Exegetical and Hermeneutical Commentary of 1 Timothy 1:20
Of whom is Hymenaeus and Alexander; whom I have delivered unto Satan, that they may learn not to blaspheme.
20. Hymeneus and Alexander ] The name Hymenus occurs again in 2Ti 2:17, and being uncommon and used in both places of an heretical person in the same locality may fairly be taken as referring to the same person; the heresy condemned is practically the same; ‘the profane babblings’ there representing the ‘vain talking’ of 1Ti 1:6 here, which is plainly echoed in 1Ti 1:19 the test of orthodoxy being ‘faith and a good conscience.’
The name Alexander also occurs again in 2Ti 4:14; but being common, and having a distinguishing addition there ‘the coppersmith,’ and referring rather to a personal enemy of St Paul than to a heretic, may more probably refer to a different person, possibly the Alexander of Act 19:33. Fairbairn adds reasonably ‘in the 2nd Epistle Philetus not Alexander is associated with Hymenus, and Alexander is mentioned alone and apparently as a worker of evil, not at Ephesus but in Rome, though it is possible enough he may have belonged to the region of Asia.’
whom I have delivered unto Satan, that they may learn ] The exact force of the tense is whom I delivered; of the mood, that they might be disciplined. In the N. T. the later usage holds of the subjunctive following the past tense instead of the optative and our idiom requires ‘might.’ A definite time and act of ‘delivering’ is thus seen to be referred to, explained by some ancient and modern commentators as being excommunication; e.g. Theod. Mops., Latin Version, “ecclesiae alienationem ‘traditionem Satanae’ vocans”; by others as the judicial infliction of bodily sickness or calamity, such as the blindness inflicted upon Elymas by St Paul, Act 13:11; by Ellicott and Fairbairn, as both combined. “The term” says Wordsworth (on 1Co 5:5, where the phrase is the same) “appears to have had its origin from consideration of the fact that physical evil is due to the agency of the Evil Spirit; cf. Job 2:6; Luk 13:16: Mat 8:30-32 (add 2Co 12:7 ‘a messenger of Satan’). But St Paul states the aim and end of the sentence of excommunication against the incestuous Corinthian to be that by the punishment of the flesh, and consequent mortification of the fleshly lusts and appetites, ‘his spirit may be saved in the day of the Lord’; so in the case of Hymenus and Alexander; and generally his spiritual weapons are given him for edification and not for destruction. Cf. 2Co 10:8.”
may learn ] might be disciplined; the verb, meaning properly ‘to train,’ ‘educate,’ as in Act 7:22, is generally used of ‘training by chastisement,’ ‘correcting’; cf. 1Co 11:32, ‘when we are judged we are chastened of the Lord,’ where the reference is to the sickness and death sent as chastisement for the desecration of the Lord’s Table. Compare the old English use of ‘teach’ in Jdg 8:16, ‘he took the thorns of the wilderness and briars, and with them he taught the men of Succoth.’ Cf. the striking use in Luk 23:16, ‘I will therefore chastise him and let him go.’
Fuente: The Cambridge Bible for Schools and Colleges
Of whom is Hymeneus and Alexander – Hymeneus is nowhere else mentioned in the New Testament, except in 2Ti 2:17, where he is mentioned in connection with Philetus as a very dangerous man. An Alexander is mentioned in Act 19:33, which some have supposed to be the same as the one referred to here. It is not certain, however, that the same person is intended; see the notes on that verse. In 2Ti 4:14, Alexander the coppersmith is mentioned as one who had done the apostle much evil, and there can be little doubt that he is the same person who is referred to here. One of the doctrines which Hymeneus held was, that the resurrection was past already 2Ti 2:18; but what doctrine Alexander held is unknown, It is not improbable, as he is mentioned here in connection with Hymeneus, that he maintained the same opinion, and in addition to that he appears to have been guilty of some personal injury to the apostle. Both also were guilty of blasphemy.
Whom I have delivered unto Satan – On the meaning of this expression, see the notes on 1Co 5:5.
That they may learn not to blaspheme – It cannot be supposed that Satan would undertake to teach them not to blaspheme, or that Paul put them under him as an instructor on that subject. The instructions of Satan tend rather to teach his followers to blaspheme, and none in his school fail to be apt scholars. The meaning here is, that Paul excommunicated them, and not improbably brought upon them, by giving them over to Satan, some physical maladies, that they might be reformed; compare notes on 1Co 5:5. It is not entirely clear what is meant by blaspheme in this place; compare notes on 1Ti 1:13. It cannot be supposed that they were open and bold blasphemers, for such could not have maintained a place in the church, but rather that they held doctrines which the apostle regarded as amounting to blasphemy; that is, doctrines which were in fact a reproach on the divine character. There are many doctrines held by people which are in fact a reflection on the divine character, and which amount to the same thing as blasphemy. A blasphemer openly expresses views of the divine character which are a reproach to God; an errorist expresses the same thing in another way – by teaching as true about God that which represents him in a false light, and, to suppose which, in fact, is a reproach. The spirit with which this is done in the two cases may be different; the thing itself may be the same. Let us be careful that we hold no views about God which are reproachful to him, and which, though we do not express it in words, may lead us to blaspheme him in our hearts.
Fuente: Albert Barnes’ Notes on the Bible
Verse 20. Of whom is Hymeneus and Alexander] Who had the faith but thrust it away; who had a good conscience through believing, but made shipwreck of it. Hence we find that all this was not only possible, but did actually take place, though some have endeavoured to maintain the contrary; who, confounding eternity with a state of probation, have supposed that if a man once enter into the grace of God in this life, he must necessarily continue in it to all eternity. Thousands of texts and thousands of facts refute this doctrine.
Delivered unto Satan] For the destruction of the flesh, that the spirit might be saved in the day of the Lord Jesus. See what is noted on 1Co 5:5; what this sort of punishment was no man now living knows. There is nothing of the kind referred to in the Jewish writings. It seems to have been something done by mere apostolical authority, under the direction of the Spirit of God.
Hymeneus, it appears, denied the resurrection, see 2Ti 2:17-18; but whether this Alexander be the same with Alexander the coppersmith, 2Ti 4:14, or the Alexander, Ac 19:33, cannot be determined. Probably, he was the same with the coppersmith. Whether they were brought back to the acknowledgment of the truth does not appear. From what is said in the second epistle the case seems extremely doubtful. Let him who most assuredly standeth, take heed lest he fall.
He that is self-confident is already half fallen. He who professes to believe that God will absolutely keep him from falling finally, and neglects watching unto prayer, is not in a safer state. He who lives by the moment, walks in the light, and maintains his communion with God, is in no danger of apostasy.
Fuente: Adam Clarke’s Commentary and Critical Notes on the Bible
Of which men who have made shipwreck of a good conscience and concerning faith,
Hymenaeus and Alexander are two persons. Of Hymenaeus we read, 2Ti 2:17,18; he affirmed the resurrection was past, and overthrew the faith of many. Of Alexander we read, 2Ti 4:14; he was a great enemy to Paul, the same person, as some judge, mentioned Act 19:33, then a friend to Paul, but afterwards one who did him much harm.
Whom I have delivered unto Satan: we meet with the same phrase, 1Co 5:5; see the notes there. Some think by it is signified a peculiar power granted the apostles, God in those primitive times confirming regular excommunications, by letting Satan loose upon persons excommunicated to torture them; but we find nothing of this in Scripture. I rather think the sense is no more than, whom I excommunicated and cast out of the church, making them of the world again, (as the world is opposed to the church, and kingdom of Christ), which, for the greater terror, the apostle expresseth by this notion of being delivered to Satan, who is called the god of this world, & c.
