EXEGESIS AND EXPOSITION OF SECOND TIMOTHY 2:23-24

Transcription

1 EXEGESIS AND EXPOSITION OF SECOND TIMOTHY 2: Pastor William E. Wenstrom Jr. WENSTROM BIBLE MINISTRIES Marion, Iowa 2015 William E. Wenstrom, Jr. Bible Ministries

2 Second Timothy 2:23 The Command Exegesis and Exposition of Second Timothy 2: Timothy 2:23 But refuse foolish and ignorant speculations, knowing that they produce quarrels. (NASB95) But refuse foolish and ignorant speculations is composed of the following: (1) conjunction de (δέ), but (2) articular accusative feminine plural form of the adjective mōros (μωρός), foolish (3) conjunction kai (καί), and (4) accusative feminine plural form of the adjective apaideutos (ἀπαίδευτος), ignorant (5) accusative feminine plural form of the noun zētēsis (ζήτησις), speculations (6) second person singular present middle imperative form of the verb paraiteomai (παραιτέομαι), refuse. The post-positive conjunction de is introducing a command that stands in contrast with the previous command in Second Timothy 2:22. Therefore, the contrast is between Timothy continue making it his habit of zealously practicing so as to exemplify divine-righteousness, Christian doctrine, divine-love and peace and continuing his habit of refusing foolish and ignorant speculations. The apostle Paul does not use the strong adversative conjunction alla here in Second Timothy 2:23 but rather the post-positive conjunction de since he is not contrasting two fundamentally different groups of people but rather the same person, Timothy. Specifically he is contrasting Timothy remaining faithful to Paul s Spirit inspired apostolic teaching which produces godly character and not practicing ungodly behavior which is the result adhering to false doctrine. The verb paraiteomai appears often in classical Greek from the fifth century B.C. and has a variety of meanings. It can mean to ask (as a favor) something from a king, appeal or entreat a person for something desired, or in even stronger terms beg. 1 The word can mean to refuse or decline by entreaty or intercede when begging for exemption from punishment. It is most often with respect to a dialogue or conversation between two individuals. The term is found 8 times in the Septuagint where it is used in a similar manner to that of classical Greek. It occurs 12 times in the New Testament where it means request (Mark 15:6), to make excuses (Luke 14:18-19), to appeal (Acts 25:11), to avoid, refuse, reject (1 Timothy 4:7; 5:11; 2 Timothy 2:23; Titus 3:10; Hebrews 12:25) and to beg (Hebrews 12:19). 1 Liddell-Scott, pages William E. Wenstrom, Jr. Bible Ministries 1

3 In Second Timothy 2:23, the verb paraiteomai means to avoid since it pertains to keeping oneself away from something or someone and refraining from getting involved in a particular practice. Here it means that Timothy was to avoid getting involved with the foolish pointless arguments about the Law which reflect a failure to receive proper training with regards to the Law. The word does not mean to reject since the word is not used of the false doctrine taught by the Judaizers and apostate pastors in Ephesus but rather it is used of the practices of these individuals when discussing the Law or teaching it. Timothy was to refrain from getting involved with these people in the sense that he was to stay away from getting involved in their foolish pointless arguments about the Mosaic Law with these people and which arguments reflected a lack of formal training in the Law. Of course, these arguments about the Law were the direct result of their misuse and misunderstanding about the purpose and use of the Law which was reflected in their teaching which amounted to false doctrine. The present imperative form of the verb paraiteomai is a customary present imperative whose force is for Timothy to simply continue avoiding these foolish and ignorant pointless debates about the Mosaic Law. It is a command for action to be continued, action that may or may not have already been going on. It is often a character building command to the effect of make this your habit, train yourself in this, discipline yourself. This is the use of the present imperative in general precepts. Therefore, the present imperative of paraiteomai means, to continue making it your habit of avoiding these foolish and ignorant pointless debates about the Law. It implies that Timothy was already performing this task when he received this letter from Paul. The middle voice of the verb paraiteomai is an indirect middle which indicates the subject of the verb acts for himself or herself or in his or her own interest. Therefore, here it indicates that Timothy was for his own benefit spiritually avoid these foolish and ignorant pointless debates about the Law. It is for his own benefit since such behavior will result in his losing fellowship with God. He will also receive divine discipline if he continues to get involved with such behavior. If he doesn t repent of such behavior by confessing his sins and obeying Paul s Spirit inspired apostolic teaching, he will be under disciplined from God. Consequently, his testimony before the non-christian community would be ruined and he would no longer be effective in ministry to the Christian community since he will be out of fellowship with God as a result of getting involved with these foolish and ignorant pointless arguments about the Law. The noun zētēsis means to express forceful differences of opinion without necessarily having a presumed goal or seeking a solution. 2 It refers to pointless 2 Louw and Nida, William E. Wenstrom, Jr. Bible Ministries 2

