# commentaries

text:
<p><em><a href='B:610 5:19'>1Ti 5:19</a></em>&nbsp;<em>Do not receive an accusation against an elder, except at the mouth of two or three witnesses</em>- The way Paul commanded Timothy not to even&nbsp;<em>consider</em>&nbsp;a complaint against an elder unless another two or three had been eye-witnesses is proof enough that he expected elders to be slandered from within the ecclesia. The more you read between the lines of Paul's letters, the more evident it is that his very own brethren almost unbelievably slandered him. See on <em><a href='B:550 5:11'>Gal 5:11</a></em>; <em><a href='B:590 2:3'>1Th 2:3</a></em>. The context is the problematic group of sisters spreading gossip and being busybodies (:13). This kind of thing happens today, with the internet facilitating it. Paul seems to be saying that such gossips should not be 'taken up' or responded to unless there are two or three eye-witnesses.</p>


text:
<p><em><a href='B:610 5:20'>1Ti 5:20</a></em>&nbsp;<em>Those elders that sin, reprove in the sight of all-&nbsp;</em>The "all" may refer to all the elders; the "rest" who are to take warning from the reproof. I say this because there appears to be a parallel in the next verse, where Timothy is charged before or "in the sight of" "the elect angels", who I suggest refer to the eldership. For the Lord addresses them as the Angel of the church at Ephesus in Revelation 2.</p><p><em>So that the rest may also be in fear</em>- Reproof in the sight of others is shame based, which we may be somewhat uncomfortable with. But shame was a hugely powerful component in first century Mediterranean psychology and sociology. And perhaps the "sin" in view was connected to this whole issue of good appearance in the sight of others- which pride to this day is the root of so many sins.</p>


text:
<p><em><a href='B:610 5:21'>1Ti 5:21</a></em>&nbsp;<em>I charge you in the sight of God and Christ Jesus</em>- If the elders were to be reproved in the sight of each other (:20), then who was Timothy as the 'boss' to be reproved in the sight of? The answer to that was 'In God's sight and that of Jesus- as well as of the Angels'.</p><p><em>And the elect Angels- The context in 1 Timothy warns against the Jewish obsession with effectively worshipping Angels. Paul wishes to refocus their attention on Angels in the correct sense:&nbsp;</em>I suggested on :20 that this refers to the elders of the church. But they in turn were represented by literal Angels in Heaven. Hence the Angel of the church at Ephesus in Revelation 2 was in the context both a literal Angel and the human elder or group of elders in Ephesus which were represented by an Angel in Heaven. Scripture abounds with reference to this 'court of Heaven', in which individuals and situations on earth are reflected in Heaven, and Heaven's structure is reflected on earth. Angels represent the face and presence of God; the fact they are physically present in our lives means that we should live in a&nbsp;sense of awe and humility at the nearness of God to us. Often this presence of the Angel is used as a means of motivating us to higher endeavour for the Lord. Jacob conceived of&nbsp;his guardian Angel as "the fear of my father Isaac". This then is one of the ways we should fear God- to live in constant respect and awareness of the Angel in our lives. Paul uses the idea of&nbsp;charging brethren "before the elect Angels that thou do these things without preferring one before another" (<em><a href='B:610 5:21'>1Ti 5:21</a></em>), as if to say that the physical presence&nbsp;of&nbsp;the&nbsp;ecclesia's&nbsp;representative Angels should inspire humility and obedience in the running of ecclesial affairs. In a judgment context, Paul charges Timothy before the angels of the elect, i:e. our guardian Angels- as if to say 'They are watching over you now, they will be there again at judgment and look back to your present life; so behave as you should as a man under God's judgment'.</p><p>The present nature of the judgment ought to powerfully motivate us. "I charge thee before God, and the Lord Jesus Christ, and the elect angels, that thou observe these things::." (<em><a href='B:610 5:21'>1Ti 5:21</a></em> AV) is full of judgment language: before God, Christ and the Angels of the elect (i:e. our 'guardian Angels'). 'Before God' is the language of the judgment in <em><a href='B:470 25:32'>Mat 25:32</a></em>; <em><a href='B:490 21:36'>Luk 21:36</a></em>; <em><a href='B:520 14:10'>Rom 14:10</a></em>; <em><a href='B:540 5:10'>2Co 5:10</a></em>; <em><a href='B:620 2:14'>2Ti 2:14</a></em>; <em><a href='B:690 2:28'>1Jn 2:28</a></em>; <em><a href='B:720 1:24'>Jud 1:24</a></em>; <em><a href='B:730 14:5'>Rev 14:5</a></em>. It's as if Paul was reminding Timothy that he was present before the judgment already, and should therefore be obedient. <em><a href='B:620 4:1'>2Ti 4:1</a></em> makes the link even more apparent: he charged Timothy to preach as being before (Gk:) both the Father and Son, who&nbsp;<em>will judge&nbsp;</em>the living and dead at His appearing. Because we effectively stand before the judgment seat now, therefore preach now, because preaching is one of those things that will be taken into account at the final judgment day (<em><a href='B:490 12:8'>Luk 12:8</a></em>). As men being before the Lord's throne, who will be finally judged just as we are now being judged, therefore act according to the principles which we know will lead to acceptance then.</p><p><em>That you observe these things</em>- The same word is used to Timothy in <em><a href='B:620 1:14'>2Ti 1:14</a></em>, where he is again told to 'keep / observe these things" "by the Holy Spirit which dwells in us". The Holy Spirit or mind is an internal power, working "within", in order to empower obedience. But like Timothy, we must be exhorted to make full use of it rather than attempting to be obedient in our own strength.</p><p><em>Without prejudice, doing nothing by partiality</em>- This was so hard for Timothy without the spiritual strengthening just alluded to. There were many different interest groups within the church, Jewish and pagan. Timothy the timid and young had to deal with older people who were teaching wrong things and shut them up. Timothy the afflicted with sexual lusts had to tell attractive young women to get married and have children. It would've been so very easy to act with partiality. He needed the psychological Holy Spirit strengthening mentioned under&nbsp;<em>Observe these things</em>&nbsp;in order to achieve this.</p>


