Exegetical and Hermeneutical Commentary of 2 Timothy 4:19
Salute Prisca and Aquila, and the household of Onesiphorus.
19. Salute Prisca and Aquila ] Prisca, or Priscilla, and her husband Aquila of Pontus had been driven from Rome with the Jews by the edict of the Emperor Claudius (Act 18:2); they were staying at Corinth with St Paul ‘because they were of the same trade’ (acts 18:3); they accompanied him 18 months later to Ephesus (acts 18:18) where they ‘further instructed Apollos’ (acts 18:24); were still there when St Paul wrote his first letter to Corinth (1Co 16:19); afterwards were again at Rome ‘cessante edicti saevitia,’ perhaps on business; their house became a place of assembly for the Christians, and they endangered their lives for St Paul (Rom 16:3). Now they seem settled at Ephesus. Dr Howson quotes Priscilla as the example of what the married woman may do for the general service of the Church, in conjunction with home duties, as Phbe is the type of the unmarried servant of the Church or deaconess; and cites Archdeacon Evans as to her usefulness to Timothy at Ephesus. ‘In his dealings with the female part of his flock which in that time and country required peculiar delicacy and discretion, the counsel of the experienced Priscilla would be invaluable. Where for instance could he obtain more prudent and faithful advice than hers in the selection of widows to be placed upon the eleemosynary list of the church and of deaconesses for the ministry?’ Dict. Bib. Priscilla.
the household of Onesiphorus ] See 2Ti 1:16-18 and notes.
Fuente: The Cambridge Bible for Schools and Colleges
19 22. Last words of salutation, entreaty, benediction
He takes up the thought of 2Ti 4:9-12, weaving in with it the new thought of his last greetings.
Fuente: The Cambridge Bible for Schools and Colleges
Salute Prisca and Aquila – Prisca, or Priscilla, was the wife of Aquila, though her name is sometimes mentioned first. In regard to their history, see the notes at Rom 16:3. They were at Rome when Paul wrote his Epistle to the Romans, but afterward went into Asia Minor, which was the native place of Aquila Act 18:2, and where they probably died.
And the household of Onesiphorus; – see the notes on 2Ti 1:16.
Fuente: Albert Barnes’ Notes on the Bible
2Ti 4:19
The household of Onesipherus.
An extensive blessing
As the dew that falleth on the mountains runs down to the valleys, and the precious ointment that was poured upon the head of Aaron ran down to the skirts of his clothing (Psa 133:1-3.), so the blessing which God pours on governors extendeth itself to such as are under them. (T. Hall, B. D.)
Fuente: Biblical Illustrator Edited by Joseph S. Exell
Verse 19. Salute Prisca and Aquila] Several MSS., versions, and fathers have Priscilla instead of Prisca: they are probably the same as those mentioned Ac 18:18; Ac 18:26.
The household of Onesiphorus.] See 2Ti 1:16. Onesiphorus was probably at this time dead: his family still remained at Ephesus.
Fuente: Adam Clarke’s Commentary and Critical Notes on the Bible
Salute Prisca and Aquila; by this Prisca and Aquila it is mor than probable he means that Priscilla and Aquila mentioned 1Co 16:19.
And the household of Onesiphorus; it cannot be concluded from hence that Onesiphorus was now dead, but probably he was. It is the same man mentioned 2Ti 1:16.
Fuente: English Annotations on the Holy Bible by Matthew Poole
19. Prisca and Aquila(Act 18:2; Act 18:3;Rom 16:3; Rom 16:4;1Co 16:19, written from Ephesus,where therefore Aquila and Priscilla must then have been).
household of OnesiphorusIfhe were dead at the time, the “household” would not havebeen called “the household of Onesiphorus.” He wasprobably absent (see on 2Ti1:16).
Fuente: Jamieson, Fausset and Brown’s Commentary Critical and Explanatory on the Whole Bible
Salute Prisca and Aquila,…. The same with Priscilla and Aquila: and so the Complutensian edition, and some copies, read here; who were of the same occupation with the apostle, and with whom he wrought at Corinth, and whom he left at Ephesus; and who seem by this salutation to have continued there, Ac 18:2.
And the household of Onesiphorus: who also lived at Ephesus, and whose kindness to the apostle, when he was at Rome, is before mentioned, 2Ti 1:16.
Fuente: John Gill’s Exposition of the Entire Bible
Prisca and Aquila ( ). Paul’s friends now back in Ephesus, no longer in Rome (Rom 16:3). See 1:16 for the house of Onesiphorus.
Fuente: Robertson’s Word Pictures in the New Testament
Salute [] . Very often in Paul. The singular only here and Tit 3:15.
Prisca and Aquila. They appear in Corinth, Act 18:2, 3; in Ephesus, Act 18:18, 26; 1Co 16:19.
Onesiphorus. Profit – bringer. Comp. chapter 2Ti 1:16. One of the punning names so common among slaves. Comp. Chresimus, Chrestus, Onesimus, Symphorus, all of which signify useful or helpful.
Fuente: Vincent’s Word Studies in the New Testament
1) “Salute Priscilla and Aquila” (aspasai Prisan kai Akulan) “Greet (salute) Priscilla and Aquila.” The woman’s name before the man’s is an infrequent appearance of Biblical times. Whenever it does occur it is considered to be because the woman’s family society rank was above that of her husband’s, so emphasized in Act 18:18; Act 18:26; Rom 16:3.
2) “And the household of Onesiphorus” (kai ton Onesiphorou oikon) “And the household belonging to Onesiphorus,” who had often refreshed Paul, sent material help to Paul in his labors to refresh him, 2Ti 1:16.
Fuente: Garner-Howes Baptist Commentary
MAIN HOMILETICS OF THE PARAGRAPH.2Ti. 4:19-22
A Martyrs Last Words
I. Breathe the spirit of love towards tried and faithful friends.Salute Prisca and Aquila, and the household of Onesiphorus (2Ti. 4:19). How tenderly this salutation would be prized when the friends received intelligence of the apostles fate! Love is precious the more it is tested and tried. The heart is impoverished indeed that cannot find room for its best friends. Love reveals itself in words and deeds.
