,…. For food; and should be taken and used for that purpose, at all times, without distinction; even every creature which is made for food, and which is easy to be discerned by men:
and nothing to be refused; or rejected as common and unclean, or to be abstained from at certain times:
if it be received with thanksgiving: if not, persons are very ungrateful, and very unworthy of such favours; and it would be just in God to withhold them from them; and this they may expect at his hands, who reject them with contempt, or receive them with unthankfulness, or abstain front them in a religious way he never enjoined.
Fuente: John Gill’s Exposition of the Entire Bible
Creature (). Late word from , result of creating. See Gen 1:31; Mark 7:15; Rom 14:14 for the idea stated.
To be rejected (). Old verbal adjective in passive sense from , to throw away, here only in N.T.
If it be received (). “Being received.” Present passive participle of , in conditional sense, “with thanksgiving.”
Fuente: Robertson’s Word Pictures in the New Testament
Creature [] . Not in Paul. See Jas 1:18; Rev 5:13; Rev 8:9. A created thing. For ktisiv creation or creature, frequent in Paul, see on Rom 8:19; 2Co 5:17; Col 1:15. Ktisma in LXX, Wisd. 9 2; 13 5; 14 11; Sir. 38 34; 3 Macc. 5 11.
Refused [] . Lit. thrown away. N. T. o. In ecclesiastical writings, excommunicated. On the whole verse, comp. Act 10:15; Rom 11:15; 1Co 10:25, 26, 30, 31.
Fuente: Vincent’s Word Studies in the New Testament
1) “For every creature of God is good” (hoti pan ktisma theou kalon) “Because every creature (creation) of God is (exists) as good;” This is a reiteration of the previous statement, echoed by our Lord, Mar 7:15; Act 10:15, and by Paul, Rom 14:14; Tit 1:15.
2) “And nothing to be refused” (kai ouden apobleton) “And not one thing (is) to be put away, or refused.” Neither regulations of the Law, concerning eating and drinking, or commands to follow them, were to be accepted, (but refused) — nor orders to forego marriage as done by the Essenes. Marriage, ordained of God, was not to be put aside, Heb 13:4.
3) “If it be received with thanksgiving;” (meta eucharistias lambanomenon) “When or if with gratitude or thanksgiving it is being received.” 1Co 10:30-31. Both New Testament Christian liberties, in eating and marriage, are to be exercised with thanksgiving by those who comprehend the truth, Joh 9:32; Joh 9:26; Gal 5:13; Col 2:14-17.
Fuente: Garner-Howes Baptist Commentary
4 For every creature of God is good The use of food must be judged, partly from its substance, and partly from the person of him who eats it. The Apostle therefore avails himself of both arguments. So far as relates to food, he asserts that it is pure, because God has created it; and that the use of it is consecrated to us by faith and prayer. The goodness of the creatures, which he mentions, has relation to men, and that not with regard to the body or to health, but to the consciences. I make this remark, that none may enter into curious speculations unconnected with the scope of the passage; for, in a single word, Paul means, that those things which come from the hand of God, and are intended for our use, are not unclean or polluted before God, but that we may freely eat them with regard to conscience.
If it be objected, that many animals were formerly pronounced to be unclean under the Law, and that fruit, which was yielded by the tree of knowledge of good and evil, was destructive to man; the answer is, that creatures are not called pure, merely because they are the works of God, but because, through his kindness, they have been given to us; for we must always look at the appointment of God, both what he commands and what he forbids.
Fuente: Calvin’s Complete Commentary
(4) For every creature of God is good.To teach that anything created was unclean would be an insult to the Creator. The very fact of its being His creation is enough. If made by God, then it must be good.
And nothing to be refused, if it be received with thanksgiving.Every kind of food and drink may become hateful in the eyes of the all-pure God if misused, if partaken of without any sense of gratitude to the Divine giver. But nothing which can be made use of as food ought to be regarded as unclean or as polluted; every kind of food is intended for man, the only condition being that whatever is partaken of should be gratefully received by him as a gift.