That they may learn not to blaspheme: not that I might ruin and undo them, but that I might amend them by this exercise of discipline, teaching them to take heed of spreading damnable and pernicious errors to the reproach of God. Or, perhaps, with their perverse opinions (which is very ordinary) they mingled reproachful speeches concerning God.
Fuente: English Annotations on the Holy Bible by Matthew Poole
20. HymenaeusThere is nodifficulty in supposing him to be the Hymenus of 2Ti2:17. Though “delivered over to Satan” (the lord of alloutside the Church, Ac 26:18,and the executor of wrath, when judicially allowed by God, on thedisobedient, 1Co 5:5; 2Co 12:7),he probably was restored to the Church subsequently, and againtroubled it. Paul, as an apostle, though distant at Rome pronouncedthe sentence to be executed at Ephesus, involving, probably, theexcommunication of the offenders (Mat 18:17;Mat 18:18). The sentence operatednot only spiritually, but also physically, sickness, or some suchvisitation of God, falling on the person excommunicated, in order tobring him to repentance and salvation. Alexander here is probably”the coppersmith” who did Paul “much evil” whenthe latter visited Ephesus. The “delivering him to Satan”was probably the consequence of his withstanding the apostle(2Ti 4:14; 2Ti 4:15);as the same sentence on Hymenus was the consequence of “sayingthat the resurrection is past already” (2Ti2:18; his putting away good conscience, naturallyproducing shipwreck concerning FAITH,1Ti 1:19. If one’s religionbetter not his morals, his moral deficiencies will corrupt hisreligion. The rain which falls pure from heaven will not continuepure if it be received in an unclean vessel [ARCHBISHOPWHATELY]). It is possiblethat he is the Alexander, then a Jew, put forward by the Jews,doubtless against Paul, at the riot in Ephesus (Ac19:33).
that they maynot”might”; implying that the effect still continuesthesentence is as yet unremoved.
learnGreek, “bedisciplined,” namely, by chastisement and suffering.
blasphemethe name ofGod and Christ, by doings and teachings unworthy of their Christianprofession (Rom 2:23; Rom 2:24;Jas 2:7). Though the apostles hadthe power of excommunication, accompanied with bodily inflictions,miraculously sent (2Co 10:8),it does not follow that fallible ministers now have any power, savethat of excluding from church fellowship notorious bad livers.
Fuente: Jamieson, Fausset and Brown’s Commentary Critical and Explanatory on the Whole Bible
Of whom is Hymenaeus and Alexander,…. The former of these is mentioned in 2Ti 2:17 and that part of faith he made shipwreck of, or erred in, was the doctrine of the resurrection of the dead, whereby the faith of some nominal believers was overthrown; and this was attended with the putting away of a good conscience, he seemingly before had; for his profane and vain babblings increased to more ungodliness: the latter seems to be the same with Alexander the coppersmith, who did the apostle much evil, 2Ti 4:14 and it may be is the same with him who was at Ephesus when the apostle was, there, Ac 19:33 and where he might be now with Hymenaeus, with whom he might agree in his erroneous opinions, and therefore are particularly mentioned, Ephesus being the place where Timothy now was. It seems by their names that they were both Greeks; Alexander is a known name among the Greeks, since the times of Alexander the great, and even became common among the Jews;
[See comments on Ac 4:6], and Hymenaeus was a name among the Grecians, from Hymen, the Heathen god of marriage: one of this name is mentioned among those said to be raised from the dead by Aesculapius q; there was also a bishop of Jerusalem of this name r.
Whom I have delivered to Satan; not by excommunication, which is the act of a church, and not of a single person; but by an apostolical power he had of delivering the bodies of men into the hands of Satan, by him to be tortured and afflicted, in order to bring them to a sense of their sins, and as a chastisement and correction for them, and a token of God’s displeasure at them; [See comments on 1Co 5:5].
That they may learn not to blaspheme; or “that being chastised”, corrected, or disciplined, “they might not blaspheme”, as they had before done; either by words, contradicting, reviling, and scoffing at the doctrine of the resurrection; or by their unbecoming lives and conversations, giving themselves great liberty in sinning, supposing there was no truth in that doctrine; whereby they not only blasphemed the Christian religion themselves, but caused it to be evil spoken of by others.
q Apollodorus de Orig. Deor. l. 3. p. 172. r Euseb. Eccl. Hist. l. 7. c. 14. 30.
Fuente: John Gill’s Exposition of the Entire Bible
Hymenaeus (H). The same heretic reappears in 2Ti 2:17. He and Alexander are the chief “wreckers” of faith in Ephesus.
Alexander (). Probably the same as the one in 2Ti 4:14, but not the Jew of that name in Ac 19:33, unless he had become a Christian since then.
I delivered unto Satan ( ). See this very idiom ( ) in 1Co 5:5. It is a severe discipline of apostolic authority, apparently exclusion and more than mere abandonment (1Thess 2:18; 1Cor 5:11; 2Cor 2:11), though it is an obscure matter.
That they might be taught not to blaspheme ( ). Purpose clause with and first aorist passive subjunctive of . For this use of this common late verb, see 1Cor 11:32; 2Cor 6:9.
Fuente: Robertson’s Word Pictures in the New Testament
Hymenaeus and Alexander. Comp. 2Ti 2:17; 2Ti 4:14.
Have delivered unto Satan [ ] . See on 1Co 5:5.
They may learn [] . Neither A. V. nor Rev. Gives the true force of the word, which is, may be taught by punishment or disciplined. See on Eph 6:4.
Fuente: Vincent’s Word Studies in the New Testament
1) “Of whom is Hymenaeus and Alexander;” (hon estin Humenaios kai Aleksandros) “From among whom are Hymenaeus and Alexander … … of the “some” or certain ones,” who had made havoc, or shipwreck of the system of teachings of Christ, these two brethren were specifically named, excluded from church leadership, 2Ti 2:17.
2) “Whom I have delivered unto Satan,” (hous paredoka to satana) “Whom I delivered to Satan, the devil.” This is what Paul instructed the Corinth church to do with regards to a fornicator in their membership, 1Co 5:1; 1Co 5:5-7; 1Co 5:13.
3) “That they may learn not to blaspheme.” (hina paideuthosin me blasphemein) “In order that they may be baby-trained (chastised) not to blaspheme or speak in derision against any holy matter. ” This excommunication was corrective, not merely punitive. See also 1Co 11:32; 2Co 6:9.
A GOOD CONSCIENCE
We have compared conscience to the eye of the soul. We may also compare it to the window of the soul. A window is of use for letting light into a room; and also for looking through that you may see what is outside of the window. But if you want a good, correct view of the things that you are looking at through a window, what sort of glass is it necessary to have in the window? Clear glass. Suppose that the glass in the window, instead of being clear glass, is stained glass; one pane red, another blue, another yellow, and another green. When you look through the red glass, what color will the things be that you are looking at? Red. And so when you look through the blue glass, all things will be blue. They will be yellow when you look through the yellow glass, and green when you look through green. But suppose you have thick, heavy shutters to the window, and keep them closed, can you see anything through the window then? No. And can you see anything in the room when the shutters are closed? No. It will all be dark. And conscience is just like a window in this respect. You must keep the shutters open, and the windows clean, so that plenty of pure light can get in, if you want to see things properly. God’s Blessed Word, the Bible, gives just the kind of light we need to have a good conscience.