II. Indicate unabated interest in the movements and condition of former fellow-labourers.Erastus abode at Corinth: but Trophimus have I left at Miletum sick (2Ti. 4:20). Erastus was a frequent companion of Paul (Act. 19:22), possibly the same as referred to in Rom. 16:23, and was the chamberlain or city steward and treasurer of Corinth. As he left Trophimus in sickness at Miletus, we learn that his power of healing the sick was limited and exercised only on special occasions and for a special purpose. To the last Paul kept in touch with his fellow-workers, and retained his anxious concern for the spread of the gospel.
III. Reveal a yearning for sympathetic companionship in the prospect of approaching doom.Do thy diligence to come before winter (2Ti. 4:21). Before the winter storms begin, when navigation would be impossible, or it may be too late. And Paul would need his cloak to protect him from winter cold. A companion like Timothy was what the apostle especially desired; but we have no record that the longed-for interview ever took place. How many of our yearnings are never satisfied! And yet they are not altogether useless. The highest cravings of the soul are gratified only in Christ.
IV. Do not neglect the grace of Christian courtesy.Eubulus greeteth thee, and Pudens, and Linus, and Claudia, and all the brethren (2Ti. 4:21). Pudens and Claudia afterwards marriedshe a Roman knight, he a Briton surnamed Rufina. Linus afterwards became a bishop. Eubulus is identified with Aristobulus, who, with his converts, is said to have been among the first evangelists of Britain. Paul himself, says Clement, visited the farthest Westperhaps Britain, certainly Spainand was martyred under the rulers of Rome, who were Neros vicegerents in his absence from the city. Paul was not so absorbed with his own troubles as to neglect to send the joint commendations of the saints in Rome. Christianity is the essence of true courtesy.
V. Concludes with the invocation of Divine blessing.The Lord Jesus Christ be with thy spirit. Grace be with you. Amen (2Ti. 4:22). Grace is invoked for Timothy and the members of the Ephesian and neighbouring Churches to whom this epistle would be read. We need no more to make us happy and inspire us to Christian work than the presence of Christ and the enriching favour of God.
Lessons.
1. The uncertainty of life should intensify our interest in Gods work.
2. Courtesy is a grace of the Christian spirit.
3. We cannot die better than with a prayer for others on our lips.
Fuente: The Preacher’s Complete Homiletical Commentary Edited by Joseph S. Exell
CONCLUSION 4:1922
1.
PERSONAL REFERENCES 2Ti. 4:19-21
Text 4:1921
19 Salute Prisca and Aquila, and the house of Onesiphorus. 20 Erastus remained at Corinth: but Trophimus I left at Miletus sick. 21 Give diligence to come before winter, Eubulus saluteth thee, and Pudens, and Linus, and Claudia, and all the brethren.
Thought Questions 4:1921
234.
Read Act. 18:2; Rom. 16:3; 1Co. 16:19 for further references to Prisca and Aquila. Where were they when they received this greeting? Is there any significance in using the womans name before the mans?
235.
Why the house of Onesiphorus? Why not salute the man?
236.
Is this the same Erastus as mentioned in Act. 19:22 and Rom. 16:23? Explain.
237.
Act. 20:4; Act. 21:9 tells us more about Trophimus. Why not heal this good friend?
238.
Why the urgency of reaching Paul before winter?
Paraphrase 4:1921
19 In my name wish health to Prisca, and her husband, Aquila, and to the family of Onesiphorus.
20 Erastus, who accompanied me in my way to Crete, abode in Corinth. But Trophimus I left at Miletus sick, when I departed from Crete.
21 Make haste to come to me before winter; sailing being then dangerous. Eubulus wisheth thee health. So do Pudens, and Linus, and Claudia, and all the brethren with whom I have any intercourse.
Comment 4:1921
2Ti. 4:19. Prisca and Aquila have been in Ephesus before; indeed, they were among those who began the work there. This reference to them indicates, then, continuing loyalty and good work. We have already made reference to the house of Onesiphorus. We could conclude that Onesiphorus was with Paul, and this greeting was sent to his family in his absence.
2Ti. 4:20. It is hardly possible that the Erastus here mentioned is the same as the man who was the treasurer of the city of Corinth, i.e., unless he resigned his job, for the Erastus here mentioned seems to have been a traveling companion to Paul. Lenski does not feel that the two references (Act. 19:22 and Rom. 16:23) are concerning the same man and therefore identifies this one with the one in Act. 19:22.
Why leave a faithful worker for Christ sick, if it were possible to heal him? Evidently, healing was for a purpose other than the physical comfort of the afflicted. Even an apostle could not exercise this power at his own will. Miracles were for a sign (Joh. 20:30-31) and where such a purpose was not present, neither was the healing. Shall we ask for a further confirmation of His Word today?
2Ti. 4:21. The seas were open to travel until September or October, If Timothy delayed his coming until winter, it would be too late, Did Pauls beloved disciple arrive in time? We do not know; we should like to believe that he did.
Of the persons mentioned in 2Ti. 4:21 b we know nothing. It is vain to speculate. It is enough to know they were faithful Christians who were not afraid of the terrors of the arena,
Fact Questions 4:22
167.
What does the greeting sent to Prisca and Aquila indicate as to their loyalty and work? Why mention Prisca first?
168.
Where was Onesiphorus when this greeting was sent to his house?
169.
Who was the Erastus here mentioned?
170.
Why leave a faithful worker sick?
171.
If Timothy did not come before winter, he need not come at all. Give two reasons.
2.
BENEDICTION 2Ti. 4:22
Fuente: College Press Bible Study Textbook Series
(19) Salute Prisca and Aquila.These were two of St. Pauls earliest friends after he had begun his great work for his Master. Originally of Pontus, they had taken up their abode at Rome, where Aquila exercised his trade of a tent-maker.
