This blog post is adapted from Lutheran Bible Companion Volume 2: Intertestamental Era, New Testament, and Bible Dictionary.
Paul, on his way to Macedonia, has left Timothy at Ephesus with instructions to “charge certain persons not to teach any different doctrine” (1 Timothy 1:3). Paul does not describe this “different doctrine” systematically, but from his attacks upon it in 1:3–7; 4:1–3, 7; 6:3–5, 20–21 and from the tenor of his instructions for the regulation of the life of the Church, it is clear that Timothy must do battle with a deeply troubling heresy.
Church Fathers such as Irenaeus and Tertullian believed the heresy was an early stage of “Gnosticism” that was to become in its fully developed form the most serious threat to the Church in their generation. (Gnosticism is not so much a system as a trend or current of thought that produced a great variety of systems, often by combining with some already existing religion. It was emerging as a corrupting force before the great Christian-Gnostic systems of the second century appeared; we have already seen something like it in the heresy that threatened the church at Colossae.) However, since the 1945 discovery and subsequent study of actual Gnostic writings, the Nag Hammadi Codices, it seems better to characterize the heresy Paul combats as a mixture of Jewish beliefs with philosophical ideas that have some similarities with later Gnosticism.
Authorship
Critical scholars have called into question the authenticity of the Pastoral Letters on a number of counts, chief among them: (1) the historical setting of the letters; (2) the type of church organization presupposed by the letters; (3) the nature of the heresy combated in the letters; (4) the doctrinal substance of the letters; and (5) the style and language of the letters. The following paragraphs will describe each concern and provide broader consideration.
The Historical Setting
It is argued that the journeys and activities presupposed by the Pastoral Letters cannot be fitted into the life of Paul as known from his undoubted epistles and from the Book of Acts. It is usually assumed that the Roman imprisonment of AD 58–60 ended in Paul’s death.
Over against this, one may urge that there is good reason to believe that Paul’s imprisonment ended in his release; both Festus and Agrippa deemed him innocent, and no ancient source actually says that Paul was executed after his two years’ imprisonment in Rome. Assuming, then, that Paul was released from prison in AD 60, the years between that date and the death of Paul (which may have occurred as late as AD 68) leave ample room for the activities presupposed by the Pastoral Letters, even if we cannot reconstruct the history of this period with absolute accuracy.
Church Organization
The church organization presupposed by the letters, it is urged, is too far advanced and too well established for the first century. It is assumed, therefore, that a writer of the late first or early second century wrote the letters in Paul’s name in order to get apostolic sanction for contemporary arrangements in the church.
It may be said in reply that we hear of the appointment of elders in the churches as early as the first missionary journey (Acts 14:23). Paul speaks of “shepherds” and “teachers” in his Letter to the Ephesians (Ephesians 4:11) and addresses the overseers and deacons of Philippi in his Letter to the Philippians (1:1). Moreover, the organization presupposed in the letters is not elaborate and is not fixed with legal precision. The terms “elder” and “overseer” (which were later distinguished) are still used interchangeably (Titus 1:5, 7), and the concern of the letters is always for the function of the office as a power to edify the Church, not for an exact definition of its rights and powers.
The Nature of Heresy Combated in the Letters
It is asserted that the false teaching attacked by the author can only be the great second-century Gnostic systems.
It is true that the false teachers and teachings attacked in the Pastoral Letters have some similarities with later Gnosticism. However, the heresy combated by the Pastoral Letters has a strongly Judaic coloring, something that is not broadly characteristic of second-century Gnosticism. There is no indication in the letters that the teachings under attack are the full-blown systems that divided the second-century Church.
The Doctrinal Substance and Language of the Letters
Judgment in this area is bound to be somewhat subjective. For example, the fact that the work of the Holy Spirit receives relatively little emphasis has been used as an argument against the authenticity of the Pastoral Letters. These letters abound in teaching so completely Pauline in content and formulation that it has no real parallel except in the accepted letters of Paul. It should be remembered also that these letters were written to addressees and for purposes quite different from those of Paul’s other letters. In general, a judgment like that of an able modern commentator would seem to be fair and reasonable: there is nothing in the Pastorals that Paul could not have written; there is much that only he could have written.