4 disputing or debates. It indicates that rather than a true and sincere search for the truth, the false teachers were involved in argumentative debate and dialogues, which were pointless, useless and of no instructional value whatsoever. Therefore, the word does not mean controversies since this refers to discussions marked by opposing views. Rather, it means pointless debates since this accurately reflects the meaning of the word. Its cognate ekzetesis appears in 1 Timothy 1:4 where it is used of these same false teachers. Ekzetesis is a compound word composed of the preposition ek, out from and the noun zetesis. First Timothy 1:3 As I urgently requested you to stay on in Ephesus when I myself was about to depart for Macedonia in order that you may command certain individuals not to teach at any time, false doctrine 4 nor, at any time be occupied with myths as well as useless genealogies because the nature of which, as an eternal spiritual truth, promotes pointless arguments rather than the administration of God s household, which is through faithfulness. (Author s translation) In First Timothy 1:4, the idea behind the noun ekzetesis is that occupation with Jewish myths and useless genealogies causes only pointless disputes. He is saying with this word that occupation with these things only causes pointless arguments. In First Timothy 6:4, the noun zētēsis appears and means pointless debates since the word denotes that rather than a true and sincere search for the truth, the false teachers in Ephesus were involved in argumentative debate and dialogues, which were pointless, useless and of no instructional value whatsoever. First Timothy 6:4 But rather he possesses a sick obsession with pointless debates, yes in fact pointless arguments about words from which he does cause envy, dissension, slanders, evil suspicions. (Author s translation) The noun zētēsis appears again in Titus 3:9 where it again means pointless debates since the word denotes that rather than a true and sincere search for the truth. Titus 3:9 However, for your own benefit continue to make it your habit of avoiding foolish pointless debates, genealogies, dissensions as well as quarrels about the Law because they are, as an eternal spiritual truth characterized as being unprofitable, yes, useless. (Author s translation) Titus was also confronting a similar situation on the island of Crete that Timothy was dealing with in Ephesus. Titus was also having problems dealing with the false doctrine of the Judaizers on the island and those apostate teachers who adhered to their legalistic teaching. As a result they were involved in argumentative debates and dialogues, which were pointless, useless and of no instructional value whatsoever William E. Wenstrom, Jr. Bible Ministries 3

5 In Second Timothy 2:23, the noun zētēsis means pointless debates which were related to the Old Testament and Mosaic Law since the false doctrine that Timothy was dealing with in Ephesus originated from the Judaizers and was being adhered to by certain apostate pastors in that city. Therefore, the noun zētēsis indicates that individuals would express forceful differences of opinion or contend with each other in words without necessarily having a presumed goal or seeking a solution when talking about the Mosaic Law or Old Testament. It refers to pointless debates that they would have with regards to the Law. It indicates that they were not involved in a true and sincere search for the truth. So as a result of adhering to the teaching of the Judaizers, these apostate pastors in Ephesus were involved in argumentative debates and dialogues, which were pointless, useless and of no instructional value whatsoever for the Christian community. Timothy was to continue making it his habit of rejecting involvement in these pointless debates over the Law since he knew for certain that they only produce quarrels. The noun zetesis is functioning as an accusative direct object meaning it is receiving the action of the verb paraiteomai which indicates that these pointless debates about the Law were to receive the action of being rejected by Timothy. The adjective mōros means foolish, ridiculous, stupid since it pertains to thoughts or words which are devoid of understanding. It pertains to lacking judgment or discretion. Here it is functioning as an attributive adjective modifying the nouns zētēsis, pointless arguments. Therefore, it describing these pointless debates, as stupid or foolish since they are lacking in judgment and discretion. The word is in the emphatic position of this prohibition for emphasis meaning that Paul is emphasizing this word to express his attitude towards these pointless debates or arguments. The articular construction of this adjective mōros is marking this word as being in the first attributive position (article-adjective-noun). In this construction, the adjective receives greater emphasis than the substantive which in our context is the noun zētēsis, pointless arguments, pointless debates. The adjective apaideutos means ignorant, uninformed, uneducated since it pertains to that which or one who fails to reflect formal instruction or training. Like the adjective mōros it is functioning as an attributive adjective modifying the nouns zētēsis, pointless debates. Therefore, it describing these pointless debates, as demonstrating a lack of formal training or instruction in the Mosaic Law or Old Testament since we are speaking in the context of the teaching of the Judaizers which the apostate pastors in Ephesus were adhering to. It is describing their pointless debates as reflecting a lack of formal training in the Word of God William E. Wenstrom, Jr. Bible Ministries 4

6 The conjunction kai is used to connect together the adjectives mōros and apaideutos in order to form the figure of hendiadys. This figure takes place when two nouns are used to express one idea or concept and it literally means one by means of two and takes place when the author uses two words but only one idea is intended. The two words are of the same parts of speech, i.e., two nouns, and are always joined together by the conjunction and and are also always in the same case. One of the two words expresses the thing, and the other intensifies it by being changed (if a noun) into an adjective of the superlative degree, which is, by this means, made especially emphatic. Here in Second Timothy 2:23, both of these adjectives are related to each other with apaideutos defining specifically what Paul means by the adjective mōros. So the idea is that Timothy was to continue making it his habit of rejecting foolish, yes ignorant pointless debates about the Law or we can say foolish pointless debates, yes which are ignorant. The Reason for the Command 2 Timothy 2:23 But refuse foolish and ignorant speculations, knowing that they produce quarrels. (NASB95) Knowing that they produce quarrels is composed of the following: (1) nominative masculine singular perfect active participle form of the verb oida (οἶδα), knowing (2) conjunction hoti (ὅτι), that (3) third person plural present active indicative form of the verb gennaō (γεννάω), they produce (4) accusative feminine plural form of the noun machē (μάχη), disputes. The verb oida is the perfect form of the verb eido, which occurs so infrequently as to be archaic. Eido does not occur in the active present form at all. Although oida is in the perfect tense it is translated as if it were a present, I know. Yet the perfect idea of possessed knowledge rather than the present aspect of acquiring knowledge dominate the word s definition. Scholars maintain that a distinction existed between the perfective kind of knowledge denoted by oida and the progressive or acquired knowledge expressed by ginosko, particularly in classical usage. This distinction is considered by many to have carried over into the Greek New Testament. Some scholars believe that the distinctions were breaking down by the Greek New Testament period. Ginosko was originally an inceptive verb as indicated by the stem in sk-, which represents the acquisition of knowledge meaning to come to know. Epistamai is resultative and points more to the practical faculty of knowing. Oida on the other hand in classical Greek denotes the theoretical possession of knowledge meaning, know, be acquainted with. We know that oida in classical 2015 William E. Wenstrom, Jr. Bible Ministries 5