-Wilson
Fuente: Garner-Howes Baptist Commentary
20 Of whom are Hymenaeus and Alexander. The former will be again mentioned in the Second Epistle, in which the kind of “shipwreck” which he made is likewise described; for he said that the resurrection was past. (2Ti 2:17.) There is reason to believe that Alexander also was bewitched by an error so absurd. And shall we wonder at the present day, if any are deceived by the various enchantments of Satan, when we see that one of Paul’s companions perished by so dreadful a fall?
He mentions both of them to Timothy as persons whom he knew. For my own part, I have no doubt that this is the same Alexander that is mentioned by Luke, and who attempted, but without success, to quell the commotion. Now he was an Ephesian, and we have said that this Epistle was chiefly written for the sake of the Ephesians. We now learn what was his end; and hearing it, let us keep possession of our faith by a good conscience, that we may hold it safe to the last.
Whom I have delivered to Satan. As I mentioned in the exposition of another passage, (1Co 5:5,) there are some who interpret this to mean that extraordinary chastisement was inflicted on those persons; and they view this as referring to δυνάμεις, “the powers” mentioned by Paul in the same Epistle. (1Co 12:28.) For, as the apostles were endowed with the gift of healing, in order to testify the favor and kindness of God towards the godly, so against wicked and rebellious persons they were armed with power, either to deliver them to the devil to be tormented, or to inflict on them other chastisements. Of this “power,” Peter gave a display in Ananias and Sapphira, (Act 5:1,) and Paul in the magician Bar-Jesus. (Act 13:6.) But, for my own part, I choose rather to explain it as relating to excommunication; for the opinion that the incestuous Corinthian received any other chastisement than excommunication is not supported by any probable conjecture. And, if by excommunicating him, Paul delivered him to Satan, why should not the same mode of expression have a similar import in this passage? Besides, it explains very well the force of excommunication; for, since in the Church Christ holds the seat of his kingdom, out of the Church there is nothing but the dominion of Satan. Accordingly, he who is cast out of the Church must be placed, for a time, under the tyranny of Satan, until, being reconciled to the Church, he return to Christ. I make one exception, that, on account of the enormity of the offense, he might have pronounced a sentence of perpetual excommunication against them; but on that point I would not venture to make a positive assertion.
That they may learn not to blaspheme. What is the meaning of this last clause? For one who has been cast out of the Church takes upon himself greater freedom of acting, because, being freed from the yoke of ordinary discipline, he breaks out into louder insolence. I reply, to whatever extent they may indulge in their wickedness, yet the gate will be shut against them, so that they shall not contaminate the flock; for the greatest injury done by wicked men is, when they mingle with others under the presence of holding the same faith. The power of doing injury is taken from them, when they are branded with public infamy, so that none are so simple as not to know that these are irreligious and detestable men, and therefore their society is shunned by all. Sometimes, too, it happens that — being struck down by this mark of disgrace which has been put upon them — they become less daring and obstinate; and therefore, although this remedy sometimes renders them more wicked, yet it is not always ineffectual for subduing their fierceness.
Fuente: Calvin’s Complete Commentary
(20) Of whom is Hymenus and Alexander.Here the Apostle names two, as examples of the utter shipwreck of all true faithpersons evidently well known to Timothy and the members of the Church at Ephesus. Hymenus is probably identical with the heretic of that name, charged, in the Second Epistle to Timothy, with teaching that the resurrection was already passed, thus undermining the great hope which Christian faith so firmly laid hold of. In the second letter to the Presbyter presiding over the Ephesian congregations the fundamental error was specified on account of which this Hymenus was excommunicated.
Alexander.It would be unsafe positively to identify this person with the personal adversary of St. Paul alluded to in the Second Epistle, 2Ti. 4:14, there spoken of as Alexander the coppersmith, or with the Alexander mentioned in Act. 19:33. The name was a very common one. Of the Alexander of Act. 19:33 we know nothing; from the circumstances in connection with which he is there mentioned, which took place some ten years before this Epistle was written, he seems to have been a Jew.
Whom I have delivered unto Satan.In this fearful formula the offender is delivered over to Satan, the evil one. It is a solemn excommunication or expulsion from the Church, accompanied with the infliction of bodily disease or death. In ordinary cases, the offender was quietly expelled from the Christian society. But an Apostle, and only an Apostle, seems to have possessed the awful powers of inflicting bodily suffering in the forms of disease and death. Certain special instances of the exercise of these tremendous powers are recorded in the cases of Ananias and Sapphira, Elymas, the incestuous person at Corinth, and the men here alluded to. The fear of Simon Magus, related in Act. 8:24, seems to have been aroused by his evident expectation that this well-known apostolic power would be put in force in his case. It is, however, noticeable that this punishment was not necessarily, in the case of disease, an irrevocable sentence. The true end and purpose of this, as of all divine punishments, was not revenge for the sin, but the ultimate recovery of the sinner.
Fuente: Ellicott’s Commentary for English Readers (Old and New Testaments)
20. Two of the mysterious some of 1Ti 1:3 seem here to be named, and a third in 2Ti 2:17, Philetus. Unquestionably the Hymeneus here and there are the same. Alexander as unquestionably is the coppersmith of 2Ti 4:14.
Delivered unto Satan See note on 1Co 5:5. The consigning to Satan did not prevent Hymeneus from persisting in sin, as appears from the mention in the second epistle.
May learn May be disciplined by punishment.
Not to blaspheme For apostates are very apt to become blasphemers. And this phrase serves to show that the adoption of the fables and genealogies of 1Ti 1:4 was no mere speculative error, but led not only to folly, but to gross apostasy.
Creeds may be limitations to liberty, but they are also safeguards of the soul. When they are made simply a means of ecclesiastical despotism or bitter contention, great injury no doubt results. Yet the forms of doctrine adopted by the holy of past years, after the most intense study of the Scriptures, are to be treated with solemn respect and not discarded with levity. Our apostle here gives us one of the best brief tests of their excellence. Is their end, their purpose, their effect, faith and a good conscience? that is, a sound mind and a holy life?
Fuente: Whedon’s Commentary on the Old and New Testaments
‘Of whom are Hymenaeus and Alexander; whom I delivered to Satan, that they might be taught not to blaspheme.’
Paul then gives two well known example, something that he does not often do. This is probably because they had been prominent members of the church at Ephesus, even possibly elders, although it may also be because of the seriousness of their offence. They were guilty of blasphemy. These men had clearly been a great disappointment to him, and had let him and God down badly.
For Hymenaeus see also 2Ti 2:17. He was clearly prominent amongst those who taught foolish things, but had also taught that the resurrection was already past, upsetting the faith of others. We do not know precisely how he did this, but we can see why it was seen as blasphemy. He had rid the cross of its power, replacing it with some psychological or mystical experience. Perhaps his claim was that some had already become ‘divine’ as a result of some spiritual resurrection, which only applied to initiates. He may well have been misrepresenting Paul’s teaching in Eph 1:19 to Eph 2:6.