text:
<p><em><a href='B:610 5:22'>1Ti 5:22</a></em>&nbsp;<em>Lay hands hastily on no one</em>- This is in the context of elders, who like Timothy were appointed by laying on of hands. He is being told not to appoint anyone hastily, in chapter 3 he has been warned to give deacons a probationary period before appointing them. We can infer that Timothy was liable to over hasty and naive decision making. Again, the fact his mission succeeded was and is a testimony to the power of the Holy Spirit working within such a weak young man; see on :21&nbsp;<em>Observe these things.</em></p><p><em>And do not participate in other's sins. Keep yourself pure</em>- It would be fair to say that the church at Ephesus, including its leadership, was in a very bad moral state. It would've been a big temptation for someone as weak minded as Timothy to justify bad behaviour because the other elders were doing it. Paul has just spoken of the "sin" of elders (:20), and the "others" of :20 would seem to be the other elders. So Timothy, the newly appointed elder, is being told not to participate in the sins of the other elders, but rather reprove them (:20):&nbsp;<em>Koinoneo</em>, "participate", is from the common word family for 'fellowship'. We are not to fellowship the sins of others in the sense of not participating in them by doing them- Timothy was to "Keep yourself pure", with the emphasis on "yourself". Not fellowshipping other's sins clearly here doesn't mean 'cast them out of the church as individuals'. The fact the Lord positively addresses the eldership at Ephesus in Revelation 2 is a testament to the power of Timothy's example; he turned around that church by obedience to Paul's inspired advice and commands, rather than by throwing the offenders out of the church. Significantly, Paul doesn't tell Timothy to do that- despite the errors being serious indeed. As has been witnessed so many times, the problems aren't ultimately resolved by throwing people out and 'breaking fellowship' with them.</p>


text:
<p><em><a href='B:610 5:23'>1Ti 5:23</a></em>&nbsp;<em>No longer drink only water; instead use a little wine for your stomach's sake</em>- A theme of the Timothy correspondence is that Timothy is indeed obedient to Paul's inspired commands- and therefore ultimately his ministry succeeds. He was clearly aware that Paul was concerned that he might abuse alcohol; for Paul commands Timothy not to be given to much wine (<em><a href='B:610 3:3'>1Ti 3:3</a></em>). It seems Timothy took this to the extreme and would not touch any alcohol. Such total abstinence was rare in first century society, so we can assume Timothy adopted this position from purely spiritual reasoning. Seeing alcohol was one of the most commonly available medicines for stomach and other ailments, this meant enduring much suffering. And Paul doesn't believe that stoic suffering for the sake of it is required; rather he wants Timothy to be active and useful in the church. And to that end he had been given the gift of the Spirit within him, i:e. in his mind, within his psychology (<em><a href='B:620 1:14'>2Ti 1:14</a></em>). But he had to allow himself to "be strengthened in the grace gift- of the Spirit that is in Christ" (<em><a href='B:620 2:1'>2Ti 2:1</a></em>), to "stir up the gift that is within you" (<em><a href='B:620 1:6'>2Ti 1:6</a></em>). It was only due to doing this that according to the Lord's later letter to the Ephesians his ministry succeeded in the areas he was charged with inspiring good works and shutting down false teachers.</p><p><em>And your frequent infirmities</em>- We continue to get the picture of Timothy as weak both physically and in personality. To be given such a demanding, stressful commission, when stomach problems are often connected to nervous strain, means that his obedience and success is the more noteworthy. And it is a testimony to the internal, psychological power of the Holy Spirit within Timothy which empowered him mentally to pull through it.</p><p>Consider Timothy's weaknesses, both directly stated and implied:</p><p>- He first of all flunked the calling to remain in Ephesus (see on <em><a href='B:610 1:3'>1Ti 1:3</a></em>)</p><p>- The commands concerning bishops were firstly Paul's commands to Timothy (see on <em><a href='B:610 3:14-15'>1Ti 3:14-15</a></em>). The suggestion would be that Timothy needed to pay attention to things like not womanizing and being a solid family man</p><p>- Liable to be taken in by the Jewish myths pedalled by the old Jewish sisters (<em><a href='B:610 4:7'>1Ti 4:7</a></em>; <em><a href='B:610 6:20'>1Ti 6:20</a></em>)</p><p>- Easily discouraged by older people despising his youth, needing encouragement to set a good example (<em><a href='B:610 4:12'>1Ti 4:12</a></em>)</p><p>- Liable to neglect his gifts, not using his full spiritual potential (<em><a href='B:610 4:14'>1Ti 4:14</a></em>; <em><a href='B:620 1:6'>2Ti 1:6</a></em>; <em><a href='B:620 1:14'>2Ti 1:14</a></em>; <em><a href='B:620 4:5'>2Ti 4:5</a></em> "make&nbsp;<em>full</em>&nbsp;proof of your ministry")</p><p>- Needing to take heed to himself (<em><a href='B:610 4:16'>1Ti 4:16</a></em>)</p><p>- Tempted to show partiality (<em><a href='B:610 5:21'>1Ti 5:21</a></em>) and to do the sins he saw other elders doing, being easily led (see on <em><a href='B:610 5:22'>1Ti 5:22</a></em>)</p><p>- Frequently ill with stomach upsets (<em><a href='B:610 5:23'>1Ti 5:23</a></em>). Paul says that he himself had to work as a tentmaker in order to meet the needs of Timothy whilst Timothy was with him; he had to work because of Timothy's weakness, mentally or physically, because he was unable to work to make himself a living (see on <em><a href='B:510 20:34'>Act 20:34</a></em>).</p><p>- Often in tears (<em><a href='B:620 1:4'>2Ti 1:4</a></em>)</p><p>- Being a fearful person rather than a positive one (<em><a href='B:620 1:7'>2Ti 1:7</a></em>)</p><p>- Fearful of suffering and having to identify with Paul from fear of persecution, easily embarrassed by association with Christ (<em><a href='B:620 1:8'>2Ti 1:8</a></em>), needing encouragement to "endure hardness" and have a disciplined mind and life (<em><a href='B:620 2:3'>2Ti 2:3</a></em>)</p><p>- Weak and needing to be stronger (<em><a href='B:620 2:1'>2Ti 2:1</a></em>)</p><p>- Easily caught up in secular things (<em><a href='B:620 2:4'>2Ti 2:4</a></em>) and to try to take spiritual shortcuts around the difficult inevitabilities of the true Christian life (<em><a href='B:620 2:5'>2Ti 2:5</a></em>)</p><p>- Needing to flee sexual lusts (<em><a href='B:620 2:22'>2Ti 2:22</a></em>), even though he was a married man with children, according to 1 Timothy 3. He had to be exhorted to "purity" (<em><a href='B:610 4:12'>1Ti 4:12</a></em>), the word carrying the specific idea of sexual purity. Paul commanded Timothy to be a man of one woman in chapter 3, and warns him to deal with the younger sisters "with all purity" (<em><a href='B:610 5:2'>1Ti 5:2</a></em>). Putting all this together, it would be fair to assume that Paul perceived a weakness in Timothy in this area. And yet all the same, Paul put him in to the position of eldership, with all the inter-personal contact with females which this required. But he warned him to beware of his weakness.</p><p>- Needing to be constantly reminded to "continue" and not give up, as he was near to doing (e:g. <em><a href='B:620 3:14'>2Ti 3:14</a></em>).</p><h4>All these issues could have been the result of being a 'rich kid'. <em><a href='B:620 3:16'>2Ti 3:16</a></em> says he was taught to read from the Scriptures by his mother and grandmother (<em><a href='B:620 1:5'>2Ti 1:5</a></em>). He was very blessed to have both a mother and grandmother to raise him; for female mortality was very high in the first century world. And the vast majority of the Roman empire was illiterate. So Timothy had advantages from birth which put him in a favoured minority. But this is no reason to despise him; he was made strong out of the weaknesses associated with his background.</h4><p>Yet out of all this weakness, Timothy was made strong and according to the Lord's letter to the Ephesian church, he achieved his calling to stamp out false teaching, purify the eldership, and encourage the doing of "good works". Perhaps he did it so zealously that the church ended up lacking the&nbsp;<em>agape&nbsp;</em>love for which finally it was condemned. But so far as his obedience to his particular ministry goes- he succeeded. Out of such weakness.</p>