Driven out of Rome by the decree of Claudius, which banished the Jews from the capital, they came to Corinth, where St. Paul became acquainted with them. But they were evidently Christians when St. Paul first met them, about A.D. 51-2. We hear of them in company with St. Paul at Corinth, about A.D. 52-3 (Act. 18:2); at Ephesus, about A.D. 55 (1Co. 16:19); and in the year A.D. 58 St. Paul sends greetings to them at Rome (Rom. 16:3).
They were, evidently, among the many active and zealous teachers of the first days of the faith. That they possessed great ability as well as zeal is evident from the fact that it was from them that the eloquent and trained Alexandrian master, Apollos, learnt to be a Christian (Act. 18:26). In this place, and in several other passages, Prisca (or Priscilla) is named before her husband, Aquila. This would seem to hint that in this case the woman was the principal worker of the two in the cause of Christ. She, in fact, was one of that band of devoted holy women which the preaching of Christ and His disciples had called into existence: a representative of the great class of noble female workers which had no existence before Christ told the world what was the true position of womenuntil the same divine Master taught them that they, too, as well as men, had a work to work for Him here.
And the household of Onesiphorus.St. Paul may have been aware that Onesiphorus was absent then from Ephesus; but this peculiar greeting, taken together with the words of 2Ti. 1:16, leads us irresistibly to the conclusion that this friend of St. Pauls was dead when the Epistle was written. (See Notes on 2Ti. 1:16.)
Fuente: Ellicott’s Commentary for English Readers (Old and New Testaments)
5. Salutations and benedictions, 2Ti 4:19-22.
19. Prisca Notes, Act 18:2; and Rom 16:4.
Household Note, 2Ti 1:16.
Fuente: Whedon’s Commentary on the Old and New Testaments
‘Salute Prisca and Aquila, and the house of Onesiphorus.’
Prisca (Priscilla) and Aquila were old friends from his missionary days (see Act 18:2; Act 18:18; Act 18:26; Rom 16:3; 1Co 16:19). They had for a time been co-workers but operated more independently. The whole household of Onesiphorus were among those who gave Paul full support (2Ti 1:16-18).
Fuente: Commentary Series on the Bible by Peter Pett
Final Explanations and Greetings ( 2Ti 4:19-22 ).
Having previously explained what had happened to his lieutenants and fellow-workers, who would all have been known to Timothy, Paul now moves to a wider circle.
Analysis.
a
b Erastus remained at Corinth, but Trophimus I left at Miletus sick (2Ti 4:20).
c Give diligence to come before winter (2Ti 4:21 a).
b Eubulus salutes you, and Pudens, and Linus, and Claudia, and all the brothers (2Ti 4:21 b).
a The Lord be with your spirit. Grace be with you (2Ti 4:22).
Note that in ‘a’ Timothy is to pass on a salute, and in the parallel he salutes Timothy. In ‘b’ he describes his companion who are not with him, and in the parallel describes those who are. Centrally in ‘c’ he asks that Timothy will come before winter.
Fuente: Commentary Series on the Bible by Peter Pett
Concluding Remarks and Greeting.
v. 19. Salute Prisca and Aquila, and the household of Onesiphorus.
v. 20. Erastus abode at Corinth; but Trophimus have I left at Miletum sick.
v. 21. Do thy diligence to come before winter. Eubulus greeteth thee, and Pudens, and Linus, and Claudia, and all the brethren.
v. 22. The Lord Jesus Christ be with thy spirit. Grace be with you. Amen. According to his custom Paul closes his letter with greetings. Prisca, or Priscilla, and Aquila, his hosts at Corinth and later his coworkers in Ephesus, were among his most faithful friends. Act 18:2-18. Both of them were always deeply interested in the spread of the Gospel and were leading members of the congregations, but the woman, who elsewhere also is named first ( Rom 16:3; Act 18:18), seems to have been the more aggressive and energetic of the two. Women are by no means excluded from the work of the Lord; under circumstances they may do very much for the message of salvation. For the family and household of Onesiphorus Paul has a special greeting on account of the kindness which he had experienced at the hands of the head of this family, 2Ti 1:16-18.
Of a certain Erastus, who may be identical with the city treasurer of Corinth, Rom 16:23, or with the assistant mentioned Act 19:22, Paul reports that he stayed at Corinth, that there had been no reason for his leaving the city. Trophimus had been a traveling companion of the apostle for some time, Act 20:4; Act 21:29, the innocent cause of the riot at Jerusalem. He had accompanied Paul on his missionary trip at the end of the first Roman imprisonment and had been taken severely ill at Miletus in Caria, and Paul had finally been obliged to leave him there to rejoin him after his recovery. Note: Paul did not heal this young coworker of his; his power to perform miracles was not his to use as he pleased, but only as the Lord wished.
Since Timothy himself was not too robust physically, the apostle adds the urgent entreaty: Do thy best to come before winter. It was not only his pupil’s state of health that caused him to write thus, however, but the fear that the first storms of winter might interrupt shipping for a matter of five months and deprive him for that much longer time of Timothy’s company and comfort.
There were several Christians in Rome that sent their greetings personally: Linus, of whom tradition says that he was the first bishop of the congregation; Claudia, either his mother or his wife. But the entire congregation joined them in sending their greetings to the distant, but highly esteemed brother. The apostle’s wish for his pupil is that the Lord Jesus Christ may be with his spirit, fill him with His gifts and keep him in His grace. The second blessing is that of the apostle to all the brethren in the Ephesian congregation, that the grace of the Father, as revealed through the Son, might be with them all, for with this blessing in their possession they would be safe against all dangers forever.
Summary. The apostle admonishes Timothy to faithfulness in his ministry, also with a reference to his own fight and victory; he gives him a short account of various mutual acquaintances and a report of his first hearing; he concludes with several personal remarks and a greeting.
Fuente: The Popular Commentary on the Bible by Kretzmann
2Ti 4:19. Salute Prisca, and Aquila, She is called Priscilla, Act 2:26. Rom 16:3.
Fuente: Commentary on the Holy Bible by Thomas Coke
2Ti 4:19 . Paul sends greetings to Prisca and Aquila.
