The Message of 1 Timothy and Titus

John Stott

• Publisher: IVP
• Year: 2021
• ISBN:
  9781783590681
• Topic: Teología y religión
• Subtopic: Estudios bíblicos

Truth matters. The apostle Paul's passion for truth runs throughout his Pastoral Letters - that it may be faithfully guarded and handed on. John Stott is at pains to convey Paul's passionate concern for the future of the gospel, and for younger pastors charged with its care.Contemporary culture, John Stott points out, is being overtaken and submerged by relativism and pluralism - an attitude that all so-called 'truth' in fact can make no demand that others be converted to its particular view.The apostle's unambiguous commitment to the definite truth of the gospel is in stark contrast to the contemporary spirit, and his concern for its future needs to grip us today.

Part 1

The message of 1 Timothy

The life of the local church

1 Timothy 1:1–2

Introduction

Most readers find Timothy a very congenial character. We feel that he is one of us in all our frailty. He was very far from being a stained-glass saint. A halo would not have fitted comfortably on his head. No, the evidence is plain that he was a real human being like us, with all the infirmity and vulnerability which that entails.

To begin with, he was still comparatively young when Paul addressed this letter to him, for he told him not to let anyone look down on him on account of his youth (4:12), and some two years later he urged him to ‘flee the evil desires of youth’ (2 Tim. 2:22). So how old was he? It seems unlikely that the apostle would have invited Timothy to join his mission team before he had reached his late teens or early twenties,1 in which case now, about thirteen or fourteen years later, he would be in his mid thirties. The ancient world regarded this as being still within the limits of ‘youth’ (neotēs). According to Irenaeus, ‘thirty is the first stage of a young man’s age, and extends to forty, as all will admit’.2 Nevertheless, Timothy evidently felt inexperienced and immature for the heavy responsibility which Paul was laying upon him.

Second, he was temperamentally shy, needing affirmation, encouragement and reassurance. So a few years previously Paul had urged the Corinthians to ‘put him at his ease’ when he came to them.3 And in his second letter to Timothy he felt the need to encourage him not to be ashamed of Christ, since ‘the Spirit God gave us does not make us timid’ (2 Tim. 1:7–8). It is not unfair, therefore, to think of him as ‘timid Timothy’.

Third, Timothy was physically frail, and suffered from a recurrent gastric problem. For Paul referred to his chronic ailments, in particular to his stomach. He even prescribed a little medicinal alcohol: ‘Stop drinking only water, and use a little wine because of your stomach and your frequent illnesses’ (1 Tim. 5:23).

So this is the profile of Timothy which we can construct from a number of Paul’s references to him. He was young, shy and frail. These three handicaps might have been thought to disqualify him from taking charge of the churches in and around Ephesus. But they endear him to us, and the grace of God was sufficient for his need: ‘You then, my son, be strong in the grace that is in Christ Jesus’ (2 Tim. 2:1).

Paul was expecting to visit Timothy in Ephesus soon, and would then of course, as an apostle, assume responsibility for the churches. But he seems to have anticipated the possibility of being delayed, and so sends Timothy these written instructions, so that Timothy would know how to regulate the life of the churches during his absence (3:14–15; 4:13). This letter, therefore, although addressed to Timothy personally, is not a private communication. It is written to him in his official capacity, and throughout it Paul is looking beyond Timothy to the churches. One clear hint of this is that his final greeting is expressed in the plural: ‘Grace be with you all’ (meth’ hymōn, 6:21). Augustine in the fourth century and Thomas Aquinas in the thirteenth both used the adjective ‘pastoral’ in relation to one or other of these letters, although not until 1703 did D. N. Berdot refer to the three of them as ‘the Pastoral Epistles’.

It is an appropriate expression, since the letters are concerned with the pastoral care and oversight of local churches. The apostle addresses six main topics. The first is the church’s doctrine and how to preserve it intact, uncorrupted by false teaching (1:3–20). The second is the church’s public worship, its global intercession for all humankind, together with the roles of men and women in the conduct of it (2:1–15). Third, the apostle writes about the church’s pastorate, and in particular the conditions of eligibility for presbyters and deacons (3:1–16). Fourth, after outlining the church’s moral instruction, which arises naturally from the doctrine of creation and calls for personal godliness (4:1–10), Paul addresses himself to the church’s local leadership, especially how younger leaders can ensure that their teaching is listened to and not despised (4:11 – 5:2). Fifth, the apostle handles the church’s social responsibilities, not only to widows, but also to elders and to slaves (5:3 – 6:2). His sixth and final concern, in reaction to those who think ‘that godliness is a means to financial gain’, is the church’s attitude to material possessions (6:3–21); he addresses both the covetous and the wealthy.