text:
<p><em><a href='B:610 5:24'>1Ti 5:24</a></em> - see on <em><a href='B:530 4:5'>1Co 4:5</a></em>.</p><p><em>Some men's sins are evident, preceding them to judgment</em>- The sins in view are surely those of the elders just mentioned (see on :20 and :22). Paul is saying that although some sins are open and need to be rebuked openly, Timothy should be aware that there are many other secret sinners around whose sins he may never know about in this life. He was not to judge the evident sinners on a basis which assumed everyone else was innocent and had no secret sins. And that is important to be aware of in church life today too. Any church discipline is only dealing with the evident sins. And those evident sins will in any case be dealt with by the Lord's judgment; any rebuke we may give is not therefore to be seen as equivalent to His judgment.</p><p><em>But those of others follow them there later-&nbsp;</em>The Greek could equally mean 'Those of others accompany them there'. The idea being that some have sins which they quit, which go before them to judgment; other men are accompanied by their sins to judgment. The idea would be, in the context of open rebuke in :20, that the motive for bringing out another's sins to the light is so that those sins do not follow him to judgment later, but are openly made evident now.</p>


text:
<p><em><a href='B:610 5:25'>1Ti 5:25</a></em>&nbsp;<em>Likewise, the good works of some are clearly evident, and those that are otherwise cannot be hidden</em>- The idea may be that in seeking to inculcate a culture of good works, Timothy should be aware that some good works are not "evident" not, but will not be hidden at the day of judgment. For then, according to the Lord's parable, He will openly go through the good deeds of the accepted; their feeding of the hungry, clothing the naked etc. Nothing then will be hidden. Timothy's mission of encouraging good works was recognized as successful by the Lord's letter to the Ephesian church in Revelation 2. But Paul is encouraging Timothy that it would be hard for him to judge his own success, because good works are not always evident.</p><p>However, the "otherwise" could mean '<em>bad</em>&nbsp;works'; the comfort being that secretly committed bad works will all the same be judged, and Timothy should not worry unduly about the bad works which he could not detect or find enough evidence to openly rebuke. Again, in this case, we see Timothy's tendency to overly worry.</p><p>For the righteous, our acceptability before God now is related to our acceptability with Him at judgment day. Our good works are manifest before we reach the judgment, which will manifest them again (<em><a href='B:610 5:25'>1Ti 5:25</a></em>). Thus David reflected on the experiences of his life: "Thou hast made my judgment; thou satest in the throne judging right::. and he shall judge the world (at the second coming, through Christ, <em><a href='B:510 17:11'>Act 17:11</a></em>) in righteousness, he shall minister judgment to the people in uprightness" (<em><a href='B:230 9:4'>Psa 9:4</a></em>; <em><a href='B:230 9:8'>Psa 9:8</a></em> A:V:mg:). This shows the continuity between God's attitude to him in his mortal life, and God's attitude at the coming judgment. If Christ is glorified by us now, we will glorify Him in that day (<em><a href='B:600 1:10'>2Th 1:10</a></em>; <em><a href='B:600 1:12'>2Th 1:12</a></em>).</p>