Paul had become acquainted with them in Corinth (Act 18:2 ), from which they accompanied him to Syria (2Ti 4:18 ). When Paul wrote the Epistle to the Romans they were in Rome (Rom 16:13 ), but they were in Corinth at the time of his writing the First Epistle to the Corinthians (1Co 16:19 ).
, see on 2Ti 1:16 .
Fuente: Heinrich August Wilhelm Meyer’s New Testament Commentary
19 Salute Prisca and Aquila, and the household of Onesiphorus.
Ver. 19. Salute Prisca, &c. ] See Trapp on “ Rom 16:3 “
Fuente: John Trapp’s Complete Commentary (Old and New Testaments)
19 21 .] Salutations and notices . Salute Prisca and Aquila (see notes, Act 18:2 ; Rom 16:3 ) and the house of Onesiphorus (himself probably deceased. See on ch. 2Ti 1:16 ). Erastus (Act 19:22 , an Erastus was sent forward into Macedonia by the Apostle from Ephesus, and Rom 16:23 , an Erastus sends greeting, who is described as the (Corinth). This latter would seem to be the person here mentioned) abode in Corinth (on the inferences to be drawn from this, see Prolegg to Past. Epp. ii. 30 f.), but Trophimus (he accompanied the Apostle from Greece into Asia, Act 20:4 . He was an Ephesian, id. 21:29, and was with the Apostle in Jerusalem on his last visit there) I left (not ‘ they (the Asian brethren who came to Rome) left ,’ as Hug) in Miletus (see again this discussed in Prolegg. to this Epistle, i. 5. Various conjectures have been made to escape the difficulty here presented: (Baronius, Beza, Grot., Est., &c.) a Miletus in Crete (Michaelis, Schrader)) sick. Endeavour to come before winter (when the voyage would be impossible, and so the visit thrown over to another year. See also on 2Ti 4:13 ). Eubulus (otherwise unknown) greets thee, and Pudens (see excursus at the end of the Prolegg. to this Epistle on Pudens and Claudia), and Linus (Iren. iii. 3. 3, p. 176, (at Rome) . . So also Euseb. H. E. iii. 4), and Claudia (see excursus as before), and all the brethren .
Fuente: Henry Alford’s Greek Testament
2Ti 4:19-22 . Final salutations.
Fuente: The Expositors Greek Testament by Robertson
2Ti 4:19 . : The same unusual order, the wife before the husband, is found in Rom 16:3 , Act 18:18 ; Act 18:26 , but not in Act 18:2 , 1Co 16:19 . “Probably Prisca was of higher rank than her husband, for her name is that of a good old Roman family [the Acilian gens]. Aquila was probably a freedman. The name does indeed occur as cognomen in some Roman families; but it was also a slave name, for a freedman of Maecenas was called (C. Cilnius) Aquila” (Ramsay, St. Paul the Traveller , pp. 268, 269; see also Sanday and Headlam, Romans , p. 118 sqq .).
: Their names are inserted after from the Acts of Paul and Thecla , by the cursives 46 and 109: .
Fuente: The Expositors Greek Testament by Robertson
NASB (UPDATED) TEXT: 2Ti 4:19-21
19Greet Prisca and Aquila, and the household of Onesiphorus. 20Erastus remained at Corinth, but Trophimus I left sick at Miletus. 21Make every effort to come before winter. Eubulus greets you, also Pudens and Linus and Claudia and all the brethren.
2Ti 4:19 “Prisca and Aquila” The lady (also called Priscilla) is mentioned first in Act 18:18; Act 18:26; Rom 16:3 and here; her husband is mentioned first in Act 18:2 and 1Co 16:19. Possibly she was mentioned first, which was highly unusual, because she was of Roman nobility. She may have been the stronger personality of the couple. They were tentmakers (or leather workers) like Paul and were his good friends and co-laborers in the gospel.
“Onesiphorous” See note at 2Ti 1:16-18.
2Ti 4:20 “Erastus” The same name is also mentioned in Act 19:22 and Rom 16:23, but it is probably not the same person.
“Trophimus I left sick” This man is mentioned in Act 20:4; Act 21:29 and possibly 2Co 8:19-22.
There are so many questions we would like to ask the NT writers. One subject all believers think about is physical healing. In Acts (cf. Act 19:12; Act 28:7-9) Paul is able to heal, but here and in 2Co 12:7-10 and Php 2:25-30, he seems unable. Why are some healed and not all, and is there a time window connected to healing which has closed?
I surely believe in a supernatural, compassionate Father who has and does physically as well as spiritually heal, but why is this healing aspect seemingly present and then noticeably absent? I do not think that it is connected to human faith, for surely Paul had faith (cf. 2 Corinthians 12). I feel that healing and believing miracles affirmed the truthfulness and validity of the gospel, which it still does in areas of the world where it is first proclaimed. However, I feel that God wants us to walk by faith and not by sight. Also, physical illness is often allowed in believer’s lives
1. as temporal punishment for sin
2. as consequences of life in a fallen world
3. to help believers mature spiritually
My problem is I never know which one is involved! My prayer for God’s will to be done in each case is not a lack of faith, but a sincere attempt to allow the gracious, compassionate God to work His will in each life.
“at Miletus” This was a seaport of western Asia Minor (western Turkey), south of Ephesus.
2Ti 4:21 “Make every effort to come before winter” Paul was lonesome and probably had eye problems. Shipping stopped in the winter, so no one would be able to come to him after the seasonal storms began (cf. Titus 3:21).
We do not know of any of these believers from other parts of the NT. Oh, but God does!
There is an early church tradition (i.e., list of Roman bishops from Irenaeus) that a man named “Linus” was the leader of the church in Rome in the late 60’s to late 70’s.
Fuente: You Can Understand the Bible: Study Guide Commentary Series by Bob Utley
Prisca. Elsewhere called Priscilla. Act 18:2, Act 18:18, Act 18:24. Rom 16:3. 1Co 16:19.
household. as 2Ti 1:16.
Onesiphorus. Compare 2Ti 1:11.