Here is wisdom for the local church in every generation and every place. Let no-one say that Scripture is out of date. Calvin, when dedicating his commentary to the Duke of Somerset in 1556, called this letter ‘highly relevant to our own times’.4 All these years later we can make the same claim. Truly ‘the Bible speaks today’.

The beginning of the letter is conventional. Paul announces himself as the author, Timothy as his correspondent, and God as the source of the grace, mercy and peace which he wishes him to enjoy. He thus describes the letter’s three main characters. He is not content, however, with a bare greeting such as ‘Paul to Timothy: grace’; each of the three persons involved is explained in more detail.

In nine out of his thirteen New Testament letters Paul describes himself an apostle of Christ Jesus, and usually adds a reference to the call, commission, command or will of God. Here it is by the command of God our Saviour and of Christ Jesus our hope (1). Thus Paul claims to be an apostle of Christ on a level with the Twelve, whom Jesus had named ‘apostles’,5 with all the teaching authority which this represented. He had emphatically not appointed himself. Nor had he been appointed by the church. He was not one of the ‘apostles of the churches’,6 whom today we might call ‘missionaries’. On the contrary, he was an apostle of Christ, chosen, called, appointed, equipped and authorized directly by Christ, without any ecclesiastical mediation. To put the matter beyond dispute or misunderstanding, Paul adds that God the Father was involved with Christ Jesus in commissioning him; it was by their command that he was an apostle. This formula by the command of (katʾ epitagēn) was apparently used on official notices, meaning ‘by order of’,7 and Lock says it ‘suggests a royal command which must be obeyed’.8

Further, Paul locates his apostleship in a historical context, whose beginning was the saving activity of God our Saviour in the birth, death and resurrection of Jesus, and whose culmination will be Christ Jesus our hope, his personal and glorious coming, which is the object of our Christian hope, and which will bring down the curtain on the historical process. Paul may even imply that the interval between these two points will be filled with the spread of the apostolic gospel throughout the world.

Paul now describes Timothy as my true son in the faith. For if Paul is an authentic apostle of Christ, Timothy is an authentic son of Paul. Gnēsios (‘true’ or ‘genuine’) was used literally of children ‘born in wedlock, legitimate’ (BAGD). It is possible, therefore, that Paul is hinting at the circumstances of Timothy’s physical birth. Since his father was a Greek, Jewish law will have regarded him as illegitimate. Spiritually, however, Timothy is Paul’s genuine child, partly because he was responsible for his conversion, and partly because Timothy has faithfully followed his teaching and example.9 By affirming Timothy’s genuineness Paul aims to reinforce his authority in the church.

After describing himself and Timothy, Paul refers to the God who binds them together in his family. What unites them is their common share in grace, mercy and peace. Each word tells us something about the human condition. For ‘grace’ is God’s kindness to the guilty and undeserving, ‘mercy’ his pity on the wretched who cannot save themselves, and ‘peace’ his reconciliation of those who were previously alienated from him and from one another. All three issue from the same spring, namely God the Father and Christ Jesus our Lord (2b). Thus Father and Son are now bracketed as the single source of divine blessing, as they were in verse 1 as the single author of the divine command which constituted Paul an apostle.

1 Timothy 1:3–20

1. Apostolic doctrine

This opening section sets the historical and geographical scene for the letter. It speaks of a visit by Paul to Macedonia and of a stay by Timothy in Ephesus. Since these events cannot be fitted into Luke’s narrative in Acts, commentators have assumed from the earliest days of the church that Paul was released after those two years under house arrest in Rome, in which Luke takes leave of him,1 and that he resumed his travels. I went into Macedonia, he writes, and at the same time I urged you to stay there in Ephesus (3a). We cannot say for certain whether Paul was himself in Ephesus when he urged Timothy to stay there. What is clear is that, however and whenever Paul issued his original spoken appeal to Timothy, he is now confirming it in writing. The reason for this arrangement was in general that Timothy might regulate the affairs of the churches of Ephesus, and in particular that he might command certain people not to teach false doctrines any longer (3b).

Paul’s concern in this first chapter is with the importance of maintaining true or ‘sound’ doctrine, and of refuting ‘false’ doctrine. This differentiation strikes a discordant note today. It is not only that most societies are increasingly pluralistic in fact (an ethnic and religious mix), but that ‘pluralism’ as an ideology is increasingly promoted as ‘politically correct’. This affirms the independent validity of every religion as a culturally conditioned p...