text:
<p><em><a href='B:610 6:1'>1Ti 6:1</a></em>&nbsp;<em>Let all that are under a yoke as slaves</em>- This reads rather strangely, because a slave was axiomatically under a AV "the" yoke. It appears to be saying the same thing twice. And there is no evidence that 'under the yoke' was a common term for slaves in New Testament times. Perhaps the idea is to remind slaves that actually they were under the yoke of Christ, which is "light" (<em><a href='B:470 12:29-30'>Mat 12:29-30</a></em>). Whatever slavery we may feel under, perhaps in our working or domestic lives, we can remind ourselves that ultimately we are under slavery to the Lord Jesus, and His yoke is light. But <em><a href='B:510 15:10'>Act 15:10</a></em> and <em><a href='B:550 5:1'>Gal 5:1</a></em> speak of those under the yoke as being those in bondage to the Mosaic law. Perhaps Paul is addressing the delicate question of how a slave was to behave if he came to Christ but was under the yoke of Jewish law because his master was Jewish. This was likely a live issue in Ephesus because the church there began with Paul making converts from within the synagogue. He does not urge rebellion against those masters or sticking on points of principle; but rather to treat these masters as Christ and thus get higher than them (see next comment).</p><p><em>Regard their own masters as worthy of all honour-&nbsp;</em>This is a clever word play. The Greek translated "regard" is elsewhere translated as the noun "Governor" (<em><a href='B:470 2:6'>Mat 2:6</a></em>; <em><a href='B:510 7:10'>Act 7:10</a></em>), "he that is chief" (<em><a href='B:490 22:26'>Luk 22:26</a></em>), "chief speaker" (<em><a href='B:510 14:12'>Act 14:12</a></em>), "chief men" (<em><a href='B:510 15:22'>Act 15:22</a></em>). By regarding their masters as "worthy of honour" because they were to serve them as they served Christ- who alone is the One "worthy of all honour"- they were effectively masters of their masters. It recalls the spirit of the Lord's command to offer to take a Roman soldier's bags another mile when asked. Those treated as low become the high by their Christian attitude. Let's remember that many slaves were abused by their masters; not even their bodies belonged to themselves. Sexual abuse was common. Yet never does Paul tell slaves to refuse the sexual demands of their masters. And slaves, according to contemporary references to Christianity, formed a large percentage of Christian congregations. This is not to say that the moral teaching of Christianity in this regard was not to be taken seriously- to refuse such demands and face the consequences was clearly the highest level to be taken by a Christian slave. But Paul in this matter surely makes a concession to human weakness and the nature of human situations, which the letter of the law could never accommodate. The way of Christ however elevates the drudgery of slavery and dead end situations, of the type faced today by many in effective slavery to minimum wage employment, abusive employers or very claustrophobic, limited domestic situations.</p><p><em>So that the name of God and the teaching may not be reviled</em>- "Reviled" or "blasphemed" is exactly what the pagans in Ephesus had accused Paul of doing to Diana (<em><a href='B:510 19:37'>Act 19:37</a></em> s:w:). Clearly the pagan opposition were looking for every opportunity and reason to do the same back to the God of the Christians, whose name they carried by baptism. Paul makes an assumption here, in warning believing slaves to act faithfully before their unbelieving masters, lest the doctrines of God be blasphemed by them. Paul takes it as read that the slave would have taught the doctrines of the faith to his master, and therefore any misbehaviour by him would cause those teachings to be mocked. He assumed that radical preaching would be going on. And again in <em><a href='B:630 2:5'>Tit 2:5</a></em>, he writes that wives should behave orderly so that “the word of God be not blasphemed”. He assumes that all believing men and women would be preachers of the word, yet if the wives were disorderly in their behaviour they would bring mockery upon the message preached. Paul so often in writing to Timothy expresses concern about the disrepute possible in the eyes of outsiders. Clearly there was a conscious effort to destroy the church in Ephesus through legal procedures, and so care had to be taken not to give genuine reasons for this to happen. Further, Paul had entrusted Timothy with a teaching ministry, and bad behaviour amongst the converts would mean that his teaching would be "reviled". The message preached was therefore backed up by the behaviour of those who believed it. Conversions are not often won by the simple attraction of the message of itself; that word is made flesh in the eyes of the world by those who believe it. "The teaching" would be reviled if those hearing it behaved in a way which invited mockery. So the teaching and the example of the believers of that teaching are parallel.</p>