Fuente: Companion Bible Notes, Appendices and Graphics
19-21.] Salutations and notices. Salute Prisca and Aquila (see notes, Act 18:2; Rom 16:3) and the house of Onesiphorus (himself probably deceased. See on ch. 2Ti 1:16). Erastus (Act 19:22, an Erastus was sent forward into Macedonia by the Apostle from Ephesus,-and Rom 16:23, an Erastus sends greeting, who is described as the (Corinth). This latter would seem to be the person here mentioned) abode in Corinth (on the inferences to be drawn from this, see Prolegg to Past. Epp. ii. 30 f.), but Trophimus (he accompanied the Apostle from Greece into Asia, Act 20:4. He was an Ephesian, id. 21:29, and was with the Apostle in Jerusalem on his last visit there) I left (not they (the Asian brethren who came to Rome) left, as Hug) in Miletus (see again this discussed in Prolegg. to this Epistle, i. 5. Various conjectures have been made to escape the difficulty here presented: (Baronius, Beza, Grot., Est., &c.)-a Miletus in Crete (Michaelis, Schrader)) sick. Endeavour to come before winter (when the voyage would be impossible, and so the visit thrown over to another year. See also on 2Ti 4:13). Eubulus (otherwise unknown) greets thee, and Pudens (see excursus at the end of the Prolegg. to this Epistle on Pudens and Claudia), and Linus (Iren. iii. 3. 3, p. 176, (at Rome) . . So also Euseb. H. E. iii. 4), and Claudia (see excursus as before), and all the brethren.
Fuente: The Greek Testament
2Ti 4:19
Salute Prisca and Aquila,-These were two of Pauls earliest friends after he had entered into his great work in the service of the Lord Jesus. They were originally of Pontus (Act 18:2); they had taken up their abode in Rome, where Aquila exercised his trade as a tent-maker (Act 18:2-3). They were driven from Rome by the decree of Claudius, which banished the Jews from Rome; they came to Corinth, where Paul became acquainted with them; they evidently were Christians when Paul first met them; they were with Paul at Corinth, at Ephesus (1Co 16:19), and Paul sends greetings to them at Rome (Rom 16:3). They evidently were among the many active and zealous teachers in the early days of the church. That they were able and zealous is evident from the fact that it was they who taught the learned Apollos the way of God more accurately. (Act 18:26.) In this place and in others Prisca is named before her husband. This seems to indicate that in this case the woman was the principal worker in the cause of the Lord Jesus.
and the house of Onesiphorus.-Onesiphorus had been with Paul in Rome (1:17) and was now likely teaching or preaching, but whose family was at Ephesus. Paul evidently intends to compliment the family for its worth and holiness.
Fuente: Old and New Testaments Restoration Commentary
Prisca: Act 18:2, Act 18:18, Act 18:26, Rom 16:3, Rom 16:4, 1Co 16:19, Priscilla
the: 2Ti 1:16-18
Reciprocal: Rom 16:10 – of
Fuente: The Treasury of Scripture Knowledge
2Ti 4:19. Prisca is another form for Priscilla. She and her husband Aquila had been faithful friends of Paul, and he is here “speaking a good word” for them. See chapter 1:16 for comments on the household of Onesiphorus.
Fuente: Combined Bible Commentary
2Ti 4:19. Aquila and Priscilla. Partly, perhaps, from their trade as tentmakers, partly from their work as Christian preachers, their life was one of constant change, first at Rome and then at Corinth (Act 18:2), then at Ephesus (Act 18:18-19; Act 18:26; 1Co 16:19), then at Rome again (Rom 16:3), lastly, as here, once more at Ephesus.
The household of Onesiphorus. Probably thus described as having lost their head and father (2Ti 1:16).
Fuente: A Popular Commentary on the New Testament
Observe here, How mindful the apostle is of his absent friends; though he was now in prison, and they a great way from him, yet he sends pious salutations to them. This Prisca or Priscilla, and Aquilla, are often remembered by St. Paul, he lodged in their house at Corinth: The saints and servants of God forget not one another, when at the ends of the earth. – He salutes also Onesiphorus and his household, wife and children, and servants. Thus do pious governors procure a blessing upon their families as well as upon their persons. Onesiphorus is not only prayed for himself, and saluted singly, but likewise his household also; Salute Prisca and Aquilla, and the household of Onesiphorus.
Fuente: Expository Notes with Practical Observations on the New Testament
Closing Thoughts Paul sent greetings to his tentmaking friends, Prisca and Aquila, who did so much to further the gospel ( Act 18:1-3 ; Act 24:1-27 ; Act 25:1-27 ; Act 26:1-32 ; Act 27:1-44 ; Act 28:1-31 ; Rom 16:3-5 ). Erastus, a companion who helped preach the gospel, stayed in Corinth, perhaps even making it his home ( Act 19:22 ). Trophimus was an Asiatic Christian who made the journey with Paul to Jerusalem at the end of the third missionary journey. He was one of the Gentiles Paul was accused of taking into the temple ( Act 21:28-29 ). Paul had left him sick at Miletus, which shows us the miraculous gifts the apostles possessed were not used for personal purposes but for the furtherance of the gospel.
Paul knew he would soon die and urged Timothy to come before winter. Travel in the winter was extremely difficult. If Timothy did not reach Paul before winter, he might have to wait another season. In spite of the persecution the church was enduring at the time of this writing, Paul was able to name several specific Christians and then the brethren in general as those who sent greetings to Timothy.
Paul’s final written prayer was that Jesus would be with the spirit of Timothy, a fine gospel preacher. The “you” in the closing words of the prayer is plural and may well be the apostle’s prayer for the church with which Timothy was working, likely Ephesus ( 2Ti 4:19-22 ).