Fuente: Ellicott’s Commentary for English Readers (Old and New Testaments)
4. For Assigning the ground reason for so receiving; namely, the cheerful Christian maxim, that under the divine benevolence we are born to enjoy. The creation is a storehouse of supplies, and man’s appetites are the avenues through which they are to be received. Atheism scowls at the whole system of things, sinks into pessimism, and says, with Voltaire, “I wish I had never been born.” Buddhism, the religion of despair, that knows no God but law, looks and pants for release from existence in annihilation. Christianity rejoices in the perpetual presence of the All-Father, as being, indeed, often tried and chastened, yet chastened by parental love, the same love which gives us all things richly to enjoy, and promises eternal enjoyment to our faith.
Every creature Every created thing.
Is good Is not the mere effect of physical laws, but the product of a good Creator, who pronounced them good at the creation, and is good for its purpose, if we can find what its true purpose is.
Nothing to be refused From a wise and temperate use. Yet our apostle, in perfect consistency, was ready for a total abstinence from meats through his whole life if it were necessary to save his brother.
Asceticism or abstinence is to be condemned: 1. When it is based on such idea of the sinfulness of matter as condemns the incarnation. 2. When it is used by us as a penance, or atonement, for our own sin, as if we might thereby be justified or pardoned. 3. When it is assumed to be a meritorious act, winning for us the divine approbation, as if God were gratified by our suffering. 4. When it tends to diffuse a gloomy and superstitious view of God and religion among men, instead of a benevolent, cheerful, practical, good-doing piety. Abstinence is commendable, on the other hand: 1. When it conduces to our health, serenity, or cheerfulness. 2. When it aids us in obtaining a mastery of our appetites and passions. 3. When by our example we induce others to abstain from those indulgences and intemperances by which their bodies, souls, estates, and families are brought to ruin.
Dr. Wordsworth, and Mr. Washburn, in Lange’s “Bibel-Werk,” infer from St. Paul’s words a condemnation of a pledge of total abstinence from intoxicants. But surely both Timothy’s practice and Paul’s direction presuppose the duty of total abstinence in all cases where drinking is not required by medical necessity. It required an inspired adviser to induce Timothy to drink wine; and by parity, it ought to require a temperate medical adviser to induce any other man to drink; and no medical adviser ought to prescribe it where any other medicine will suffice as well.
With thanksgiving Which in the right temper will regulate our enjoyments to the due object and in their due degree.
Fuente: Whedon’s Commentary on the Old and New Testaments
‘For every creature of God is good, and nothing is to be rejected, if it be received with thanksgiving,’
For the truth is that every creature of God is good. When God created the world He had declared it ‘very good’ (Gen 1:31). So as long as it is received with thanksgiving as a gift from God, therefore, no creature of God is to be rejected. This certainly does demonstrate that the distinction between flesh as bad and spirit as good is not valid (for all are declared good), but the suggestion that ‘every creature is good’ fits better the idea that distinctions are being made between different types of animals, and that fits better the concept of Levitical distinctions (Leviticua 11). This serves to confirm that what is in mind here is a Jewish kind of heresy.
Fuente: Commentary Series on the Bible by Peter Pett
1Ti 4:4 . ] This verse gives the ground of the preceding thought, which Hofmann denies. Bengel wrongly takes it to be in apposition to .
, which does not occur elsewhere in Paul, means here of course the creatures of God destined for nourishment. On the principle here expressed, comp. Rom 14:14 : , and Rom 4:20 : ; Act 10:15 : , .
] comp. Iliad , iii. 65: ; and the scholiast’s remark: , , . Here the thought stands in contrast with the idea of defilement caused by partaking of certain meats. Going back to the in 1Ti 4:3 , the apostle defines it more precisely, though not by mentioning an accessory point merely: (Eph 5:20 : ), because God wishes His gifts to be enjoyed with thankful heart, and the purpose of creation is therefore fulfilled only by him who partakes with thankfulness.