7 literature retained its proper sense in the aorist tense of to see. In the aorist form the idea of literal or mental sight is expressed while in the passive sense it could mean to be visible, to appear. The verb oida in the perfect tense means to know without a doubt, to know for certain, or to acknowledge depending upon the context. In the perfect tense it expresses the concept of a continued completed state meaning I have come to know (through experience or event). Liddell and Scott (under eido): (1) see, perceive, behold (2) look (3) to be seen, appear (4) I see with the mind s eye, know (5) know, have knowledge of, be acquainted with, assured (6) c. inf. Know how to do, to be in a condition, be able, to have the power; c. part., to know that such and such is the fact. 3 The verb oida appears 278 times in the Septuagint (LXX) and is employed to translate twelve Hebrew words: (1) bin, Qal: perceive, understand (Jb. 23:8; 42:3). (2) dea, opinion (Jb. 32:10). (3) da`ath, intention, knowledge (Dt. 4:42; Jb. 21:14; Is. 5:13). (4) zakhar, remember; hiphil: acknowledge (Is. 26:13). (5) chazah, see (Is. 26:11). (6) chakham, skilled (2 Chr. 2:7). (7) yadha, Qal: know (Ex. 32:22 f.; 1 Sm. 20:3; Jer. 24:7); niphal: be known (Dt. 21:1). (8) yedha, know (Ezr. 7:25; Dn. 2:80-Aramaic). (9) nakhar, recognize; piel: regard (Jb. 34:19). (10) ra ah, see (Gn. 39:3; Nm. 35:23; Is. 33:19). (11) sa`ar, know about (Dt. 32:17). (12) shama, hear (1 Kgs. 20:31 [21:31] ). (13) shamar, be careful (Jos. 1:8). The verb oida translates the Hebrew verb yadha` is more than any other Hebrew term. The use of both oida and ginosko to render a Hebrew infinitive absolute (usually translated emphatically) in 1 Samuel 20:3 (LXX 1 Kgs. 20:3) suggests that the Septuagint translators did not rigidly enforce the classical distinction between the 2 words (Hebrew: yado `a yada`; Greek: ginoskon oiden). The rule of thumb was more often than not to separate the two concepts of knowing. The verb oida was a versatile term in the LXX since it was used to translate 12 Hebrew words. The verb oida appears 318 times in the Greek New Testament. The Analytical Greek Lexicon Revised: (1) to know (2) to know how (3) to regard with favor. 4 The New Thayer s Greek-English Lexicon: (1) Aorist, to perceive (2) like the Latin video, to perceive by any of the senses (3) universally to perceive, notice, discern, discover (4) to see, i.e., to turn the eyes, the mind, the attention to anything, to pay attention, observe, to see about something, to inspect, examine, to look at, behold (5) to experience any state or condition (6) with accusative of person, to see, i.e., have an interview with, to visit (7) Perfect, to know with 3 Greek English Lexicon, New Edition, page page William E. Wenstrom, Jr. Bible Ministries 6

8 accusative of thing (8 to know, i.e., get knowledge of, understand, perceive; to know how (9) to have regard for one, cherish, pay attention to. 5 Louw and Nida list the following meanings: (1) to possess information about to know, to know about, to have knowledge of, to be acquainted with, acquaintance. 6 (2) to have knowledge as to how to perform a particular activity or to accomplish some goal to know how to. 7 (3) to comprehend the meaning of something, with focus upon the resulting knowledge to understand, to comprehend. 8 (4) to be able to recall from memory to remember, to recall, to recollect. 9 (5) to acknowledge the high status of a person or event to honor, to show honor to, to respect 10. Vine's Expository Dictionary of Biblical Words, oida, from the same root as eidon, to see, is a perfect tense with a present meaning, signifying, primarily, to have seen or perceived ; hence, to know, to have knowledge of, whether absolutely, as in divine knowledge, e. g., Matt 6:8,32; John 6:6,64; 8:14; 11:42; 13:11; 18:4; 2 Cor 11:31; 2 Peter 2:9; Rev 2:2,9,13,19; 3:1,8,15; or in the case of human knowledge, to know from observation, e. g., 1 Thess 1:4,5; 2:1; 2 Thess 3:7. Vine commenting on the distinction between ginosko and oida, writes, The differences between ginosko (No. 1) and oida demand consideration: (a) ginosko, frequently suggests inception or progress in knowledge, while oida suggests fullness of knowledge, e. g., (John 8:55), ye have not known Him (ginosko), i. e., begun to know, but I know Him (oida), i. e., know Him perfectly ; (13:7), What I do thou knowest not now, i. e. Peter did not yet perceive (oida) its significance, but thou shalt understand, i. e., get to know (ginosko), hereafter ; (14:7), If ye had known Me (ginosko), i. e., had definitely come to know Me, ye would have known My Father also (oida), i. e., would have had perception of : from henceforth ye know Him (ginosko), i. e., having unconsciously been coming to the Father, as the One who was in Him, they would now consciously be in the constant and progressive experience of knowing Him; in (Mark 4:13), Know ye not (oida) this parable? and how shall ye know (ginosko) all the parables? (RV), i. e., Do ye not understand this parable? How shall ye come to perceive all... the intimation being that the first parable is a leading and testing one; (b) while ginosko frequently implies an active relation between the one who knows and the person or thing known (see No. 1, above), oida expresses the fact that the object has simply come within the scope of the knower's perception; 5 see eido, pages A Greek-English Lexicon Based on Semantic Domains A Greek-English Lexicon Based on Semantic Domains A Greek-English Lexicon Based on Semantic Domains A Greek-English Lexicon Based on Semantic Domains A Greek-English Lexicon Based on Semantic Domains William E. Wenstrom, Jr. Bible Ministries 7