The Style and Language of the Letters
The style resembles, as one would expect, the practical and hortatory portions of the other Pauline Letters rather than that of the doctrinal portions. Besides, Paul’s style varies considerably from letter to letter and even within a single letter, so that arguments based on style must be used with considerable caution.
The vocabulary presents the greatest difficulty. Over 36 percent of the words that make up the vocabulary of the Pastoral Letters are not found in any of the other Pauline Letters. This large percentage of new words is in part explained by the newness of the subject matter of these letters, but only in part; for the little words (connectives, prepositions, etc.) that have no connection with the subject matter have changed too. How can one account for so radical a change?
First, Paul’s vocabulary changes considerably within the range of his undoubtedly genuine letters, too, though not as radically as in the case of the Pastoral Letters. Second, part of the change may be accounted for by the fact that Paul quotes or paraphrases “sure sayings” of the Early Church more freely here than anywhere else in his writings. Third, it must be remembered that Paul probably spoke and wrote Greek as a second language, which he picked up largely by ear. His language would change more readily than that of a born Greek under changing conditions and surroundings. Thus his long stay in Rome would tend to make his Greek more like that spoken in Rome.
Purpose and Recipients
Paul wrote to Timothy in order to combat a heresy. The trend of thought in the heresy at Ephesus would lead inevitably to an utter distortion of all that “the Gospel of the glory of the blessed God” (1 Timothy 1:11) proclaimed. God the Creator disappears—all the good gifts of food and drink that He gives are suspected and feared; all the salutary orders that He has established in this world (marriage, family, government) are despised and ignored. The Old Testament, which rings with glad adoration of the God who made the heavens and the earth and blesses people within the orders of this world, must either be ignored or have its obvious sense interpreted away by allegorizing “myths and endless genealogies” (1:4). The Law becomes the arena of speculation and vain discussions, not the voice of God that calls the sinner to account and condemns him. Where knowledge is made central in a person’s religious life, and self-redemption by way of ascetic exercise is made the way of salvation, there is no possibility of that pure Christian love that “issues from a pure heart and a good conscience and a sincere faith” (1:5). A narrow and sectarian pride takes its place (6:4, 20; cf 1:3–7). Where the teaching office becomes a wordy, speculative, disputatious purveying of “knowledge” to a select coterie of initiates, it is bound to become corrupted; it appeals to the pride, the selfishness, and the mercenary instincts of mankind, and the teacher becomes that ghastly, demon-ridden caricature of the true teacher that Paul has described in 4:1–2.
Timothy’s task will be to let the fresh and wholesome winds of “sound doctrine” into the house of God, whose air has been infected by morbid and infectious mists. In opposition to the demonic denial of God the Creator and the rejection of His good gifts, he must present the glorious Gospel of the blessed God “who gives life to all things” (6:13). God still has upon His every creation the mark of His primeval “very good!” (Genesis 1:31), and the creation is even in its fallen state “made holy by the word of God and prayer” (1 Timothy 4:5).
In opposition to the rarefied and unreal Christ of speculation, Paul must present “the man Christ Jesus” (2:5), the Christ Jesus who really entered into history under Pontius Pilate (6:13) and died a real death upon the cross for the sins of all people (2:6). He must present this Christ as the whole content of the truth that the Church upholds and guards, the mystery of God “manifested in the flesh” (3:16).