Fuente: Heinrich August Wilhelm Meyer’s New Testament Commentary
4 For every creature of God is good, and nothing to be refused, if it be received with thanksgiving:
Ver. 4. If it be received with thanksgiving ] While we taste the sweetness of the Creator in the creature, and are stirred up thereby to praise his name. Doves at every grain they pick look upwards, as giving thanks. The elephant is said to turn up towards heaven the first sprig or branch that he feedeth on, &c. Birds chirp and sing to their Maker.
Fuente: John Trapp’s Complete Commentary (Old and New Testaments)
4, 5 .] Reason for the above assertion . Because ( is more the objective, , which follows, the subjective causal particle: introduces that which rests on a patent fact, as here on a Scripture quotation, , that which is in the writer’s mind, and forms part of his own reasoning) every thing which God has made is good (in allusion to ref. Gen. See also Rom 14:14 ; Rom 14:20 ); and nothing (which God has made) is to be rejected (Wetst. cites Hom. Il. . 65, on which the Schol., , , , ) if received with thanksgiving (“properly, even without this condition, all things are pure: but he did not rise to this abstraction, because he was regarding meats not per se , but in their use , and this latter may become impure by an ungodly frame of mind.” De Wette): for (see on and above) it (this subject is gathered out of the preceding clause by implication, and = ‘every which is partaken of with thanksgiving’) is hallowed (more than ‘ declared pure ,’ or even than ‘ rendered pure :’ the latter it does not want, the former falls far short of the work of the assigned agents. The emphasis is on , and a new particular is introduced by it not purity merely, but holiness , fitness for the godly usage of Christian men. To this, which is more than mere making or declaring pure, it is set apart by the ; so that the minus is proved by the majus. There is certainly a slight trace of reference to the higher consecration in the Lord’s Supper. The same word is common to both. Ordinary meals are set apart for ordinary Christian use by asking a blessing on them: that meal , for move than ordinary use, by asking on it its own peculiar blessing) by means of the word of God and intercession ( what ‘word of God?’ how to be understood? treating the plamer word first, the is evidently intercession (see on ch. 1Ti 2:1 ) on behalf of the partaken of that it may be ‘sanctified to our use.’ This, bound on as is to by the non-repetition of the preposition, may serve to guide us to its meaning. And first, negatively. It cannot mean any thing which does not form part of the : such as God’s word in the Scripture just cited (Mack), or in any other place (Grot., al.): or God’s word in the foundation-truths of Christianity. Then, positively: it must mean in some sense the , or something in it. But not, as Wahl and Leo, the ‘word addressed to God,’ ‘oratio ad Deum facta,’ which would be an unprecedented meaning for : the only way open for us is, that the itself, or some part of it, is in some sense the word of God . This may be (1) by its consisting in whole or in part of Scripture words, or (2) by the effusion of a Christian man, speaking in the power of God’s Spirit, being known as . This latter is perhaps justified by the reff.: but still it seems to me hardly probable, and I should prefer the former. (So Ellic. also.) It would generally be the case, that any form of Christian thanksgiving before meat would contain words of Scripture, or at all events thoughts in exact accordance with them: and such utterance of God’s revealed will, bringing as it would the assembled family and their meal into harmony with Him, might well be said the on the table for their use. Many of the Commentators quote from the Constt. Ap. vii. 49, p. 1057, Migne, the following grace before meat, used in the primitive times: , , , , , . Here almost every clause is taken from some expression of Scripture).
Fuente: Henry Alford’s Greek Testament
1Ti 4:4 . : This is the proof of the preceding statement, consisting of ( a ) a plain reference to Gen 1:31 , ( b ) a no less clear echo of our Lord’s teaching, Mar 7:15 (Act 10:15 ), also re-echoed in Rom 14:14 , Tit 1:15 .
: This verb is used of taking food into one’s hand before eating (in the accounts of the feeding of the multitudes, Mat 14:19 = Mar 6:41 ; Mat 15:36 = Mar 8:6 , also Luk 24:30 ; Luk 24:43 ) as well as of eating and drinking. See reff. Perhaps it is not fanciful to note its special use in connexion with the Eucharist (1Co 11:23 ; Mat 26:26 (bis) 27; Mar 14:22-23 ; Luk 22:19 ).