About Alexander we know nothing further. There is no reason for seeing this Alexander at Ephesus as the same Alexander who did much harm to Paul in 2Ti 4:14. That was not at Ephesus, and Alexander was a common name. But these two had also thrust their consciences to one side and their behaviour had been so bad that Paul had felt it necessary to act openly against them
Paul then goes on to say that he had “delivered them over to Satan so that they might learn not to blaspheme,” and that raises the question as to exactly what this means. A number of suggestions have been made.
1) That he was thinking of the Jewish practise of excommunication. According to synagogue practise, if a man was an evildoer he was first publicly rebuked. If that was ineffective, he was banished from the synagogue for a period of thirty days. And then if he was still stubbornly unrepentant, he was put under ‘the ban’. This put him into a position where he was seen as accursed, and debarred from both the society of good men and the fellowship of God.
2) That he was saying that he has barred them from the fellowship of the church. The world outside the church was seen as being in the arms of the evil one (1Jn 5:19). Thus to exclude them from the church may well have been seen as delivering them to Satan. The aim would be to bring about repentance as a result of their exclusion. However, this suggestion does not strictly tie in with the idea of ‘the destruction of the flesh’ in 1Co 5:5 unless Paul also expected that God’s punishment would follow, which may well be the case (see 1Co 11:30). It does, however, tie in with Mat 18:17 ; 2Th 3:14.
3) That he was saying that he has handed them over to Satan in a similar way to that in which Job was handed over to Satan (although in his case it was because he was such a man of faith). The point then is that he has called on God to let Satan have his way with them so that they will become subject to suffering in order that it might make them rethink their position. We can compare here the man in the church at Corinth who was guilty of incest. Paul’s advice was that he should be delivered to Satan “for the destruction of the flesh, so that the spirit may be saved in the day of the Lord Jesus” (1Co 5:5). The hope would be that, after chastisement, he might finally be saved. We can compare the blindness which fell on Elymas because of his opposition to the gospel (Act 13:11). It could well be that it was Paul’s prayer that these two men should be subjected to some painful experience which would be both a punishment and a warning.
Fuente: Commentary Series on the Bible by Peter Pett
1Ti 1:20. Of whom is Hymeneus and Alexander; Probably this Alexander is the person mentioned Act 19:33 who might become worse and worse after St. Paul’s departure from Ephesus, emboldened whereto by his absence: so that the apostle might now be determined to deliver him up to Satan; that is,according to the extraordinary apostolic power with which God had invested him for such purposes,to inflict upon him certain pains and evils which might possibly under divine grace reclaim him. See 2Ti 2:17-18; 2Ti 4:14.
Inferences.How solemn and important, honourable and delightful, is the trust which God our Father and the Lord Jesus Christ have committed to gospel-ministers! how thankful should they be for it, and how desirous of an abundance of grace and mercy from these Divine Persons, to help, pity, and prosper them, that they may be supported under their numerous trials from without and from within, and enabled to be faithful in their Lord’s work, according to the qualifications that he has given them, and the reasonable expectations which they afford. They may indeed meet with many virulent and subtile adversaries; some, furious persecutors like Paul before his conversion; others, apostates like Hymeneus and Alexander; and others, who would propagate fabulous traditions and strange doctrines, and introduce doubtful disputations and vain janglings, to the overthrowing of the faith of many, instead of promoting spiritual edification. But as all such are to be shunned and rejected, while the truly sincere and pious are to be affectionately loved as genuine children in the faith, with what courage may the servants of Christ stand to their charge, in which they are called to war a good warfare! and with what pleasure may they recommend the glorious gospel of the blessed God, in hopes that other sinners, by their preaching, may embrace the same offers and the same grace which have been proposed and bestowed upon them! for they well know, and can assure all around them, on the credit of a divine testimony, that Jesus Christ came into the world to save even the chief of sinners. O wondrous, superabounding grace! It turns the hearts, and pardons the sins of blasphemers, persecutors, and injurious persons, and frees them from the condemnation of the law, which does not stand in force against those who are righteous through faith in Christ, but only against obstinate, impenitent unbelievers, who persist in ungodliness and immorality, which are forbidden by the good and holy law of God, and are equally contrary to the sound doctrine of the gospel. But how should sinners tremble at the thought of continuing to oppose and reject the gospel, and of making a wrong use of the law: and how solicitous should preachers and hearers be, that they may live under the power of evangelical love, as proceeding from a sanctified heart; and also, that unfeigned faith and a good conscience may be always preserved together; lest, by violating conscience, they soon make shipwreck of faith! and with what gratitude and praise should all who are experimentally acquainted with Christ, according to the gospel revelation of him, unite their adorations of him, together with the Father and the Holy Spirit, as he in his divine nature is inseparably, one with them, the King eternal, immortal, invisible, the only wise God! to whom be honour and glory for ever and ever. Amen.
REFLECTIONS.1st, We have in this chapter,
1. The apostolical inscription. Paul an apostle of Jesus Christ, to bear a special witness to him; who was not invested with this office by the authority of men; but was called by Christ himself to fulfil it among the Gentiles, not according to his own deserts, but according to the grace, commandment, and pleasure of God the Fathersends greeting; and the beloved Timothy, a faithful brother in the ministry, concurs in all that is hereafter written.
2. His salutation. Grace, mercy, and peace, be with you, from God our Father, in whose love we have a common interest; and Jesus Christ our Lord, who bought us with his blood, and called us to the obedience of the faith.
3. He reminds him of the design that he had in leaving him at Ephesus, and exhorts him to be faithful to his charge. 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; even those Judaizing teachers, who would corrupt the simplicity of the gospel; be faithful to thy trust, and warn the people to beware of these seducers; neither to give heed to fables, their absurd traditions, and endless genealogies; affecting to trace up their descent from Abraham and the patriarchs, and valuing themselves highly on such an ancestor; which minister questions, and endless disputes, rather than godly edifying, which is in faith. Note; (1.) Unedifying disputes about unessential matters have the most pernicious tendency to destroy vital religion. (2.) There can be no true godliness, but what springs from faith as its principle. (3.) Ministers must watch over the flock, and guard them from the inroads of error, as well as impiety. (4.) Broachers of new doctrines, contrary to the fundamental articles of faith, should receive from the bishops of the church deserved rebuke.
2nd, Having repeated the charge before given to Timothy, concerning the deluding teachers, he
1. Directs him what end he should aim at, the preservation of the church’s peace. Now the end of the commandment, (either of the moral law, or of the gospel, or of the charge which the apostle had given him,) is to promote charity, or love towards God and man, flowing out of a pure heart, sanctified by the blessed Spirit; and of a good conscience, purged from dead works by the blood of sprinkling, and of faith unfeigned, the radical grace, whence love and every other divine temper spring: from all which some having swerved, and wandering wide of the mark, have turned aside unto vain jangling, trifling questions, and idle disputes; desiring to be teachers of the law; setting up for great wisdom, as interpreters of it, and zealous to urge the observation of its rites upon the Gentiles, as necessary to salvation; understanding neither what they say, nor whereof they affirm; real strangers to its spiritual nature, use, and design. Note; (1.) Love in the heart is the great preservative from all disputes and dissensions. (2.) It is a sad consideration, when ignorant men intrude into the ministry, strangers to the oracles of God, and unacquainted with all the truths themselves in which they pretend to instruct others.