Fuente: Gary Hampton Commentary on Selected Books
2Ti 4:19-22. Salute Prisca This word is a contraction of the name Priscilla; or, as Estius supposes, Priscilla may be the diminutive of Prisca. Erastus abode at Corinth When I came from thence, being chamberlain of the city, Rom 16:23. He is likewise mentioned, Act 19:22, as one who administered to Paul. But Trophimus have I left at Miletum sick It has been very justly argued from this text, that a power of working miracles did not always reside in the apostles; and indeed if it had, one can hardly imagine that any good and useful man would have been sick and died under their notice; which would have been quite inconsistent with the scheme of Providence. Timothys frequent infirmities afford a further argument to the same purpose. Do thy diligence to come before winter Sailing being then dangerous. Some, comparing Heb 13:23 with this text, have concluded that Timothy did come, and was seized at Rome, and confined longer than Paul himself. But it seems much more probable that the epistle to the Hebrews was written during Pauls first imprisonment, and consequently several years before this. Eubulus greeteth thee, and Pudens Though these persons, like the other Roman brethren, did not appear with the apostle at his first answer, they did not flee from the city, nor desert him altogether; but visited him in his prison, and desired him to send their salutation to Timothy. Linus is said, by some of the ancients, to have been the first bishop of Rome, after the apostles Paul and Peter. But Theodoret speaks of this only as a tradition. Claudia is said to have been a British lady, whom Paul was the instrument of converting, and that she first carried the gospel into Britain. But of this there is no evidence. According to tradition, the Apostle Peter was now in Rome, and suffered martyrdom at the same time with St. Paul. But seeing Paul says, 2Ti 4:11, Only Luke is with me, and 2Ti 4:16, At my first answer no one appeared with me; also, seeing Peters salutation was not sent to Timothy, his being in Rome at the time this letter was written may justly be doubted. If he suffered martyrdom along with Paul, as the ancients affirm, he must have come to Rome after Paul wrote his second letter to Timothy. Grace be with you This being a benediction distinct from the one bestowed on Timothy in the preceding clause, it must have been designed for such of the brethren where Timothy was, as maintained the truth of the gospel in purity.
Fuente: Joseph Bensons Commentary on the Old and New Testaments
Verse 19
Prisca; Priscilla. (Acts 18:1-3,18,19.)
Fuente: Abbott’s Illustrated New Testament
“Salute Prisca and Aquila, and the household of Onesiphorus.” 20 Erastus abode at Corinth: but Trophimus have I left at Miletum sick.”
This is a verse which seems to stop those that believe in healing today in their tracks. I have mentioned that Paul could not heal this man, he could not heal himself (thorn in the flesh) and he could not heal Timothy for he told him to drink a little wine for his stomachs sake. The fact that in the early part of Paul’s life people were being healed by clothes that had been sent out by the apostle yet in his later life it is clear that he no longer had the gift of healing.
On internet boards the Charismatics often cease to post after this thought. One that lived in Washington ventured into the waters and suggested I was quite wrong. He however declined my invitation to come down to the Salem hospital and empty it I told him I was sure the Statesman Journal would cover the story and I would be proven wrong.
Fuente: Mr. D’s Notes on Selected New Testament Books by Stanley Derickson
C. Additional greetings and instructions 4:19-21
Fuente: Expository Notes of Dr. Constable (Old and New Testaments)
Paul sent greetings to his old friends Prisca (Priscilla) and Aquila who then lived in Ephesus (cf. Act 18:2; Act 18:18; Act 18:26; Rom 16:3; 1Co 16:19). He also greeted the loyal family of Onesiphorus of whom he had written earlier (2Ti 1:16).
Fuente: Expository Notes of Dr. Constable (Old and New Testaments)
Chapter 36
THE PERSONAL DETAILS A GUARANTEE OF GENUINENESS.
IT would scarcely be exceeding the limits of legitimate hyperbole to say that these two passages prove the authenticity and genuineness of the Pastoral Epistles; that they are sufficient to show that these letters are an authentic account of the matters of which they treat, and that they are genuine letters of the Apostle Paul.
In the first of these expositions it was pointed out how improbable it is that a portion of one of these letters should be genuine, and not the remainder of it; or that one of the three should be genuine, and not the other two; and a fortiori, that two of the three should be genuine and not the remaining one.
The passages before us are among those of which it has been truly said that they “cling so closely to Paul that it is only by tearing the letter to pieces that any part can be dissociated from that Apostle.” The internal evidence is here too strong even for those critics who deny the Pauline authorship of the Pastoral Epistles as a whole. Thus Renan and Weisse are disposed to admit that we have here embedded in the work of a later writer portions of a genuine letter of the Apostle; while Ewald, Hausrath, and Pfleiderer accept not only these verses, but the earlier passage about Phygelus, Hermogenes, and Onesiphorus as genuine also. Similar views are advocated by Hitzig, Krenkel, and Immer, of whom the two first admit that the Epistle to Titus also contains genuine fragments. And quite recently (1882) we have Lemme contending that only the central portion of 2 Timothy {2Ti 2:11-26; 2Ti 3:1-17; 2Ti 4:1-5} is an interpolation.
These concessions amount to a concession of the whole case. It is impossible to stop there. Either much more must be conceded or much less. For
(1) we cannot without very strong evidence indeed accept so improbable a supposition as that a Christian long after the Apostles death was in possession of letters written by him, of which no one else knew anything, that he worked bits of these into writings of his own, which he wished to pass off as Apostolic, and that he then destroyed the genuine letters, or disposed of them in such a way that no one knew that they had ever existed. Such a story is not absolutely impossible, but it is so unlikely to be true that to accept it without clear evidence would be most uncritical. And there is not only no clear evidence; there is no evidence at all. The hypothesis is pure imagination.
(2) The portions of this letter which are allowed by adverse critics to be genuine are precisely those in which a forger would be pretty sure to be caught tripping. They are full of personal details, some of which admit of being tested, and all of which can be criticized, as to whether they are natural and consistent or not. Would a forger be likely to risk detection by venturing on such dangerous ground? He would put into the letter those doctrines for which he wished to appear to have St. Pauls authority; and, if he added anything else, he would take care not to go beyond vague generalities, too indefinite to be caught in the meshes of criticism. But the writer of this letter has done the reverse of all this. He has given an abundance of personal detail, such as can be found in only one other place in the New Testament, and that in the concluding portion of the Epistle to the Romans, one of, the indisputable writings of St. Paul.