9 thus in (Matt. 7:23) I never knew you (ginosko) suggests I have never been in approving connection with you, whereas in (25:12), I know you not (oida) suggests you stand in no relation to Me. A Greek-English Lexicon of the New Testament and Other Early Christian Literature-Third Edition: (1) to have information about, know (2) to be intimately acquainted with, stand in a close relation to, know (3) to know or understand how, can be able with infinitive following (4) to grasp the meaning of something, understand, recognize, come to know, experience (5) to remember, recollect, recall, be aware of (6) to recognize merit, respect, honor. 11 Analytical Lexicon of the Greek New Testament (1) as having come to a perception or realization of something know, understand, comprehend (MK 4.13); (2) as having come to knowledge through experience know (about), recognize, understand (EP 1.18); (3) as having knowledge and ability to do something with an infinitive following know how to, can, be able to (MT 7.11); (4) of intimate or close relationship with someone know, have knowledge of (MT 26.72); (5) as a formula for introducing a well-known and accepted fact (e.g. οἴδαμεν ὅτι we know that MT 22.16); for introducing a rhetorical question (e.g. οὐκ οἴδατε ὅτι don t you know that? 1C 3.16); (6) as giving deserved recognition to someone respect, appreciate, have regard for (1TH 5.12). In Second Timothy 2:23, the verb oida means to know for certain, to know without a doubt since it pertains to having knowledge of something to the extent of having no doubt about the matter. Here it is used with Timothy as its subject and the quarrels produced by the foolish and ignorant pointless debates about the Law as its object. Therefore, this word indicates that Timothy knew without a doubt or he knew for certain that the foolish and ignorant pointless debates about the Law produced quarrels. This verb implies that Timothy had full knowledge of what these foolish and ignorant pointless debates about the Mosaic Law produced. Timothy knew for certain that they produced quarrels because he had seen these quarrels or heated arguments firsthand. The perfect tense of the verb oida is a perfect with a present force demonstrating little distinction between the act and its results since the verb is a stative verb emphasizing a state. It emphasizes Timothy s state of certainty of knowing firsthand that these foolish and ignorant pointless debates about the Law which the Judaizers and apostate pastors in Ephesus got involved in produced quarrels or heated arguments. The active voice is stative indicating that the subject is existing in the state indicated by this verb. This would mean that Timothy existed in the state of knowing for certain that these foolish and ignorant pointless debates about the Law 11 Pages William E. Wenstrom, Jr. Bible Ministries 8

10 which the Judaizers and apostate pastors in Ephesus got involved in produced quarrels or heated arguments. The participle form of the verb is a causal participle meaning it indicates the cause or the reason or basis of the action of the finite verb which in our context is the second person singular present middle imperative form of the verb paraiteomai. Therefore, the verb oida is a causal participle which presents the basis or the reason for the previous command for Timothy to continue making it his habit of avoiding foolish, yes ignorant pointless arguments about the Law. Thus Timothy should obey this command because these foolish, yes ignorant pointless arguments about the Law produced quarrels or heated arguments among men. The conjunction hoti is employed with the indicative mood of the indicative form of the verb gennaō, they produce in order to form a direct object clause, which is the direct object of the verb oida. The verb gennaō means to produce, to give rise to since it pertains to causing something to happen or take place with the implication of the result of existing circumstances. The third person plural form of this verb means they and refers of course to the foolish, yes ignorant pointless arguments about the Law. Therefore, this verb indicates that these foolish, yes ignorant pointless arguments about the Law produce: quarrels or heated arguments among men. The present tense of the verb gennaō is a gnomic present, which is used to describe something that is true any time and does take place. This would therefore, indicate that that these foolish, yes ignorant pointless arguments about the Law do produce quarrels or heated arguments among men. The present tense of this verb is also a customary or stative present used to signal an ongoing state. Therefore it indicates that indicates that these foolish, yes ignorant pointless arguments about the Law are existing in the state of producing quarrels. The active voice is a stative active voice which means that the subject exists in the state indicated by the verb. This would indicate that that these foolish, yes ignorant pointless arguments about the Law are existing in the state of producing quarrels. The noun machē means quarrels, altercations since it pertains to heated or emotional verbal fights or contentions, emphasizing strained or severed relations which may persist beyond the contention. It speaks of an intense, emotional and bitter verbal confrontation between individuals of differing views. Here it speaks of the intense, emotional and bitter verbal confrontations between the apostate pastors in Ephesus amongst themselves as a result of getting involved in foolish, yes pointless debates about the Mosaic Law. This noun machē is functioning as an accusative direct object meaning it is receiving the action of the verb gennaō indicating Timothy that these quarrels 2015 William E. Wenstrom, Jr. Bible Ministries 9