2. The right use of the law is here declared. But, however abused it may be, we know that the law is good, if a man use it lawfully, and apply it to the purposes for which God gave it,to convince the conscience of sin; to be a schoolmaster to lead us to Christ; and, though ceasing to be a covenant of works, yet continuing to be a rule and law of duty, according to which God will proceed in his judgment at the last day: knowing this, that the law is not made for a righteous man, nor does the damning sentence of it lie against any faithful soul; but for the lawless and disobedient, for the ungodly and for sinners, for unholy and profane, who with daring impenitence and wilful obstinacy transgress it, &c. and if there be any other thing that is contrary to sound doctrine; all which, and every other crime, the law condemns; and the judgment denounced by the law is according to the glorious gospel of the blessed God, which was committed to my trust; there being the most perfect agreement in this respect between the law and the gospel, which condemns all ungodliness, and teaches us to live righteously, soberly, and godly in this present evil world. Note; The gospel is an awful glorious trust; and while we bless God for the honour that he puts upon us in committing it to our charge, we need tremble for ourselves, lest we should be found unfaithful.
3rdly, The apostle with deep gratitude acknowledges the distinguishing favour shewn him of God, not only in calling him to the knowledge of his grace, but in putting him in trust with the gospel, and qualifying him for the discharge of it. I thank Christ Jesus our Lord, who hath enabled me, for that he counted me faithful, putting me into the ministry. Note; (1.)
None are Christ’s ministers, but those whom he puts into their office. (2.) Whom he calls, he qualifies for the discharge of their ministry. (3.) Want of ministerial abilities is a sure proof that men run without being sent.
1. The apostle humbly owns the dreadful state out of which by divine grace he was called; who was before a blasphemer of Christ and his gospel, and a persecutor of his people, and injurious, branding the Christian name with every malignant aspersion. Note; (1.) The depth of our guilt serves to magnify but the more the riches of divine grace in our pardon and salvation. (2.) True converts are ever ready to take shame to themselves, and to own their former abominations with deep regret.
2. God had mercy on him; But I obtained mercy, because I did it ignorantly in unbelief; I did it not against knowledge, for I verily thought I ought to do many things against the name of Jesus, Act 26:9 and yet, notwithstanding this, the grace of our Lord was exceeding abundant, beyond all conception wonderful, that it should be extended to such a wretch as me; with faith, and love, which is in Christ Jesus, and which in the richest measure the Lord was pleased to bestow upon my soul. So that from the happiest experience I can now declare, that this is a faithful saying, and worthy of all acceptation, that Christ Jesus came into the world to save sinners, of whom I am chief: none, therefore, after the mercy which I have received, need despair. Howbeit, notwithstanding my enormous guilt, for this cause I obtained mercy, that in me first, or the chief of sinners, Jesus Christ might shew forth all long-suffering, for a pattern to them which should hereafter believe on him to life everlasting; encouraging the vilest to hope and return to him, as being still willing and able to save to the uttermost. Note; (1.) Unbelief is at the bottom of every evil. (2.) The chief of sinners may be saved as freely as the least: those only perish, who will not come to Christ that they may have life. (3.) They who are discouraged under a sense of the greatness of their sins, should remember those who have already found mercy, and from the deepest crimes have risen to the greatest heights of grace; witness David, Manasseh, Peter, and this apostle.
4thly, The apostle repeats his charge to Timothy. This charge I commit unto thee, son Timothy, according to the prophets which went before on thee, which held thee forth as one who would be called to an eminent station in the church of God; that, remembering these things, thou mightest be quickened to correspond therewith, and by them mightest war a good warfare; as a faithful soldier of Christ, manfully fighting under his banner against sin and error; holding faith, firmly attached to the purity of the gospel doctrines, and maintaining a good conscience, void of offence towards God and man; which some having put away, rejected and thrust from them, concerning faith have made shipwreck, and apostatized from the life of God; of whom is Hymeneus and Alexander, those notorious heretics, whom I have delivered unto Satan; by my apostolic power assigning them over to that tormentor, to inflict upon them severe chastisement; that they may learn not to blaspheme, and that by their sufferings they may be brought to a conviction of their sins, or, at least, be so terrified, as not to dare any longer to persist in their horrid blasphemies. Note; (1.) We are now engaged in a dangerous warfare, and the ministers of Christ especially will meet with the strongest opposition. We have need therefore to hold fast by him who is our strength, that we may stand in the evil day. (2.) None usually turn out so dreadfully, and become such horrid blasphemers, as those who apostatize from the genuine doctrines of the gospel, and from the experience of true religion.
Fuente: Commentary on the Holy Bible by Thomas Coke
1Ti 1:20 . ] In 2Ti 2:17 , the apostle names two false teachers whose words eat like a cancer
Hymenaeus and Philetus. There is no ground for distinguishing between the Hymenaeus there and the one here mentioned. No difficulty is caused even by the fact that “the one here is mentioned as a man cast out from the church, and the other merely as an example of error” (de Wette); for Hymenaeus and Philetus are not so tenderly dealt with in the other passages as de Wette seems to think. As to Alexander, we must leave it unsettled whether he is the same as the one mentioned in 2Ti 4:14 . The reasons are not decisive which seem to tell against the identity, viz. that in the other passage the surname is added, and that “he is mentioned there not as excommunicated, but rather as still coming in contact with the apostle; not as a heretic, but as an opponent” (de Wette). It is, however, quite arbitrary to regard the Alexander (Act 19:33 ) who took part in the uproar at Ephesus as identical with the one mentioned here (see Meyer on the passage). [80]
] the same excommunication of which the apostle speaks in 1Co 5:5 (comp. Meyer on the passage). It is not simply excommunication from the church, but with the purpose of ensuring, through Satan’s means, to the one excommunicated. This is shown not only by the formula itself, but also by the solemnity with which Paul there expresses himself. The added clause, . . . , makes it clear that here also the apostle had in mind . . , for that clause at the same time gives the purpose of the , which is the reformation ( , 1Co 5:5 ), or at least the preservation, of the excommunicated man from . [81]
] in classical Greek equivalent to “educate, especially by instruction,” so also Act 7:22 ; Act 22:3 , has elsewhere in the N. T. the meaning of “punish in order to reform,” i.e. chastise; comp. 2Ti 2:25 ; 1Co 11:32 ; 2Co 6:9 , especially Heb 12:5-11 . In Rev 3:19 it stands connected with (in Luk 23:16 ; Luk 23:22 , the purpose of reformation falls quite into the background).
The is intended by the apostle to be a chastisement to the one named, that he may be kept from further reviling. The expression shows that they had not only suffered shipwreck in faith, but in their unbelief were on the point of proceeding actually to revile the Lord.
[80] Otto (pp. 98 112) gives a very vivid and detailed picture of the tumult at Ephesus in which a certain Alexander took part, in order to prove the identity of the two Alexanders, and confirm his view regarding the date of the composition of this epistle. But even if the course of that tumult was as Otto describes it, with the aid of many arbitrary suppositions, still we can by no means infer the identity he maintains. In order to prove it, Otto does not despise many strange assumptions, such as, that the designation (2Ti 4:14 ) was given to Alexander because he was one of those who manufactured the miniature silver temples; further, that he, deceived by the soothsayers, had made no objection to the union of the worship of Jehovah with heathen idolatry.
[81] In opposition to Hofmann’s opinion, that neither here nor in the passage of Corinthians we are to think of an excommunication from the church, comp. Meyer on 1Co 5:5 .