text:
<p><em><a href='B:610 6:2'>1Ti 6:2</a></em>&nbsp;<em>And those who have believing masters, let them not despise them because they are brothers</em>- Why should a Christian slave despise his believing master? Perhaps because slavery was so obviously wrong; a Christian master should not participate in the style of slavery then practiced. The master should release his slave- because that is just the language used of what Jesus did to all in Him. He released us from slavery, redeeming us from it, paying the price of manumission whereby a person could be bought out of slavery. But for whatever reason, these believing masters hadn't responded as they might. The Lord had warned His followers to “despise not” the ‘little ones’ (<em><a href='B:470 18:10'>Mat 18:10</a></em>). Paul picks up this phrase here in warning servants not to despise their masters who were brethren; the implication that they were to treat those wealthy but perhaps not very spiritually mature masters as ‘little ones’, with all the patience this would require. The command is not to despise them; but we might think that the dominant emotion in this case would be anger. Yet Paul focuses on not despising because his point is that we must respect others because of their status in Christ; every believer in Him should be respected by us. We must ask whether our churches are places of respect, or whether various strata of respect and acceptance have robbed them of the spirit of mutual respect which ought to characterize the communal life of God's people.</p><p><em>But rather serve them because those whom they are serving are</em>&nbsp;<em>believers and beloved</em>- The reference to "beloved" invites connection to Christ who is "the beloved"; just as unbelieving masters were to be given "all honour", i:e. served as Christ, to whom alone "all honour" is due. In any difficult relationship with a believer, however abusive to us we consider them to have been, no matter how much better we feel they ought to be able to do in their relationship with us, let us remember that 'God loves this person'. They are beloved. So much so that He gave His only begotten Son for them. Some MSS, followed by the AV, add here: "Partakers of the benefit", literally, 'partakers in the good deed', referring surely to the cross. The Lord died not only for me. But for those who name His Name whom I consider to have abused me. We cannot condemn another believer, so we are to presume their acceptance by the Lord. This will mean that they have partaken in the benefits of His death, just as we have. This is so easy to write, but it was equally difficult for first century Christian slaves being abused by their Christian masters.</p><p><em>Teach and exhort these things</em>- The idea is of comfort, and the message to abused slaves was indeed a comfort.</p>


text:
<p><em><a href='B:610 6:3'>1Ti 6:3</a></em>&nbsp;<em>If anyone teaches a different doctrine</em>- Paul's opening charge to Timothy at Ephesus was to stop false teaching (<em><a href='B:610 1:3'>1Ti 1:3</a></em>). From those who taught different teaching, Paul says that Timothy is to "withdraw thyself" (:5 AV- although omitted in some MSS and NEV). Timothy was to distance himself from such teachers, which is equivalent in <em><a href='B:610 1:3'>1Ti 1:3</a></em> to not allowing them the platform. This little phrase "withdraw thyself" has been much abused in closed table communities to mean that we are to withdraw ourselves from anyone who differs from us on some matter of understanding or practice. But the context here, and the parallel with <em><a href='B:610 1:3'>1Ti 1:3</a></em>, is that the persons in view should not be allowed to teach. Who takes bread and wine is one issue, and does not ultimately affect anyone much. But who is allowed to teach is another issue altogether. The "different doctrine" or teaching references the teaching about the possibilities for slaves in :1 and :2. We can imagine that the teachers were also materially wealthy and may have been those referred to as the "believing masters". We can assume that they would have been tempted to not agree with the teaching of :1 and :2, and not to teach it- despite the simple command at the end of :2 to teach these things.</p><p><em>And consents not to sound words, the words of our Lord Jesus Christ</em>- The teaching in&nbsp;view is that about slaves and masters in :1 and :2. To disagree with what Paul has said would be to disagree with the words of the Lord Jesus. This could be because Paul's inspired words were effectively the words of the Lord Jesus, although in that case we wonder why the reference is to the words of Jesus rather than of God. Or Paul may mean that the teaching he had just given was a repetition of the essence of the&nbsp;<em>logos</em>, the essential idea, of the Lord Jesus. He may not have been quoting recorded words of the Lord Jesus (although maybe he is alluding to words of Jesus which were then well known but were unrecorded in the Gospels)- but in any case, Paul was repeating the<em>&nbsp;logos</em>, the word or essential ideas, of the teaching of the Lord Jesus.</p><p><em>And to the doctrine which shows reverence towards God</em>- The teaching or doctrine in view is that of :1 and :2 which have spoken of the need not to bring God's Name to disrepute; and to reverence / respect people because God is working through them and they in a sense represent Him. But "reverence towards God" is the word for "Godliness" which often occurs in 1 Timothy; and it occurs in this context in :5, where these alternative teachers are portrayed as men teaching "that reverence towards God "Godliness" is a way of gain". They didn't want to teach things like those in :1 and :2 because they used their teaching as a way of gain. So far in this exposition I have suggested that there were female teachers in the church who were acting like the female mediators of the Diana cult, and taking money for their sexual services to brothers in Christ by getting money from the church for their services under the front of the widows' support fund. And here we find Timothy again being told to remove some from teaching- and again money is involved. These people were using 'Godliness' to get gain for themselves and were abusing their teaching ministry to that end. It sounds like the same group. It was doubtless with this money that the women could dress themselves up with such expensive and provocative clothing in <em><a href='B:610 2:9-10'>1Ti 2:9-10</a></em>.</p>


text:
<p><em><a href='B:610 6:4'>1Ti 6:4</a></em>&nbsp;<em>He is proud, knowing nothing, but is obsessed with disputes and arguments over words</em>- This is the warning of chapter 1 repeated now at the end of this first letter. Those who 'know nothing' are those of <em><a href='B:610 1:7'>1Ti 1:7</a></em>: "They neither understand what they say, nor what they confidently affirm". They did of course know something theoretically, for they were teachers. But in real spiritual essence, they knew nothing. They were "bereft of the truth" (:5), which is Jesus and the great, real salvation in Him. All else is insignificant. The obsession with disputing and arguing about words frankly sounds like elements of many small time Protestant groups in their neo-Judaism. And the fruit of that attitude is the same- envy, strife and division. "Obsessed" translates a word meaning 'to be sick', in the sense of vomiting. That is what all the disputes and arguments amount to- vomit. The only time Paul uses the term 'arguments over words' again is in <em><a href='B:620 2:14'>2Ti 2:14</a></em>, where Timothy is told that he must still stamp out this attitude. I have mentioned several times that the Lord's assessment of the church at Ephesus in Revelation 2 is such that we can conclude Timothy's charge was carried out successfully by him; for they are then commended for not having false teaching. But the way Paul has to repeat these charges about not allowing false teachers suggests that this was not so easily achieved; in the gap between the two letters, Timothy had not made total progress. His final success is therefore the more noteworthy and commendable.</p><p><em>From which come envy, strife, reviling, evil suspicions</em>- We see here the importance of having a good teaching ministry. The congregation become this way according to the kind of teaching they are receiving.</p>