11 receive the action of being produced by these foolish, yes pointless debates about the Mosaic Law. Translation of Second Timothy 2:23 Second Timothy 2:23 But continue making it your habit of avoiding foolish, yes ignorant pointless debates because you know for certain that they do produce quarrels. (Author s translation) Exposition of Second Timothy 2:23 The command in verse 23 stands in contrast with the previous command in verse 22 which required that Timothy continue making it his habit of zealously practicing so as to exemplify righteousness, doctrine, divine-love and peace along with those who make it their habit of calling upon the Lord from a pure heart. The command here in verse 23 required that Timothy continue making it his habit of avoiding foolish, yes ignorant pointless debates about the Law. Therefore, the contrast is between Timothy continue making it his habit of zealously practicing so as to exemplify divine-righteousness, Christian doctrine, divine-love and peace and continuing his habit of avoiding these foolish and ignorant pointless debates. In other words, the contrast is between exemplifying these Christian virtues and the ungodly behavior of the apostate teachers in Ephesus. The former is the product of being obedient to Paul s Spirit inspired apostolic teaching whereas the latter is the direct result of obeying false doctrine propagated by the Judaizers. Pointless debates were related to the Old Testament and Mosaic Law since the false doctrine that Timothy was dealing with in Ephesus originated from the Judaizers and was being adhered to by certain apostate pastors in that city. Therefore, this indicates that these individuals would express forceful differences of opinion or contend with each other in words without necessarily having a presumed goal or seeking a solution when talking about the Mosaic Law or Old Testament. It refers to pointless debates that they would have with regards to the Law. It indicates that they were not involved in a true and sincere search for the truth. So as a result of adhering to the teaching of the Judaizers, these apostate pastors in Ephesus were involved in argumentative debates and dialogues, which were pointless, useless and of no instructional value whatsoever for the Christian community. Paul describes these pointless debates about the Law as foolish in the sense that these debates were lacking in judgment and discretion. He also describes them emphatically as ignorant in the sense that these debates demonstrated a lack of sound formal training or instruction in the Mosaic Law or Old Testament. It is 2015 William E. Wenstrom, Jr. Bible Ministries 10

12 describing their pointless debates as reflecting a lack of sound formal training or instruction in the Word of God. Paul commands Timothy to avoid these foolish, yes ignorant pointless debates about the Law which means that he was to avoid getting involved with such behavior. Timothy was to refrain from getting involved with these people in the sense that he was to stay away from getting involved in their foolish pointless arguments about the Mosaic Law and which arguments reflected a lack of formal training in the Law. Of course, these arguments about the Law were the direct result of their misuse and misunderstanding about the purpose and use of the Law which was reflected in their teaching which amounted to false doctrine. Timothy was already obeying this command in Second Timothy 2:23 as he was with all of these commands in this epistle. This is indicated by Paul s statement in Second Timothy 1:5, in which he tells Timothy that he clung to the memory of his sincere faith. In fact Paul says that he was convinced of this. Now, some have argued that Paul s statement in Second Timothy 1:6 indicates that Timothy had lost his enthusiasm in exercising his spiritual gift but there is nothing in Second Timothy which would indicate this taking place. Rather, since the apostle in Second Timothy 1:5 acknowledges that Timothy possessed a sincere faith in his apostolic teaching and identified his background with Timothy s in Second Timothy 1:3-5, it is clear that Timothy was not in apostasy or wavering. So Paul s statements in Second Timothy 1:6 do not imply that Timothy was no longer on fire for the Lord but rather it means he was to make his habit of exercising the spiritual gift of pastor-teacher which the Spirit bestowed upon him at the moment of his conversion. Thus, instead of suppressing this gift Timothy was to exercise this gift with enthusiasm and zeal and thus to permit the Spirit s power to work mightily through his ministry. Paul wants to remind Timothy to exercise with the zeal or enthusiasm the spiritual gift that he received from God at the moment of his conversion. Also some have argued that the mention of cowardice in Second Timothy 1:7 would seem to indicate that Timothy was acting like a coward. However, again there is nothing which would indicate this in the immediate context or within the epistle itself. Rather verse 5 affirms Timothy s faithful to Paul s apostolic teaching. Therefore, Paul is simply reminding Timothy in verse 7 that the Holy Spirit permanently indwells him so as to give him the power, the love and discipline he will need to endure these things and remain faithful to his calling. The apostle is again encouraging his young delegate, disciple and friend to persevere in his ministry by appropriating the ministry of the Spirit who is available to him because He indwells Timothy permanently. So therefore, Paul is reminding Timothy in Second Timothy 1:7 that he has the capacity to continue exercising his spiritual gift with the enthusiasm despite persecution and various trials and tribulations because 2015 William E. Wenstrom, Jr. Bible Ministries 11