Fuente: Heinrich August Wilhelm Meyer’s New Testament Commentary
REFLECTIONS
READER! the more we traverse the inspired writings of this great Apostle, the more we find cause to bless God for his ministry. What affection he here manifests, to the Church of Christ! What love to Timothy, as a minister in the Church! What earnestness he expresseth, that he should be found faithful! And what delight he takes, to go over again and again, the wonderful story of his conversion! No expressions can he find, sufficiently humbling, to set forth his own worthlessness: neither any sufficiently exalted, to praise the riches of God’s grace. Surely the Holy Ghost intended, from the frequency of this record to be brought before the Church, to show poor sinners, that no state is too polluted, no life or sin too abandoned, to be out of the reach of Christ’s blood. Yes! Paul! thou art indeed a pattern of the exceeding riches of grace; yea, and abundant grace, to all that hereafter believe on the Lord Jesus to everlasting life. Oh! blessed Jesus! enable me in thy strength to hold faith, and a good conscience, in thee; and daily to cry out with Paul: Now to the, King eternal, immortal, invisible, the only wise God be honor and glory, forever, and ever. Amen.
Fuente: Hawker’s Poor Man’s Commentary (Old and New Testaments)
20 Of whom is Hymenaeus and Alexander; whom I have delivered unto Satan, that they may learn not to blaspheme.
Ver. 20. That ye may learn ] Ut castigati discant; that being buffeted and bodily tormented by Satan, as Act 13:2 ; (for as yet there were no Christian magistrates), they may learn, .
Not to blaspheme ] That is, not to hold erroneously, and to live scandalously, to the reproach of the gospel. Confer Pro 30:9 .
Fuente: John Trapp’s Complete Commentary (Old and New Testaments)
1Ti 1:20 . : I have delivered (A.V.) expresses more accurately than I delivered (R.V.) the force of the aorist followed by the subjunctive: they were still under sentence of excommunication (see Field in loc .). The theory of the relation of the Church to non-Christians which underlies this phrase is expressed in 1Jn 5:19 , , . The was “the darkness” over against “the light” of the Kingdom of God (Act 26:18 ). The conception is not popular among modern Christians. The two kingdoms, if there are two, have interpenetrated each other. The phraseology, here and in the parallel, 1Co 5:5 , is based on Job 2:6 , . The name also occurs in chap. 1Ti 5:15 and in eight other places in the Pauline Epistles.
: The apostolic severity was not merely punitive; it was also corrective. The intention, at least, of excommunication was , 1Co 5:5 . So Chrys. We must not therefore render here, sarcastically, that they may learn , A.V., but that they might be taught or instructed . At the same time, it is unnatural to assume with Bengel that the was intended to keep them from blaspheming at all; St. Paul hoped that it might prevent a repetition of the sin. The term has more of the association of discipline here and in 1Co 11:32 , 2Co 6:9 , than in the other references.
: It is absurd to suppose that St. Paul here refers to a railing disparagement of his own apostolic claims.
Fuente: The Expositors Greek Testament by Robertson
Hymenaeus. Compare 2Ti 2:17, 2Ti 2:18.
Alexander, Compare 2Ti 4:14, 2Ti 4:15.
have. Omit.
delivered. Greek. paradidomi. See Joh 19:30.
Satan. Compare e Cor. 1Ti 5:5.
not. App-106. as in 1Ti 1:7.
Fuente: Companion Bible Notes, Appendices and Graphics
1Ti 1:20. , Hymenus and Alexander) A reproof, with the names expressed: comp. on Hymenus and Alexander, 2Ti 2:16-17; 2Ti 4:14-15.-, whom) though absent. They were at Ephesus; Paul was at Rome. This was the part of an apostle; it was the part of Timothy merely to avoid them and to be on his guard.-, I have delivered) for [or to] the destruction of the flesh [1Co 5:5].- ) lest they should fall into blasphemy, and wholly complete their guilt by becoming more hurtful to themselves and others. [The danger of blasphemy is near at hand to the man who has made shipwreck of his faith. Satan might harass them: he could not force them to blaspheme.-V. g.]
—–
Fuente: Gnomon of the New Testament
1Ti 1:20
of whom is Hymenaeus and Alexander;-Among those who had put away from them a good conscience and had made shipwreck of their faith were Alexander and Hymenaeus, thought to have been among the Judaizing teachers of Ephesus, who, from worldly motives, did violence to their consciences and, their faith miscarried, blasted all their hopes as when a ship driven by contrary winds is cast upon the breakers and all perish.
whom I delivered unto Satan,-This is generally supposed to mean he had excluded them from the church, but it has always seemed to me to mean more than this. The church at Corinth was commanded to deliver the incestuous person to Satan. (1Co 5:5.) Many of the early critics, and some of the later ones, James Macknight among them, hold that Satan inflicted bodily punishments in the days of the apostles. Sometimes they cast out demons and delivered from the afflictions of the body. That was to deliver from Satan. To deliver to Satan was to turn the person over to him that he might inflict bodily disease or punishment upon him. If such was the case, it ceased with the age of miracles. During that age both God and Satan exerted wonderful working power. They both ceased at the same time. One used his power to bless, the other to afflict and punish.
that they might be taught not to blaspheme.-The design was reformation that they might be taught not to blaspheme God, Christ, and his cause by their erroneous and unholy teaching. The discipline at Corinth appears to have proved successful in bringing good results. (2Co 2:5-8,) In this case it seems to have been otherwise. (2Ti 2:16-18.)
Fuente: Old and New Testaments Restoration Commentary
Hymenaeus and Alexander
It is significant as bearing upon the seriousness of all false teaching, and particularly as related to resurrection, that Paul calls it blasphemy to teach that “the resurrection is past already” 2Ti 2:17; 2Ti 2:18.
Fuente: Scofield Reference Bible Notes
Hymenaeus: 2Ti 2:17
Alexander: Act 19:33, 2Ti 2:14, 2Ti 4:14, 2Ti 4:15
I have: Mat 18:17, 1Co 5:4, 1Co 5:5, 2Co 10:6, 2Co 13:10
that: 1Co 11:32, 2Th 3:15, Rev 3:19
blaspheme: Act 13:45, 2Ti 3:2, Rev 13:1, Rev 13:5, Rev 13:6
Reciprocal: Lev 13:3 – pronounce Lev 14:41 – into an unclean place Eze 31:11 – delivered Joh 20:23 – General Act 20:30 – of your 2Co 1:12 – our rejoicing 2Co 1:23 – that 2Co 2:17 – which 2Co 13:8 – General Gal 1:8 – though Gal 5:10 – bear Col 3:8 – blasphemy 1Ti 5:20 – that others 2Ti 2:26 – at Tit 3:11 – is subverted
Fuente: The Treasury of Scripture Knowledge
1Ti 1:20. According to 2Ti 2:17, Hymenaeus was a false teacher. We have no certain Information concerning Alexander, but he was a blasphemer according to Paul’s statement in this verse. Delivered unto Satan means they were excluded, as the same thing Is said in 1Co 5:5 of the fornicator who was excluded.
Fuente: Combined Bible Commentary
1Ti 1:20. Hymenus and Alexander. The first probably identical with the false teacher named with Philetus in 2Ti 2:17, as teaching that the resurrection was past already, i.e. that it was simply ethical and ideal, as a rising to newness of life. From St. Pauls point of view, this was to overturn the faith. Those who held it, like shipwrecked sailors, had no hope of reaching the haven where they would be. The Alexander is probably the same as the coppersmith, who wrought St. Paul much evil, of 2Ti 4:14, possibly also the same as the man put forward by the Jews in Act 19:33. One who was a worker in copper, or rather bronze, would be likely to have influence with the workmen of Demetrius. One who was put forward by the Jews was not unlikely to identify himself with one form of Jewish error, i.e. an idealized Sadduceism, and as such to oppose himself to St. Paul, as preaching the doctrine, held by him in common with the Pharisees, of the resurrection of the dead.