To the imposing picture of these brilliant, speculative, disputatious, and mercenary men, Timothy must present the picture of the true teacher. He must, first of all, himself be that picture; he dare not let himself be drawn down to the level of his opponents and fight demonic fire with fire; he must do battle, “holding faith and a good conscience” (1:19); he must, as a good minister of Jesus Christ, not allow himself to be infected by what he opposes but must continue to be “trained in the words of the faith and of the good doctrine” that he has followed hitherto. He must train himself, athlete-like, in godliness (4:6–8). Thus he will be able to fight the good fight of faith as a “man of God,” standing in the succession of Moses and the prophets, devoted to God’s cause (6:11–12; cf 6:3–10), laying hold even now of that eternal life that shall be his in fullness at the appearing of the Lord Jesus Christ (6:11–15). He must himself be all that the Gnostic teachers are not; and he is to see to it that the men who oversee the church’s life and administer the church’s charity, the overseers and deacons, are men of like character. They need not be brilliant men; they must be good men.
Summary of 1 Timothy
1 Timothy 1 The work of the Gospel ministry carried out by Paul and Timothy flows from God’s command. The words they speak are His words, not their own. Their competence for ministry comes from God, who called them to His service. Paul writes this Epistle to stop the teaching of false doctrine among the Ephesian churches and to promote the teaching of sound doctrine.
1 Timothy 2–3 The Gospel affirms the unique vocations God assigned to men and women at creation. Only qualified men may serve as pastors of God’s flock. Deacons were faithful men, entrusted with special responsibilities for service to their fellow Christians. (The calling of deaconess is referred to in Romans 16:1 rather than here.)
1 Timothy 4 God daily and richly provides us with all that we need. To reject God’s good gifts, or to receive them thanklessly, is a sin against His graciousness. Pastors are to command and teach true doctrine, while condemning doctrine that is false and deceitful.
1 Timothy 5–6 Paul describes how to work respectfully with other members of the congregation. When Christians interact with one another in ways that are honorable and pure, they beautifully reflect God and the faith they confess. As a true man of God, Timothy is to flee every corrupting influence and keep God’s command, faithfully guarding that which has been deposited with him.
Martin Luther on 1 Timothy
“This epistle St. Paul writes in order to provide a model to all bishops of what they are to teach and how they are to rule Christendom in the various stations of life, so that it may not be necessary for them to rule Christians according to their own human opinions.
“In chapter 1 he charges that a bishop keep true faith and love and resist the false preachers of the law who, beside Christ and the gospel, would also insist on the works of the law. In a brief summary, he comprehends the entire Christian doctrine concerning the purpose of the law and the nature of the gospel. He offers himself as an example to comfort all sinners and those with troubled conscience.
“In chapter 2 he charges that prayer be made for all stations of life. He also commands that women are not to preach or wear costly adornment, but are to be obedient to men. [For Luther’s intent, see Ephesians 5:21–33.]
“In chapter 3 he describes the kind of persons that bishops, or priests, and their wives ought to be, and also the deacons and their wives. He praises those who desire to be bishops of this kind.
“In chapter 4 he prophesies of false bishops and the spiritual estate which is opposed to that spoken of above, who will not be persons of that kind, but instead will forbid marriage and foods, and with their doctrines of men inculcate the very opposite of the things Paul has described.
“In chapter 5 he gives orders as to how widows and young women should be looked after, and which widows are to be supported from the common funds; also how godly bishops or priests are to be held in honor, and blameworthy ones punished.
“In chapter 6 he exhorts the bishops to hold fast to the pure gospel and to promulgate it by their preaching and living. They are to avoid senseless and meddlesome controversies which are only raised for gaining worldly reputation and riches.” (AE 35:388)
Scripture: ESV®.
The quotation marked AE in this blog is from Luther’s Works, American Edition, vol. 35, p. 388 © 1960 by Augsburg Fortress. Used by permission of the publisher.
Blog post adapted from pp. 599–604, 607–608, 611–12 in Lutheran Bible Companion, Volume 2: Intertestamental Era, New Testament, and Bible Dictionary © 2014 Concordia Publishing House. All rights reserved.
Read the Lutheran Bible Companion to find more commentary on 1 Timothy or any book of the Bible.