text:
<p><em><a href='B:610 6:5'>1Ti 6:5</a></em>&nbsp;<em>Wranglings&nbsp;of men corrupted in mind and bereft of the truth</em>- The word can mean 'meddlings' and is used about being a busybody. Although a different word is used, this is the very accusation made about the female false teachers of <em><a href='B:610 5:13'>1Ti 5:13</a></em>. Again we get the impression that the same group of teachers are in view; the women and their male supporters, teaching a heady mixture of Jewish and pagan Diana cult heresy.</p><p><em>Who suppose that reverence towards God is a way of gain- See&nbsp;</em>on :3<em>&nbsp;To the doctrine</em>.</p><p>Some MSS and AV add "From such withdraw thyself". See on :3.</p>


text:
<p><em><a href='B:610 6:6'>1Ti 6:6</a></em>&nbsp;<em>But reverence towards God with contentment is great gain</em>- In chapter 2 and elsewhere, Paul urges the false teachers to settle down into Christian family life and where appropriate, have children. We note that he doesn't tell Timothy to cast these people out of the church. He wants their salvation. And from personal experience I would tend to think that the "Godliness with contentment" which is "great gain" is a reference to a Christ-centered family life which is not focused upon getting personal wealth and success nor leadership in the church.</p>


text:
<p><em><a href='B:610 6:7'>1Ti 6:7</a></em>&nbsp;<em>For we brought nothing into the world, for neither can we carry anything out</em>- This is a quote from Seneca, contemporary with Paul. The Bible is full of allusions to contemporary literature and wisdom, approving some of the ideas and deconstructing others. Some of the Bible's most difficult passages are likely difficult to our eyes because they are alluding to material we are unaware of. For the Bible is written&nbsp;<em>for&nbsp;</em>us but not directly&nbsp;<em>to&nbsp;</em>us in our generation. The fact we cannot take anything material with us is proof enough that any amassing of personal wealth is for this life only. The deception of wealth is the idea of permanent ownership of property, in various forms. But the permanence is only until death. The opening "for" connects with the idea of 'gain'. Overall in life, we gain nothing. We start and finish with nothing, so why stress about 'gaining' as we pass through the life process. <em><a href='B:230 49:17'>Psa 49:17</a></em> may be in view: "For when he (the rich man) dieth, he shall carry nothing away; his glory shall not descend after him”. In saying this, Paul is alluding to how Job faced up to the reality of our condition by saying that we entered this world naked and return naked (<em><a href='B:220 1:21'>Job 1:21</a></em>). Paul is saying that we are all in Job's position, facing up to the loss of all things, and should count it a blessing to have even clothing. We need not pass through Job's experience if we learn the theory. Solomon says the same in <em><a href='B:250 5:15'>Ecc 5:15</a></em>, but only after passing through the wealth experience. It is our wisdom to absorb this principle without having to be dragged through a hedge backwards to make us realize its truth.</p>


text:
<p><em><a href='B:610 6:8'>1Ti 6:8</a></em>&nbsp;<em>But having food and covering we shall be content-&nbsp;</em>The reference may be to God's provision of these two things, food and clothing, to Israel in the wilderness. Their journey towards the promised land is a common prototype of our path towards the Kingdom. Note that there is no promise of a stable place to live; Paul himself had "no certain dwelling place" and neither did Israel in the wilderness. So much angst goes with the question of property ownership. But the promise we can take comfort from is that we ourselves shall always be provided with food and clothing.</p>