And he has not been caught tripping. Hostile writers have subjected these details to the most searching criticism; and the result, as we have seen, is that many of them are constrained to admit that these portions of the letter are genuine productions of the Apostle. That is, those portions of the Epistle which can be subjected to a severe test, are allowed to be by St. Paul, because they stand the test; while those which do not admit of being thus tested are rejected, not because there is any proof of their being spurious, but because critics think that the style is not like the Apostles. Would they not be the first to deride others for such an opinion? Supposing that these details had contained absurdities or contradictions, which could not have been written by St. Paul, would they not have maintained, and reasonably maintained, that it was monstrous to surrender as spurious those sections of the letter which had been tested and found wanting, and to defend as genuine the other sections, which did not admit of being tested?
Let us look at the details a little more closely. Besides St. Paul and Timothy, twenty-three Christians of the Apostolic age are mentioned in this short letter. A considerable number of these are persons of whom we read in the Acts or in St. Pauls other letters; but the majority are new names, and in most of these cases we know nothing about the bearers of the names beyond what is told us here. Would a forger have given us this mixture of known and unknown? If he ventured upon names at all, would he not either have given us imaginary persons, whose names and actions could not be checked by existing records, or else have kept closely to the records, so that the checking might tell in his favor? He has done neither
The new names do not look like those of imaginary persons, and the mention of known persons is by no means a mere reproduction of what is said of them elsewhere. “Demas forsook me, having loved this present world. Take Mark and bring him with thee: for he is useful to me for ministering.” A forger with the Acts and the Epistles to the Colossians and Philemon before him would have made Mark forsake Paul, and Demas be commended as useful to him; for in the Acts {Act 15:38} Paul had to condemn Mark for slackness, and in the Epistles to the Colossians {Col 4:14} and to Philemon {Phm 1:24} Demas with Luke is waiting on the Apostle in his imprisonment. And yet how natural that the Apostles condemnation should rouse Mark to greater earnestness, and that the Apostle should recognize that earnestness in this farewell letter? And how consistent with human frailty also that Demas should have courage enough to stand by St. Paul during his first Roman imprisonment and yet should quail before the greater risks of the second! That the Apostles complaint respecting him means more than this is unlikely yet some have exaggerated it into a charge of heresy, or even utter apostasy. We are simply to understand that Demas preferred comfort and security away from Rome to the hardship and danger of a Roman prison; and therefore went to Thessalonica. Why he selected that town we are not told, but there being a Christian community there would be one reason.
“Titus to Dalmatia.” Why should a forger send Titus to Dalmatia? The Pastoral Epistles whether a forgery or not, are all by one hand and seem to have been written within a short time of one another. Would not a forger have sent Titus either to Crete, {Tit 1:5} or to Nicopolis? {Tit 3:12} But if Titus went to Nicopolis, and failed to find Paul there, owing to his having been meanwhile arrested, what more probable than that he should go on into Dalmaria? The forger, if he had thought of this would have called attention to it, to ensure that his ingenuity was not overlooked.
“But Tychicus I sent to Ephesus.” The meaning of the “but” is not quite clear. Perhaps the most probable supposition is that it indicates the reason why the Apostle needs a useful person like Mark. “I had such a person in Tychicus; but he is gone on a mission for me to Ephesus.” How natural all this is! And what could induce a forger to put it in? We are told in the Acts that Tychicus belonged to the Roman province of Asia, {Act 20:4} and that he was with St. Paul at the close of his third missionary journey about nine years before the writing of this letter to Timothy. Three or four years later we find Tychicus once more with St. Paul during the first Roman imprisonment; and he is sent with Onesimus as the bearer of the Epistle to the Colossians {Col 4:7} and to the Ephesians. {Eph 6:21} And we learn from the sentence before us, as well as from Tit 3:12, that he still enjoys the confidence of the Apostle, for he is sent on missions for him to Crete and to Ephesus. All these separate notices of him hang together consistently representing him as “the beloved brother,” and also as a “faithful minister and fellow-servant in the Lord,” whom St. Paul was accustomed to entrust with special commissions. If the mission to Ephesus mentioned here is a mere copy of the other missions, would not a forger have taken some pains to ensure that the similarity between his fiction and previous facts should be observed?
“The cloke that I left at Troas with Carpus, bring when thou comest, and the books, especially the parchments.” Here the arguments against the probability of forgery reach a climax; and this verse should be remembered side by side with “Be no longer a drinker of water, but use a little wine for thy stomachs sake” in the First Epistle. {1Ti 5:23} What writer of a fictitious letter would ever have dreamed of inserting either passage? To an unbiased mind they go a long way towards producing the impression that we are dealing with real letters and not with inventions. And this argument holds good equally well, whatever meaning we give to the word () which is rendered “cloke.” It probably means a cloak and is a Greek form of the Latin penula. It appears to have been a circular garment without sleeves, but with a hole in the middle for the head. Hence some persons have made the astounding suggestion that it was an eucharistic vestment analogous to a chasuble, and have supposed that the Apostle is here asking, not for warm clothing “before winter,” but for a sacerdotal dress for ritualistic purposes. But since Chrysostoms day there has been a more credible suggestion that the word means a bag or case for books. If so, would the Apostle have mentioned both the book-bag and the books, and would he have put the bag before the books? He might naturally have written, “Bring the book-bag,”-of course with the books in it; or, “Bring the books and the bag also.” But it seems a strange way of putting the request to say, “The book-bag that I left at Troas with Carpus, bring when thou comest; the books also, especially the parchments,” as if the bag were the chief thing that he thought about.
It seems better to abide by the old rendering “cloke”; and, if this is correct, then it fits in well with “Do thy diligence to come before winter.” Yet the writer in no way draws our attention to the connection between the need of the thick cloak and the approach of winter: and the writer of a real letter would have no need to do so. But would a forger have left the connection to chance?