: The statement of Gen 1:31 which is summed up in Every creature of God is good might be met by the objection that nevertheless certain kinds of food were, in point of fact, to be rejected by the express command of the Mosaic Law. St. Paul replies that thanksgiving disannuls the Law in each particular case. Nothing over which thanksgiving can be pronounced is any longer included in the category of things tabooed. It is evident, from the repetition of the condition, ., that St. Paul regarded that as the only restriction on Christian liberty in the use of God’s creatures. Is it a thing of such a kind that I can, without incongruity, give thanks for it?
Field regards here as a proverbial adaptation of Homer’s saying ( Il . . 65): .
For see reff. is found in Rom. (7), 2 Cor. (1), Gal. (1), Col. (2); but in these places creation is the best or a possible rendering. means unambiguously thing created .
Fuente: The Expositors Greek Testament by Robertson
creature. Greek. ktisma. Here; Jam 1:18. Rev 6:13; Rev 8:9.
nothing. Greek. oudeis.
to be refused. Greek. apobletos. Only here. Compare Heb 10:35.
if it be = – being.
Fuente: Companion Bible Notes, Appendices and Graphics
4, 5.] Reason for the above assertion. Because ( is more the objective,-, which follows, the subjective causal particle: introduces that which rests on a patent fact, as here on a Scripture quotation,-, that which is in the writers mind, and forms part of his own reasoning) every thing which God has made is good (in allusion to ref. Gen. See also Rom 14:14; Rom 14:20); and nothing (which God has made) is to be rejected (Wetst. cites Hom. Il. . 65, -on which the Schol.,-, , , ) if received with thanksgiving (properly, even without this condition, all things are pure: but he did not rise to this abstraction, because he was regarding meats not per se, but in their use, and this latter may become impure by an ungodly frame of mind. De Wette): for (see on and above) it (this subject is gathered out of the preceding clause by implication, and = every which is partaken of with thanksgiving) is hallowed (more than declared pure, or even than rendered pure: the latter it does not want, the former falls far short of the work of the assigned agents. The emphasis is on , and a new particular is introduced by it-not purity merely, but holiness,-fitness for the godly usage of Christian men. To this, which is more than mere making or declaring pure, it is set apart by the ; so that the minus is proved by the majus. There is certainly a slight trace of reference to the higher consecration in the Lords Supper. The same word is common to both. Ordinary meals are set apart for ordinary Christian use by asking a blessing on them: that meal, for move than ordinary use, by asking on it its own peculiar blessing) by means of the word of God and intercession (what word of God? how to be understood? treating the plamer word first, the is evidently intercession (see on ch. 1Ti 2:1) on behalf of the partaken of-that it may be sanctified to our use. This, bound on as is to by the non-repetition of the preposition, may serve to guide us to its meaning. And first, negatively. It cannot mean any thing which does not form part of the : such as Gods word in the Scripture just cited (Mack), or in any other place (Grot., al.): or Gods word in the foundation-truths of Christianity. Then, positively: it must mean in some sense the , or something in it. But not, as Wahl and Leo, the word addressed to God, oratio ad Deum facta, which would be an unprecedented meaning for : the only way open for us is, that the itself, or some part of it, is in some sense the word of God. This may be (1) by its consisting in whole or in part of Scripture words, or (2) by the effusion of a Christian man, speaking in the power of Gods Spirit, being known as . This latter is perhaps justified by the reff.: but still it seems to me hardly probable, and I should prefer the former. (So Ellic. also.) It would generally be the case, that any form of Christian thanksgiving before meat would contain words of Scripture, or at all events thoughts in exact accordance with them: and such utterance of Gods revealed will, bringing as it would the assembled family and their meal into harmony with Him, might well be said the on the table for their use. Many of the Commentators quote from the Constt. Ap. vii. 49, p. 1057, Migne, the following grace before meat, used in the primitive times: , , , , , . Here almost every clause is taken from some expression of Scripture).
Fuente: The Greek Testament
1Ti 4:4. , good) Genesis 1-, and) The particle connects the two propositions, of which the second has this subject, every thing which is received with thanksgiving; the predicate, is not to be refused.- , with thanksgiving) This includes a good conscience. Rom 14:6, He that eateth, eateth to the Lord, for he giveth God thanks.