13 he possesses permanently the indwelling of the Spirit. Timothy need not concern himself with trying to produce these attributes himself but rather when he obeys the Word of God, the Spirit who indwells him will produce the power, love and self-discipline he needs to remain faithful to his calling. Thus, Paul exhorting Timothy to continue to depend upon the Spirit s presence in his life. He is to do this by continuing to obey the Spirit inspired commands and prohibitions in Paul s apostolic teaching, which is the gospel. The warnings that Paul issues Timothy throughout this epistle do not imply that Timothy was starting to fall away from the gospel or was no longer faithful but rather they were to protect him from falling into apostasy and unfaithfulness. This command in Second Timothy 2:23 would benefit Timothy spiritually since getting involvement in these foolish, yes ignorant pointless debates about the Law will only result in his losing fellowship with God. If he doesn t repent of such behavior by confessing his sins and obeying Paul s Spirit inspired apostolic teaching, he will be under discipline from God. Consequently, his testimony before the non-christian community would be ruined and he would no longer be effective in ministry to the Christian community since he will be out of fellowship with God as a result of getting involved with these foolish and ignorant pointless arguments about the Law. After issuing this command to Timothy in Second Timothy 2:23, the apostle Paul presents the reason why his young delegate, disciple and friend should obey it. He tells Timothy that he knew without a doubt or he knew for certain that these foolish and ignorant pointless debates about the Law produced quarrels. This causal clause implies that Timothy had full knowledge of what these foolish and ignorant pointless debates about the Mosaic Law produced. Timothy knew for certain that they produced quarrels because he had seen these quarrels or heated arguments firsthand. Timothy knew firsthand that these foolish and ignorant pointless debates about the Law which the Judaizers and apostate pastors in Ephesus got involved in produced quarrels or heated arguments. He knew firsthand that they produced intense, emotional and bitter verbal confrontations between the apostate pastors in Ephesus. Now, we must clarify something about this command that Paul issues Timothy in Second Timothy 2:23, namely that a pastor-teacher must not avoid all arguments or controversies but rather he is to avoid those which do not deserve his time and energy. Pastors can never escape arguments which are important or of a critical nature spiritually since if they are faithfully teaching the Word of God they will be controversial and provoke arguments. The reason this is the case is that the Word of God by its very nature is controversial since it is Spirit inspired which opposes the sin nature and Satan s cosmic system. Therefore, the pastor should never get involved in arguments that are about non-essentials but only essentials and even 2015 William E. Wenstrom, Jr. Bible Ministries 12

14 then he must conduct himself with gentleness when involved in such debates or arguments. He must conduct himself like a godly man whose conduct honors the Lord. The New American Commentary has the following comment, they write Paul was not prohibiting intelligent, probing theological discussion but useless wrangling over recondite questions that divide and confuse. We must cultivate a judgment that can distinguish between these options Ray Pritchard writes Sometimes people will say things just to see if they can get us riled up. They will try to stir up trouble by pushing our hot buttons. Most of us know people (some of them very close to us) who seem to have the gift of getting under our skin. Paul s advice is simple but not always easy to follow: Don t let them do it. Don t let them get you riled up so that you lose your cool, blow your top, say things you shouldn t say, and end up in a bitter shouting match. We are not permitted to yell back at those who yell at us. We are not to curse at those who curse at us. We are not to intimidate those who try to intimidate us. In short, we are not to match the tactics of those who may oppose us and ridicule our faith. We must keep our cool all the time, at all costs. One reason for this is very practical: You can t argue a person into the kingdom of God. You can t insult them into becoming a Christian. You can t intimidate them into accepting Christ as Savior. It is quite possible to argue them away from the kingdom, but you can t argue them into it. Salvation is a miracle of God that takes place in the human heart. Only the Holy Spirit can convert the soul. It s not our arguments that win the lost. Unless the Lord works on the heart, all our words will be of no avail. Therefore, we must be gentle under pressure and kind even when pushed to the limit. We must be patient toward those who oppose us and we must with meekness tell them the truth. If we lose our temper, we may win the verbal battle but we will surely lose the war for the soul. 14 Chuck Swindoll commenting on Second Timothy 2:23 writes Paul s point is clear: arguing is futile. People who genuinely want truth don t dispute what you have to tell them. They ask questions. They seek clarification. But they rarely argue. 15 Paul mentions these pointless debates to Timothy in First Timothy 1:4 and 6:4 and to Titus in Titus 3:9. In every instance Paul reminds these men to avoid them. Both Timothy and Titus were confronted with similar situations. Titus was stationed on the island of Crete whereas Timothy was located in Ephesus. Both 12 Uninformed men rejoice in a verbal victory and angels weep at the damage done to the witness of the church. Controversies are prolific, spawning quarrels and fights to the third and fourth generation (see R. W. Ward, Commentary on 1 & 2 Timothy & Titus [Waco: Word, 1974], 181). 13 Lea, T. D., & Griffin, H. P. (1992). 1, 2 Timothy, Titus (Vol. 34, p. 220). Nashville: Broadman & Holman Publishers. 14 The Life God Blesses - Keep Believing Ministries 15 Swindoll, Charles R., Swindoll s New Testament Insights: Insights on 1 and 2 Timothy, Titus; page 201; Zondervan; William E. Wenstrom, Jr. Bible Ministries 13