text:
<p><em><a href='B:610 6:9'>1Ti 6:9</a></em> - see on <em><a href='B:490 5:7'>Luk 5:7</a></em>.</p><h4><em>But they that are intent on being rich</em>- Paul had thought deeply about the parables. He doesn't just half-quote them in an offhand way. For example, <em><a href='B:470 13:22'>Mat 13:22</a></em> says that riches choke a man's response to the word. <em><a href='B:610 6:9'>1Ti 6:9</a></em> warns that those who&nbsp;<em>want to be rich</em>&nbsp;are choked by their&nbsp;<em>desire&nbsp;</em>for riches. Likewise Paul saw the rich man of <em><a href='B:470 19:23'>Mat 19:23</a></em> as actually one who&nbsp;<em>wanted</em>&nbsp;to be rich (= <em><a href='B:610 6:9-10'>1Ti 6:9-10</a></em>). So Paul had thought through the parable. He saw that possession of riches alone wouldn't choke a man; he saw that the Lord was using "riches" as meaning 'the desire for riches'. And because "riches" are relative and subjective, this must be right. And therefore the Spirit was able to use Paul's deductions. My point is that the Spirit&nbsp;<em>could</em>&nbsp;have used just anyone to write (e:g:) <em><a href='B:610 6:9'>1Ti 6:9</a></em>. But it was no accident that God chose to use a man with a fine knowledge and appreciation of His Son to be His pen-man.</h4><p><em>Fall into a temptation and a snare-&nbsp;</em>Twice in 1 Timothy, Paul speaks about a snare; the snare of the devil (<em><a href='B:610 3:7'>1Ti 3:7</a></em>), and the snare of wanting wealth (<em><a href='B:610 6:9'>1Ti 6:9</a></em>). He mentions the snare of the devil again in <em><a href='B:620 2:26'>2Ti 2:26</a></em>. In the immediate application, the 'devil' referred to the enemy of the church which surrounded them in Ephesus- a combination of Jewish and pagan powers who were eager to trap the Christians by accusations regarding financial and moral matters in order to close down the church. The clear influence of the Jewish Eve cult and the pagan Diana cult indicates that this snare was very real. Yet the Ephesian church survived, for the Lord wrote a letter to them in Revelation 2. Again we sense that Timothy's difficult ministry was successful, for despite all this surrounding desire to snare and strangle the church to death, it survived.</p><p>The desire for wealth in whatever form is the very epitome of the devil, our inherent sin which we must struggle against. The idea of a snare is that it results in a sudden and&nbsp;<em>unexpected</em>&nbsp;destruction. The unexpectedness of the destruction should set us thinking: surely the implication is that those who are materialistic don't realize that in fact this is their besetting sin, and therefore their rejection in the end because of it will be so tragically unexpected. It's rather like pride; if you're proud and you don't know it, then you really are proud. And if we're materialistic and don't know it, we likewise really have a problem. The idea of riches being a snare connects with copious OT references to idols as Israel's perpetual snare (<em><a href='B:20 23:33'>Exo 23:33</a></em>; <em><a href='B:50 7:16'>Deu 7:16</a></em>; <em><a href='B:70 2:3'>Jdg 2:3</a></em>; <em><a href='B:70 8:27'>Jdg 8:27</a></em>; <em><a href='B:230 106:36'>Psa 106:36</a></em>; <em><a href='B:350 5:1'>Hos 5:1</a></em>). Paul's point is surely that the desire of wealth is the equivalent of OT idolatry. But there is another, even more telling Biblical usage of the "snare". The day of the Lord will be a snare to the unsuspecting worldling, who will suddenly find that the Lord has come and destroyed him (<em><a href='B:290 8:14'>Isa 8:14</a></em>; <em><a href='B:290 24:17-18'>Isa 24:17-18</a></em>; <em><a href='B:300 50:24'>Jer 50:24</a></em>; <em><a href='B:490 21:35'>Luk 21:35</a></em>). Yet the materialistic believer falls into the snare of riches here and now. Surely the point is that our attitude to riches is a preview of the judgment; the materialistic believer has condemned himself, right now. Not only does such a man fall into the devil's snare, but he pierces himself through with sorrows (<em><a href='B:610 6:10'>1Ti 6:10</a></em>), which is the language of crucifixion. This connection suggests a powerful logic. We face a cross either way; either the cross of the Lord Jesus, with the matchless eternity it heralds; or the cross, the twisting, unsatisfied pain of a life devoted to material advancement, which finally results in the darkness of rejection.</p><p><em>And many foolish and hurtful lusts</em>- The lust for wealth spawns many other lusts, for the things which can be done with wealth or for things which are thought to lead to wealth. Hence :10 says that the desire to be wealthy is the root of all evil.</p><p><em>Which drown men</em>- The word is only elsewhere used about the disciples almost drowning because they overloaded their boats with fish (<em><a href='B:490 5:7'>Luk 5:7</a></em>); which Paul saw, through this allusion, as rooted in a desire to be wealthy. The fish were given by the Lord, all the same; He could give or not give them, but by giving them, the disciples almost drowned.</p><p><em>In destruction and condemnation-&nbsp;</em>Quite simply, men will be condemned at the last day because they wanted to be rich in this life. This is a sober warning.</p>


text:
<p><em><a href='B:610 6:10'>1Ti 6:10</a></em>&nbsp;<em>For the love of money is a root of all kinds of evil-&nbsp;</em>We could read the "all" literally, as if all evil can be traced back to a love of wealth. Or we can read these "kinds of evil" as referring to the "many foolish and hurtful lusts" of :9 which arise directly or indirectly from a desire for wealth. In the context of Ephesus, Paul's reference to love of wealth would apply to the women / sisters receiving money for sexual services to brothers, taken under cover of spirituality from the widows' relief fund. "Love of money" is literally 'love of silver'. Again in the context of Ephesus, we recall that the images of Diana were made of silver; and it was the guild of silversmiths who raised the persecution against the early church in Ephesus and sought to have Christianity banned. Their literal love of silver led them to "all kinds of evil". But those materialistic ones&nbsp;<em>within&nbsp;</em>the church were in essence no better than those in the world outside who were persecuting them.</p><p><em>Which some, by seeking for, have been led astray from the faith, and have pierced&nbsp;themselves through with many sorrows</em>- The Greek translated "pierced themselves through" is related to the verb 'to crucify'. We are asked to crucify ourselves, to give up the brief materialism of this life. Yet if we refuse to do this, we still pierce ourselves through, we crucify ourselves, with the pain which comes from a mind dedicated to materialism and self-fulfilment, a life devoted to reaching the end of a rainbow. So what is the logical thing to do? It's crucifixion either way. The idea of piercing self through with sorrow is actually a direct quote from the LXX of <em><a href='B:110 21:27'>1Ki 21:27</a></em>, where Ahab was pierced with sorrow as a result of his coveting of Naboth’s vineyard. And yet when Naboth was dead, Ahab tore his clothes and put on sackcloth, in sorrow for what he had done (<em><a href='B:110 21:16'>1Ki 21:16</a></em> LXX- omitted in the AV); but these very words are used in describing how when Ahab heard the words of his condemnation, he tore his clothes and put on sackcloth (<em><a href='B:110 21:27'>1Ki 21:27</a></em>). His sin brought him to tear his clothes, just as he did when his condemnation was pronounced. In his seeking for happiness he pierced himself through with the sorrow of condemnation. Quite simply, people who are bent on getting wealthy are not happy. Wealth</p>