Fuente: Gnomon of the New Testament
1Ti 4:4
For every creature of God is good,-This refers to all the appointments and gifts of God-marriage and meats. God created all things on earth for man (Gen 1:28-29), and everything properly used for the purpose for which he created them will bring good to man.
and nothing is to be rejected,-It is not the part of wisdom to reject or refuse what God does not reject.
if it be received with thanksgiving:-Gods appointments and gifts are to be received with thanksgiving and used as God directs that they should be used.
Fuente: Old and New Testaments Restoration Commentary
every: Gen 1:31, Deu 32:4
and: Act 11:7-9, Act 15:20, Act 15:21, Act 15:29, Act 21:25, Rom 14:14, Rom 14:20, 1Co 10:23, 1Co 10:25
Reciprocal: Gen 2:16 – thou mayest freely eat Gen 9:3 – even Gen 9:4 – the life Lev 3:17 – blood Lev 7:13 – leavened Lev 7:26 – ye shall eat Lev 11:2 – General Deu 8:10 – thou hast Deu 12:16 – General 1Sa 9:13 – he doth bless Ecc 8:15 – Then I Mat 14:19 – he blessed Mat 15:11 – that which goeth Mat 15:36 – and gave thanks Mar 6:41 – blessed Luk 9:16 – he blessed Luk 11:41 – all Luk 22:17 – gave Joh 6:11 – when Act 27:35 – and gave 1Co 10:30 – for which 1Ti 1:18 – according 1Ti 4:3 – with 1Ti 5:23 – General Tit 1:15 – the pure
Fuente: The Treasury of Scripture Knowledge
1Ti 4:4. Paul is not posing as an authority on diet, or presuming to decide on what might be liked or disliked as an article of food. He means there is nothing that is wrong from a religious standpoint. There were certain things forbidden by the law of Moses, but that system as a, religious course of conduct, was taken away by the Gospel and therefore no one has the right to impose restrictions on the people of God concerning what they may eat. (See Col 2:16.) The privilege of eating the various articles of food is on condition that they be received with thanksgiving. It is an obligation upon all disciples to give thanks for their food (Eph 5:20; Col 3:17). The writer has been in homes of disciples where the practice of offering thanks for food was evidently not done. This was indicated by the embarrassment manifested by the host in requesting the guest to “please ask a blessing.”
Fuente: Combined Bible Commentary
1Ti 4:4. Good. The higher word (, excellent, not ) is used in the Greek, as in the LXX. of Genesis 1, and with a manifest reference to that history. The repetition of the clause (with thanksgiving ) is striking, as showing how the apostles mind recognised that it was the spiritual state of the receiver, not the physical characteristics of the thing received, that determined the lawfulness of the reception.
Fuente: A Popular Commentary on the New Testament
Here our apostle assigns a reason why Christians are not forbidden under the gospel to abstain from particular meats, namely, because the distinction of meats (clean and unclean) is taken away, and every creature of God is good in itself, and clean to us, and nothing to be refused, as unlawful or unclean, if it be received thankfully from God’s hand: For it is sanctified by the word, that is, by the gospel; it is made clean to us, that having taken off the difference of meats, and to the pure made all things pure.
Note here, 1. The quality of all God’s creatures as they come from him, and are given to us, Every creature of God is good.
Note, 2. The use of God’s creatures consisting in their lawfulness unto us, and our liberty unto them, Nothing is to be refused; so that there is no sin in the use of them, nor no religion in the forbearing of them, or abstaining from them; this liberty was given us by God, and restored by Christ, therefore we must not suffer our Christian liberty to be impeached by Judiasm.
Note, 3. A condition necessary on our part, lest the creatures, otherwise good and lawful, should become unto us evil and hurtful, and that is, thankfulness: If it be received with thanksgiving, with the thankfulness of the heart expressed by the language of the lips.
Note, 4. The way and means by which the creatures become clean and sanctified to us; namely, by the word of God and prayer.