15 men were having problems dealing with the false doctrine of the Judaizers. They were also both dealing with apostate teachers in the Christian community who were adhering to the legalistic teaching of the Judaizers. In fact, First Timothy chapter one, First Timothy 6:3-5 and Titus 3:9 give us a greater understanding with regards to these apostate pastors and their teaching and where it originated. 1 Timothy 1:3-11 alludes to the contentious behavior of the Judaizers and those Christian pastors who adhered to their legalistic teaching. 1 Timothy 1:3 Since I requested you to stay on in Ephesus when I myself was about to depart for Macedonia in order that you may command certain individuals not to teach at any time, false doctrine.continue making it your habit of performing this task. (Author s translation) 1 Timothy 1:3 is an elliptical causal clause meaning that Paul does not explicitly command Timothy to command certain Ephesian men to not teach false doctrines but rather he only presents the basis or the reason for doing so. This verse is an urgent request for Timothy to fulfill the task of confronting the false teachers in Ephesus. It presents the basis for Timothy commanding certain Ephesian believers to stop teaching false doctrines. The emphasis is not upon a comparison between Paul urging Timothy when leaving Macedonia to stay on at Ephesus in order to instruct certain men not to teach false doctrines and Timothy doing exactly that now that Paul has left him in Ephesus. Rather, his emphasis is that he wants Timothy to continue commanding certain Ephesian believers to not teach false doctrines because he commanded him to do so upon leaving for Macedonia. His emphasis is as to why he wants Timothy to confront these false teachers. This is to help support Timothy in this task since he is emphasizing in this causal clause his apostolic authority that he received from the Lord Jesus Christ Himself. To reject Paul s instructions was to reject the Lord Himself. In order that you may command certain individuals not to teach at any time, false doctrine is a purpose clause that indicates that Paul s purpose for urgently requesting that Timothy stay on in Ephesus was so that he could command certain Ephesian believers not to teach false doctrine. The purpose is further described in verse 4 indicating that Paul wanted these Ephesian believers who taught false doctrines to also not occupy themselves with myths and interminable genealogies. It implies clearly that Paul has delegated authority to Timothy to rebuke and hold these false teachers accountable since this word indicates that the false teachers in Ephesus are under Paul s apostolic authority and are thus Christians. The fact that Paul is commanding these unidentified individuals to stop teaching false doctrine clearly implies that they are believers since Paul would not have authority over a non-believer. It also indicates that they were pastors since Acts 2015 William E. Wenstrom, Jr. Bible Ministries 14

16 20:28 records Paul predicting to the pastors in Ephesus that some of them would become apostates. Certain individuals refers to unidentified Christian pastor-teachers who taught false doctrines in fulfillment of Paul s prophesy recorded in Acts 20:28. It means that there was more than one pastor in Ephesus who was teaching false doctrines. However, it does not mean that all the pastors were doing so. Not to teach at any time, false doctrine speaks of the act of teaching that which is contrary to the apostolic teaching of Paul. It does not refer to the style of teaching or manner of teaching but the content of teaching. It describes the content of the teaching of these pastors in Ephesus as fundamentally and essentially different than Paul s apostolic teaching. This prohibition denies any idea of these Christian pastors in Ephesus teaching heretical doctrines. 1 Timothy 1:4 Nor, at any time be occupied with myths as well as useless genealogies because the nature of which, as an eternal spiritual truth, promotes pointless arguments rather than the administration of God s household, which is through faithfulness. (Author s translation) This verse is connecting Paul s prohibition that certain Ephesian pastors were not to teach at any time, false or heretical doctrine with the prohibition for these same pastors to not pay attention to myths and useless genealogies. It makes clear that Paul does not want these unidentified pastors in Ephesus to at any time occupy their minds with myths. Myths describes the content of the teaching of these unidentified pastors in Ephesus as falsehood in contrast to Paul s gospel, which is absolute truth since it is inspired by the Holy Spirit as well as rooted in historical events (crucifixion, death and resurrection of Christ) and an historical individual (Jesus of Nazareth). It has nothing to do with Gnosticism since the phrase teachers of the Law and Titus 1:14 describing these myths as Jewish indicate that the myths and genealogies mentioned by Paul in 1 Timothy 1:4 were Jewish in nature. Useless genealogies refers to a listing of descendants of a particular individual. Specifically, it refers to the genealogies in the Old Testament. Paul was not against the study of the genealogies of the Bible since they can teach us quite a bit about God s creation, His desire to redeem mankind, and His sovereign control over history. The apostle was against the misuse of genealogies. Though it is true that the Old Testament genealogies were important with respect to the claims of Jesus of Nazareth as the promised Jewish Messiah and taught the sovereignty of God over the human race, they did not promote the administration of God s household by these pastors. They would not help these pastors to fulfill their responsibilities. The causal clause because the nature of which, as an eternal spiritual truth, promotes pointless arguments rather than the administration of God s 2015 William E. Wenstrom, Jr. Bible Ministries 15

17 household refers to these unidentified individuals in Ephesus fulfilling their stewardship as pastor-teachers. Specifically, it refers to the administration of God s household, which is the church. It refers to leading the church in Ephesus. Pointless debates is the noun zetesis, which denotes that rather than a true and sincere search for the truth, the false teachers in Ephesus were involved in argumentative debate and dialogues, which were pointless, useless and of no instructional value whatsoever. 1 Timothy 1:5 However, the result, which this command produces is, as an eternal spiritual truth, divine-love from a pure heart as well as a conscience that is divine good in quality and character and in addition a sincere faith. (Author s translation) To summarize our findings from our study of 1 Timothy 1:5, we noted that this verse is contrasting the negative ungodly results of some unidentified pastors in Ephesus teaching false doctrine and being occupied with myths and useless genealogies and the positive results if they are faithful in administrating God s household. The negative result of the former is that the church in Ephesus will be involved with pointless arguments. The positive result of the latter is the church will function in God s love for one another since the result of obeying Paul s apostolic teaching is love for God and love each other. The noun telos in 1 Timothy 1:5 does not mean objective or purpose but rather result since Paul is contrasting the negative ungodly results of these pastors in Ephesus teaching false doctrine and being occupied with myths and useless genealogies and the positive results of their being faithful in administrating God s household. The negative result of the former is that the church in Ephesus will be involved with pointless arguments. The positive result of the latter is the church will function in God s love for one another since the result of obeying Paul s apostolic teaching is love for God and love each other. Also, further supporting this interpretation is that the noun parangelia functions as a genitive of product meaning that it is the product of the noun telos to which it stands related. This would indicate that Paul is saying that the result which (obeying) this command produces is love for one another in contrast to pointless arguments with one another. In 1 Timothy 1:5, the noun parangelia refers to Paul s prohibition that appears in 1 Timothy 1:3-4, which prohibited a certain group of unidentified pastors in Ephesus from teaching false doctrine and being occupied with myths and useless genealogies. Supporting this interpretation is the articular construction, which is anaphoric referring back to this prohibition. Related to this is that Paul uses the noun form of the verb parangello that appears in verse 3 suggesting that Paul wants us to see the connection with the prohibition in verses 3 and 4 and his statement in verse William E. Wenstrom, Jr. Bible Ministries 16