Whom I have delivered to Satan. Better whom I delivered, the tense pointing to a definite time, probably on the occasion of his last visit to Ephesus. The act so spoken of involves (as in 1Co 5:5) the thought that Satan, when permitted, exercises a power to inflict disease and pain on the bodies of men analogous to that of which we read in the Book of Job. That power is, indeed, recognised by our Lord (Luk 13:16) and by St. Paul in reference to himself (2Co 12:7, and probably 1Th 2:18). It might be connected, as in the case at Corinth (1Co 5:2), with excommunication, but was not necessarily identical with it. And in both the cases referred to, and therefore probably in all others, it was thought of as remedial. The spirit was to be saved by the destruction of the flesh; men were to be chastened and disciplined (this rather than taught is the meaning of the word) as those who, though offending grievously, were not as yet shut out from love and from the hope of pardon.
Not to blaspheme. The word is used probably to express the horror felt at the association of the name of God or Christ with a doctrine which overthrew the faith and led to impurity of life. Comp. Rom 2:24.
Fuente: A Popular Commentary on the New Testament
That is, of the number of those who have made shipwreck of faith and a good conscience are these two men. They made shipwreck of faith. But how: by renouncing Christianity expressly? No, but implicitly, by denying the resurrection, and maintaining such doctrines as utterly subverted and totally overthrew the faith.
Whom I have delivered unto Satan, that they may learn not to blaspheme.
That is, whom I have inflicted the church’s censure of excommunication upon, cast them out of the church, and delivered to Satan as God’s executioner, who oft-times tormented the person with greivous diseases and bodily pains, called elsewhere, the destruction of the flesh, 1Co 5:5
Learn hence, That excommunication rightly administered is a very solemn ordinance, a shutting out of heaven him who is justly cast out of the church’s communion here on earth.
But observe, The charitable intention of the apostle in denouncing this sentence of excommunication; it was, That they might learn not to blaspheme.
Mark, it was none of Satan’s desire, but the apostle’s that they might learn not to blaspheme. Satan was then God’s executioner, when the church wanted the countenance of the Christian magistrate; and his design was destruction, but the apostle’s was reformation; not to ruin, but reclaim.
Learn, That the end of the church’s censure, in particular if excommunication, is not to serve to the destruction of the censured, much less to the private revenge of the censurer; but to reform and reclaim the offender, that others may be warned, and the infection stayed: Of whom is Hymeneus and Alexander, whom I have delivered unto Satan, that they may learn not to blaspheme.
Fuente: Expository Notes with Practical Observations on the New Testament
Verse 20
Hymeneus and Alexander. The same individuals, apparently, are mentioned in and 4:14. An Alexander of Ephesus is spoken of as taking an active part in the disturbances produced by Demetrius; although whether his action in that case was intended to be friendly or hostile to Paul, seems to be uncertain.–Delivered unto Satan; to the kingdom of Satan; that is, he had excommunicated them from the kingdom of Christ.
Fuente: Abbott’s Illustrated New Testament
1Ti 1:20 Of whom is Hymenaeus and Alexander; whom I have delivered unto Satan, that they may learn not to blaspheme.
Hymenaeus is seen in 2Ti 2:17-18 also: “And their word will eat as doth a canker: of whom is Hymenaeus and Philetus; Who concerning the truth have erred, saying that the resurrection is past already; and overthrow the faith of some.”
Notice that faith is again mentioned. The doubt caused by this man caused a lack of faith. His false teaching affected others and so it is in life. That is why we avoid, get rid of, eliminate false doctrine from our lives.
The seminarian that I introduced you to in the opening had read a book that had shaken his faith in the Word. That shake resulted in a total breakdown of his faith, thus his dive into the liberal education.
Isn’t this where the person with an unclear conscience ends up quite often? Such a person has no faith in the Word or in the believers around them. They often seek the vain jangling of the false teachers.
Alexander is a common name so we don’t know who he is or what his problem was. Many believe he is the same one mentioned in 2Ti 4:14 “Alexander the coppersmith did me much evil: the Lord reward him according to his works: 15 Of whom be thou ware also; for he hath greatly withstood our words. ” I assume his error was the same as Hymenaeus.
You notice that Paul took these men into his office and dealt very delicately with them so as not to hurt their feelings. He requested that they sugar coat their teaching so that they could continue to teach, but not offend the more conservative folks in the church.
NO! He turned them over to the Devil.
Let’s look at 1Co 5:1-7 for a moment to see a similar incident in Paul’s life.
1. It is reported commonly [that there is] fornication among you, and such fornication as is not so much as named among the Gentiles, that one should have his father’s wife.
2 And ye are puffed up, and have not rather mourned, that he that hath done this deed might be taken away from among you.
3 For I verily, as absent in body, but present in spirit, have judged already, as though I were present, [concerning] him that hath so done this deed,
4 In the name of our Lord Jesus Christ, when ye are gathered together, and my spirit, with the power of our Lord Jesus Christ,
5 To deliver such an one unto Satan for the destruction of the flesh, that the spirit may be saved in the day of the Lord Jesus.
We know from II Cor. that this man was brought back into the fellowship of the church. He was restored through the church discipline process that the Word of God holds forth.
This seems to speak of apostolic authority, but I firmly believe that church discipline would be a direct application of what Paul did.
It is sad that in our day more churches do not practice church discipline.
While in Wyoming my manager at work was having problems in his marriage – his wife was “having trouble finding herself” as so many young women do. She wanted a divorce. He came to me wanting advice. I told him that I would go to the church board – a very conservative church – and ask them to intervene. He followed that advice and came back a week later to tell me that they would do nothing.
I was blown away that a sound church would not follow Biblical principles – blatantly say no we won’t do this – I asked why and he informed me that both his family and her family were all members of the church and the board did not want to take sides and upset the woman’s family.
The woman went on and got a divorce and the church board put forth a letter to the congregation stating that there was nothing wrong with the couple breaking up, but that they would no longer be able to work with the youth – now if there is nothing wrong, why wouldn’t they be allowed to work with the youth.
This is typical of churches and their dealing with problems and with choosing to not use Biblical principles in the affairs of the church (pun intended).
It is of import, that blaspheme is one of the items for which church discipline is necessary. Morals as in the context of I Corinthians is another and division as well. Basically any outward sin which is detracting from the testimony of the Lord should be considered for discipline.
“That they may learn not to blaspheme” is the clear indication that the turning over to Satan was not a forever item, nor a for life item. It was for educational purposes. You didn’t know the Devil was a teacher did you? Not one I’d care to sit under!
Paul was desirous of seeing these two men come back to their proper place in the fellowship.
There is one item of business that we haven’t covered as yet. What was the charge that Paul committed to Timothy? At first I thought it was the holding faith and good conscience, but then I thought more specifically it might be holding to faith as the only means of salvation – this would result in a good conscience. Lenski suggests that Paul is repeating his charge to Timothy to remove false teachers. This might be more consistent with the thought of waring a good warfare. I suspect Lenski is correct.