1. By the word of God; here observe, a threefold word of God, by which the creature is sanctified, namely, the word of donation, the word of benediction, and the word of promise. By the first he bestows his creatures upon us, by the second he blesses the creatures to us, and by the third he confirms his blessing in Christ; in whom, and by whom, we have a covenant right unto, and a sanctified use of, all the mercies which we do enjoy.
2. By prayer; namely, as it obtains from God, first, a right improvement, and secondly, a comfortable enjoyment of all that we do receive; or thus, the creature is sanctified to us by prayer in the procurement of it, in the fruition of it, in the review and recognition of it, and God’s mercy in it, with thanksgiving and praise, loving it after God, and for God, and in subordination to God. Thus then is every creature of God good, and nothing to be refused, being sanctified by the word of God and prayer.
Fuente: Expository Notes with Practical Observations on the New Testament
1Ti 4:4 For every creature of God [is] good, and nothing to be refused, if it be received with thanksgiving:
Is every creature of God really good for food? “every creature of God is good” – EVERY – !
Nothing is to be refuse IF “it is received with thanksgiving.” This indicates our food should be accepted after thanks has been given.
Another rabbit trail. Do we say a prayer over those snacks that we put together for guests, you know, those desserts, coffees, cheeses etc.? Do we bless those things we know we shouldn’t be eating? Maybe we ought to consider this in the quiet of the refrigerator light some late night.
One more point then about “every creature” – A missionary in chapel was mentioning that they eat roast tarantulas with their Indian people in Venezuela. Does every creature mean every creature? YES. Even the horsemeat that is eaten in Europe today.
Our American tastes may not measure up to the spiders and the snakes that are eaten in the world. We might attribute this to our overabundant economy!
Fuente: Mr. D’s Notes on Selected New Testament Books by Stanley Derickson
4:4 {7} For every creature of God [is] good, and nothing to be refused, if it be received with thanksgiving:
(7) He sets an apostolic rule for taking away the difference of meats, against that false doctrine.
Fuente: Geneva Bible Notes
Everything God created is good (1Ti 4:4; Gen 1:31). We can abuse God’s good gifts (e.g., fornication and gluttony), but marriage and food are essentially good, and we should enjoy them with thankfulness to God for giving them. Thankfulness is the only condition connected to their use. This verse is not saying that everything is good for us (poisons, pornography, etc.), only that all God has created is essentially good (Gen 1:31).
When we thank God for His good gifts we remember that they come from Him and consequently we treat them as set apart for our benefit. We recognize that He has sanctified (set apart) them when we pray (give thanks) for them and reflect on the Scriptures that tell us they come from our heavenly Father for our benefit. [Note: Cf. Lea, p. 132.] Paul’s idea was not that through a ritual of Scripture recitation and praying marriages and food become acceptable for God’s people. We learn that God has set apart what He has created for our enjoyment through the Word of God, and we acknowledge that through prayer. [Note: See Michael Haykin, "’Sanctified by the Word of God and Prayer,’" Banner of Truth 275-76 (August-September 1986):55-58.] The Greek word translated "prayer" in 1Ti 4:5 (enteuxis) means "petition" (cf. 1Ti 2:1), but in this context it serves as a generic term for prayer and clearly refers to thanksgiving (cf. 1Ti 4:4). [Note: See Towner, The Letters . . ., p. 299.] Alternatively with his reference to the Word of God Paul may have been thinking of biblical expressions that the early Christians, and the Jews, used when they gave thanks for their food. [Note: Idem, 1-2 Timothy . . ., p. 104.]
"Paul’s words certainly sanction the Christian practice of grace before meals. To eat without giving thanks is base ingratitude. But the scope of the passage is much wider than that." [Note: Hiebert, First Timothy, p. 80. Cf. 1 Samuel 9:13; Matthew 14:19; Acts 27:35.]
To give thanks for a meal or our marriage and then complain about it is inconsistent.
Advocates of asceticism are still with us today, as Paul wrote they would be. Roman Catholicism, Seventh-Day Adventism, and some cults, to name a few advocates, have promoted this false teaching.