18 Paul s use of anacoluthon in 1:3-18 strongly suggests that the noun parangelia in verse 18 is used with reference to the prohibition in verses 3 and 4. The figure of anacoluthon means that Paul uses two dependent clauses but does not have an independent clause to anchor or control them. The verse begins with a causal clause followed by a purpose clause. The implication is that Paul does not complete his thought explicitly but rather digresses before explicitly completing his thought in verse 18. This is not unusual to take place in mandate letters or in a mind such as Paul s. Also, Paul does not use alla but rather de since he wants to show the connection between the prohibition in verses 3 and 4 and his purpose for having Timothy communicate this prohibition to these unidentified pastors in Ephesus. This would indicate that parangelia is referring to this prohibition rather than the general command to love one another. Remember, verse 5 presents a contrast with the previous statement in verses 3 and 4. So the fact that the apostle Paul in verse 5 is making this contrast strongly suggests that parangelia is referring back to the prohibition in verses 3 and 4. Thus, as a result of this, the noun parangelia not only refers to the prohibition in verses 3 and 4 for certain pastors in Ephesus to not teach false doctrine or be occupied with myths and useless genealogies but also it refers to them being faithful in administrating God s household. As we noted, the noun parangelia functions as a genitive of product meaning that it is the product of the noun telos to which it stands related. This would indicate that Paul is saying that the result which (obeying) this command produces is love for one another in contrast to pointless arguments with one another. In 1 Timothy 1:5, the noun agape means divine-love and refers to the Ephesian believers divine-love as it functions towards each other since Paul is contrasting the negative ungodly results of these pastors in Ephesus teaching false doctrine and being occupied with myths and useless genealogies and the positive results of their being faithful in administrating God s household. From a pure heart teaches that a pure heart is the source from which God s love is exercised towards one s fellow Christian. This prepositional phrase teaches that when the Christian obeys the command to love one another as Christ loved him it is from a heart that is experiencing fellowship with God and being influenced by the Holy Spirit. This prepositional phrase refers to the state of the Christian s soul that does not have any known sin in its stream of consciousness. It refers to the believer experiencing fellowship with God and being influenced by the Spirit. It speaks of the believer bringing his thoughts into obedience to the Spirit William E. Wenstrom, Jr. Bible Ministries 17

19 A conscience that is divine good in quality and character refers to the Christian s conscience or whose standards are in accordance with the Father s will because the Christian is being influenced by the Spirit. The Christian is filled with or influenced by the Spirit when they bring their thoughts into obedience to the teaching of the Spirit, which is heard through the communication of the Word of God. Therefore, the conscience, where the norms and standards reside, is divine in quality and character because the teaching of the Spirit as recorded in the Word is the basis for the norms and standards. It describes the Christian s conscience as being intrinsically valuable, intrinsically good, inherently good in quality but with the idea of good which is also profitable, useful, benefiting others, benevolent because their norms and standards are based upon the teaching of the Spirit in the Word of God. This prepositional phrase indicates that loving one s fellow Christian as Christ loved all men also finds its source in a conscience that is divine good in quality and character. This means that loving one s fellow Christian as Christ loved all men originates from not only a pure heart but also a conscience that is divine good in quality and character, which is the result of being filled with the Spirit and letting the Word of Christ richly dwell in your soul. A sincere faith speaks of the Christians post-conversion faith in the Word of God or in other words, their faith in the Spirit s teaching that is revealed through the communication of the Word of God. It does not refer to saving faith or faith in Jesus Christ for eternal salvation but rather the Christian s faith in the Word of God after their conversion since in context Paul is addressing the conduct of Christians as a result of their pastors teaching sound doctrine rather than false doctrine. Also, in context, pistis is used in relation to the Christian obeying the command to love his fellow believer as Christ loves, which is accomplished by exercising faith in the Spirit s teaching in the Word of God and specifically, the command to love one another as Christ loves. Obedience to the Spirit s teaching in the Word of God to love one another as Christ loved is the direct result of the believer exercising faith in the Spirit s teaching since obedience to the commands of the Word of God are the direct result of exercising faith in the Spirit s teaching in the Word of God. This prepositional phrase indicates that love for one s fellow believer originates from a faith in the Word of God that is sincere in the sense that the Christian does not simply talk about loving his fellow believer but rather he demonstrates it by both their words and actions since obeying the command to love one another is the direct result of exercising faith in the Spirit s teaching in the Word of God. Paul is saying that love for one another is without hypocrisy. It also indicates that loving 2015 William E. Wenstrom, Jr. Bible Ministries 18