Whether Alexander the coppersmith is the person of that name who was put forward by the Jews in the riot raised by Demetrius, {Act 19:33} is not more than a possibility. The name Alexander was exceedingly common; and we are not told that the Jew in the riot at Ephesus was a smith, or that Alexander the smith was a Jew. In what way the coppersmith “showed much ill-treatment” to the Apostle we are not told. As St. Paul goes on immediately afterwards to speak of his “first defense,” it seems reasonable to conjecture that Alexander had seriously injured the Apostles cause in some way. But this is pure conjecture; and the ill-treatment may refer to general persecution of St. Paul and opposition to his teaching. On the whole the latter hypothesis appears to be safer.
The reading, “The Lord will render to him” () is shown by an overwhelming balance of evidence to be preferable to “The Lord reward him () according to his works.” There is no malediction. Just as in ver. 8 {2Ti 4:8}, the Apostle expresses his conviction that the Lord will render () a crown of righteousness to all those who love His appearing, so here he expresses a conviction that He will render a just recompense to all those who oppose the work of His kingdom. What follows in the next verse, “may it not be laid to their account,” seems to show that the Apostle is in no cursing mood. He writes in sorrow rather than in anger. It is necessary to put Timothy on his guard against a dangerous person; but he leaves the requital of the evil deeds to God.
“Salute Prisca and Aquila.” A forger with the Apostles indisputable writings before him, would hardly have inserted this; for he would have concluded from Rom 16:3-4, that these two well-known helpers of St. Paul were in Rome at this very time. Aquila was a Jew of Pontus who had migrated from Pontus to Rome, but had had to leave the capital again when Claudius expelled the Jews from the city. {Act 18:2} He and his wife Prisca, or Priscilla, then settled in Corinth, where St. Paul took up his abode with them, because they were Jews and tent-makers, like himself. And in their workshop the foundations of the Corinthian Church were laid. Thenceforward they became his helpers in preaching the Gospel, and went with him to Ephesus, where they helped forward the conversion of the eloquent Alexandrian Jew Apollos. After much service to the Church they returned once more to Rome, and were there when St. Paul wrote the Epistle to the Romans. Either the persecution under Nero, or possibly missionary enterprise, induced them once more to leave Rome and return to Asia. The Apostle naturally puts such faithful friends, “who for his life laid down their necks,” {Rom 16:3-4} in the very first place in sending his personal greetings; and they are equally naturally coupled with the household of Onesiphorus, who had done similar service in courageously visiting St. Paul in his imprisonment (2Ti 4:19). The double mention of “the household of Onesiphorus” (not of Onesiphorus himself) has been commented upon in a former exposition.
Of the statements, “Erastus abode at Corinth: but Trophimus I left at Miletus sick,” no more need be said than to point out how lifelike and natural they are in a real letter from one friend to another who knows the persons mentioned; how unlikely they are to have occurred to a writer who was inventing a letter in order to advocate his own doctrinal views. That Trophimus is the same person as the Ephesian, who with Tychicus accompanied St. Paul on his third missionary journey, {Act 20:4; Act 21:29} may be safely assumed. Whether Erastus is identical with the treasurer of Corinth, {Rom 16:23} or with the Erastus who was sent by Paul with Timothy to Macedonia, {Act 19:22} must remain uncertain.
“Eubulus saluteth thee, and Pudens, and Linus, and Claudia.” With this group of names our accumulation of arguments for the genuineness of this portion of the letter, and therefore of the whole letter, and therefore of all three Pastoral Epistles, comes to an end. The argument is a cumulative one, and this last item of the internal evidence is by no means the least important or least convincing. About Eubulus, Pudens, and Claudia we know nothing beyond what this passage implies, viz., that they were members of the Christian Church in Rome; for the very bare possibility that Pudens and Claudia may be the persons of that name who are mentioned by Martial, is not worth more than a passing reference. But Linus is a person about whom something is known. It is unlikely that in the Apostolic age there were two Christians of this name in the Roman Church; and therefore we may safely conclude that the Linus who here sends greeting is identical with the Linus, who, according to very early testimony preserved by Irenaeus (“Haer.,” III 3:3), was first among the earliest bishops of the Church of Rome. Irenaeus himself expressly identifies the first Bishop of Rome with the Linus mentioned in the Epistles to Timothy, and that in a passage in which (thanks to Eusebius) we have the original Greek of Irenaeus as well as the Latin translation. From his time ( cir. A.D. 180) to the present day, Linus, Anencletus or Anacletus or Cletus (all three forms of the name are used), and Clement have been commemorated as the three first Bishops of Rome. They must all of them have been contemporaries of the Apostle. Of these three far the most famous was Clement; and a writer at the end of the first century, or beginning of the second, inventing a letter for St. Paul, would be much more likely to put Clement into it than Linus. Again, such a writer would know that Linus, after the Apostles death, became the presiding presbyter of the Church of Rome, and would place him before Eubulus and Pudens. But here Linus is placed after the other two. The obvious inference is, that, at the time when this letter was written, Linus was not yet in any position of authority. Like the other persons here named, he was a leading member of the Church in Rome, otherwise he would hardly have been mentioned at all; but he has not yet been promoted to the chief place, otherwise he would at least have been mentioned first, and probably with some epithet or title. Once more one asks, what writer of fiction would have thought of these niceties? And what writer who thought of them, and elaborated them thus skillfully, would have abstained from all attempt to prevent their being overlooked and unappreciated?
The result of this investigation is greatly to increase our confidence in the genuineness of this letter and of all three Pastoral Epistles. We began by treating them as veritable writings of the great Apostle, and a closer acquaintance with them has justified this treatment. Doubts may be raised about everything; but reasonable doubts have their limits. To dispute the authenticity of the Epistles to the Corinthians, Romans, and Galatians is now considered to be a sure proof that the doubter cannot estimate evidence; and we may look forward to the time when the Second Epistle to Timothy will be ranked with those four great Epistles as indisputable. Meanwhile let no student of this letter doubt that in it he is reading the touching words in which the Apostle of the Gentiles gave his last charge to his beloved disciple, and through him to the Christian Church.