As we end chapter one of I Timothy I would like to draw some application.
1. Timothy was told to get the false doctrine and false teachers out of the church.
How dare we do any less in our own day?
We aren’t talking about the little disagreements of interpretation on minor passages. These are not uncommon and should be something that we allow one another to have.
We knew a dear old lady that had some quirks in her thinking. One day at the dinner table she and her grandson’s were having a discussion about whether the wine of the miracle where Christ made wine from water was fermented wine or just juice. She was very emphatic that she didn’t think that it was fermented – that it was only grape juice. The grandsons were trying to gently tell her that it was most likely fermented wine.
She all of a sudden turned to me, the poor innocent bystander that had not been in the conversation, and said, “Stan, do you think the Lord turned that water into fermented wine?” Before I had opportunity to answer she must have sensed my coming answer and said, “Well! Your Lord might but MINE wouldn’t!” That was the end of the discussion.
I know good men on both sides and all get along well together. They realize this isn’t a serious problem. If it is, we are going to really have to talk to the believers in Irian Jaya that use soda crackers and orange juice for the Lord’s table. They can’t get grape juice.
However, if you have someone that begins to teach against the normal sound doctrines, you had better deal with them very quickly.
2. Timothy was told to be a good soldier. We are all soldiers of one sort or another.
Some of us are AWOL or absent with out leave.
Some of us are POW’s or prisoners of war. Tied up in the Devil’s camp.
Some of us are on permanent furlough.
Some of us are just to chicken to show our swords to the enemy.
We sing about being soldiers of the cross and that we should be marching onward, but are we really that type of soldiers?
3. One and two above are directly related!
A correctly doctrined soldier is usually a good soldier, however at times they are so doctrined that they forget to soldier at times.
4. We as believers should be as Paul, in that we are believers and servants of the Lord only by His grace and mercy which He decided to shed upon us at His own good pleasure, and not our superior qualities and talents.
I saw a suggestion in some Gospel Light Sunday school material years ago that suggested the student think of a person that they had known that was very influential in their life and describe them briefly. The point – do you see the following items in their lives?
“pure heart”
“good conscience”
“sincere faith”
“knowledge of sin”
“servant heart”
These are traits we ought to be seeking to instill in our own lives.
Ray Stedman rightly said: “The question this leaves us with is: “What are we doing?” We are called by Christ, called to live a Christian life in a godless world. This is not something to take lightly, something to do on weekends, a low-calorie dessert to add to life to make it more agreeable. We are soldiers in a battle, a fierce war against sin, called by Christ himself to “wage a good warfare, to hold fast to the faith, to hold to a good conscience.” God’s image in the eyes of others is at stake. We are to live redemptively in the midst of a fallen world.”
Consider your life up to this point in time – is it really a war zone or are you on permanent R & R (Rest and Relaxation leave)?
Fuente: Mr. D’s Notes on Selected New Testament Books by Stanley Derickson
1:20 Of whom is Hymenaeus and Alexander; {17} whom I have {n} delivered unto Satan, that they may {o} learn not to blaspheme.
(17) Those who fall from God, and his religion, are not to be endured in the Church, but rather ought to be excommunicated.
(n) Cast out of the Church, and so delivered them to Satan.
(o) That by their pain they might learn how serious it is to blaspheme.
Fuente: Geneva Bible Notes
Paul cited two examples of casualties of this type with which Timothy was apparently familiar: Hymenaeus (cf. 2Ti 2:17) and Alexander (cf. 2Ti 4:14). Paul had turned them over to God’s discipline because of their determination to continue living in a manner contrary to the will of God. This discipline would come on them through the agency of Satan so they would repent and stop blaspheming God by their lives. [Note: See Sydney H. T. Page, "Satan: God’s Servant," Journal of the Evangelical Theological Society 50:3 (September 2007):449-65.]
Handing someone over to Satan may mean that Satan had permission to inflict some illness or disability on the evildoer (cf. Job 2:6). [Note: Kelly, p. 59; Mounce, pp. 69, 72. Cf. Matthew 18:15-20.] It may picture life outside the fellowship of the church as Satan’s sphere (cf. 1Co 5:5). [Note: See Knight, p. 111.] Thus to deliver these men to Satan could mean that Paul had removed them from the church’s fellowship and placed them in Satan’s realm where they would experience his malice (cf. Act 5:1-11; Act 13:11). [Note: Thomas D. Lea and Hayne P. Griffin Jeremiah , 1, 2 Timothy, Titus, p. 81. Thomas Lea wrote the commentaries on 1 and 2 Timothy in this volume. See also Walter Lock, The Pastoral Epistles, p. 19.] These men appear to have been leaders, teachers, and even elders in the Ephesian church. It was very rare for Paul to name names when referring to serious sinners. That he did so here indicates that he wanted everyone to know to whom he was referring.
"It is certainly a disciplinary or remedial and not a merely punitive penalty . . ." [Note: J. H. Bernard, The Pastoral Epistles, p. 36. Cf. Guthrie, p. 69.]
"We should not misunderstand the nature of this process. It was not simply intended to ’cut out a cancer’ in order to preserve the rest of the body, as some churches view it today. Neither is it a practice that the church today can afford to ignore, as if it were an aberration belonging to the Inquisition. Taken together, Mat 18:15-17, 1Co 5:5, 2Co 2:5-11 and 2Th 3:14-15 reflect the development of a carefully measured process. Each step was designed to bring the erring individual to the point of admission and true change of mind and behavior. Even if the individual persisted in a stubborn refusal to change (like the two mentioned here), the final step of expulsion from the fellowship back into the hostile world was ultimately intended as a means (desperate and last-ditch though it be) of reclamation. To be handed over to Satan (compare 1Co 5:5) is to be exposed, without the protection God promises to his people, to the dangers of sin. For some it takes being cast off into the sea to realize the advantages on board ship [cf. Jonah]." [Note: Towner, 1-2 Timothy . . ., pp. 59-60. Cf. idem, The Letters . . ., pp. 161-62.]
Hymenaeus and Alexander appear to have been genuine believers in view of how Paul described them here and in his other references to them in 2 Timothy. [Note: See Knight, p. 110; and Joseph C. Dillow, The Reign of the Servant Kings, pp. 333-36.] Perseverance in faith and good works is not inevitable for the Christian. The many New Testament warnings against turning away from the Lord and the truth should make that fact obvious. There are also examples of Old Testament believers who did not remain faithful to the Lord (e.g., Lot, the Israelites in the wilderness, Saul, Solomon, Uzziah, et al.).
"Within the overall context of the PE . . . it seems that Paul is saying that the opponents rejected their personal faith and as a result have brought the Christian faith into reproach . . ." [Note: Mounce, p. 67.]
The Greek word translated "blaspheme" (blasphemein) means to "by contemptuous speech intentionally come short of the reverence due to God or to sacred things." [Note: A Greek-English Lexicon of the New Testament, s.v. "blaspheme," p. 102.]
This first chapter deals with matters of vital importance to every Christian since we are all ministers of Jesus Christ. These matters are especially relevant to church leaders. In the communication of God’s Word, our primary responsibility (2Ti 4:2), we should avoid speculation and seek to represent God’s intention accurately (1Ti 1:3-11). We can face our task optimistically since God has the power to transform even the worst of sinners into the greatest of saints (1Ti 1:12-17). Nevertheless we should be careful not to go against the warnings of our consciences programmed with God’s Word as we carry out our ministry.