text:
<p><em><a href='B:610 6:11'>1Ti 6:11</a></em>&nbsp;<em>But you, o man of God, flee these material things</em>- The call to flee suggests weak minded Timothy was tempted by material things.</p><p><em>And instead pursue after righteousness</em>- There must always be something positive in place if we decide to flee sin. The fleeing from must become a pursuing after. Paul repeats this idea in <em><a href='B:620 2:22'>2Ti 2:22</a></em> - flee youthful sexual lusts and instead follow after the same positive attributes.</p><p><em>Reverence towards God, faith, love, patience, meekness</em>- To aspire to meekness is the acme of spiritual endeavour.</p>


text:
<p><em><a href='B:610 6:12'>1Ti 6:12</a></em> - see on <em><a href='B:620 4:6-8'>2Ti 4:6-8</a></em>; <em><a href='B:490 13:24'>Luk 13:24</a></em>.</p><p><em>Fight the good fight of the faith</em>- In 2 Timothy, Paul urges Timothy to accept the disciplined life of a soldier, as if Timothy was naturally weak minded and not well disciplined; we recall the command to him to have his children more firmly in order in chapter 3. Paul uses the same words in saying that he has "fought a good fight" (<em><a href='B:620 4:7'>2Ti 4:7</a></em>), unashamedly and consciously setting himself up to Timothy as an example. This is possible to do, without pride and any self affection, if truly we live in integrity before God and man.</p><p><em>Lay hold on the everlasting life-&nbsp;</em>We can experience eternal life by starting to live now how we shall eternally live. Hence the Lord in John's Gospel speaks of having eternal life now. Paul goes on to write of how the wealthy can lay hold on everlasting life (:19 s:w:) by giving away their wealth in the Lord's service. But Timothy was to be their example of laying hold on the Kingdom life right now. We are frequently spoken of as having been 'laid hold of' by the Lord; and we are to respond by laying hold of the things of the Kingdom as firmly as He has taken a grip upon our lives.</p><p><em>Whereunto you were called and did confess the good confession in the sight of many witnesses</em>- The confession was perhaps related to confessing that we have been called to eternal life, and have taken hold of that offer and will try to live that eternal life now. This was such a fundamental idea that it was part of some unrecorded "good confession" which was presumably declared by baptismal candidates (s:w. <em><a href='B:520 10:9-10'>Rom 10:9-10</a></em> "If you shall confess with your mouth the Lord Jesus::. confession is made unto salvation"; "the obedience of your confession" of the Faith, <em><a href='B:540 9:13'>2Co 9:13</a></em>). We note that such materials have not been preserved for us- so that we would not slavishly hold to any form of words. For a confession of faith by its nature is personal and unique. Yet the confession before witnesses may not necessarily refer to Timothy's baptism, but rather to the time when the elders, the "many witnesses", laid hands on him to grant him the Holy Spirit for his ministry (<em><a href='B:610 4:14'>1Ti 4:14</a></em>). The Greek for 'confess' means essentially 'to agree'; the agreement was therefore regarding the reality of the hope of eternal life, and Timothy's promise to live that eternal life now and fight for the faith. The "<em>good</em>&nbsp;fight" he was to fight connects with the&nbsp;<em>good</em>&nbsp;confession he had made.</p>


text:
<p><em><a href='B:610 6:13'>1Ti 6:13</a></em>&nbsp;<em>I urge you in the sight of God, who gives life to all things, and of Christ Jesus, who before Pontius Pilate made the good confession</em>- Timothy's confession was one of faith and commitment to the life and work appropriate to e belief that God really will give life to all in His Son. And the essence of that confession of devotion and faith in the life to come was seen in the Lord's confession before Pilate. In <em><a href='B:470 27:11'>Mat 27:11</a></em> we read that Jesus before Pilate said just one word in Greek; translated "Thou sayest". It is stressed there that Jesus said nothing else, so that Pilate marvelled at His silent self-control and intense focus of meaning upon that word- that Pilate had said truly in saying that Jesus was a King who would reign in God's Kingdom. Yet Paul speaks with pride of how the Lord Jesus "before Pontius Pilate witnessed a good confession". You'd expect him to be alluding to some major speech of Jesus. But it seems, reading his spirit, Paul's saying: 'Lord Jesus, your self control, your strength of purpose and faith towards the coming Kingdom an eternal life::. was just so great. I salute you, I hold you up to Timothy as the supreme example. Just one word. What a witness'. And as He witnessed in His ministry, so must we (<em><a href='B:520 2:19'>Rom 2:19</a></em> cp. <em><a href='B:470 4:16'>Mat 4:16</a></em>). As He witnessed before Pilate, so must we witness (<em><a href='B:610 6:12-13'>1Ti 6:12-13</a></em>).</p>


text:
<p><em><a href='B:610 6:14'>1Ti 6:14</a></em>&nbsp;<em>Keep the commandment without stain</em>- Which charge or commandment? Presumably here at the end of the letter, Paul is summarizing and referring back to his opening charge to Timothy to remove false teachers and inculcate good works, with love as the intended end result (<em><a href='B:610 1:3-5'>1Ti 1:3-5</a></em>). Yet in the immediate context, the charge / commandment might be that to which Timothy had given a good confession (:12); which would suggest his 'good confession' was not at his baptism but rather in agreement to the commission given him to care for Ephesus. The sentence as it stands can be read two ways- either the commandment itself was to unstained; or Timothy was to keep the commandment without stain. The question is whether "without stain" refers to the subject or object of the sentence, and in my judgment of the Greek it refers to keeping the commandment itself unstained- until the Lord's return. This could only be achieved by handing on the commandment / charge to maintain pure doctrine to faithful men of the next generation (<em><a href='B:620 2:2'>2Ti 2:2</a></em>). If Paul meant that Timothy was to keep the commandment until the Lord returned, then it would mean that Paul expected the Lord's coming to be within Timothy's lifetime. And indeed Paul does write like that and in other places he does appear to make that assumption- as we all should live in the hopeful expectation of the Lord's imminent return:&nbsp;</p><p><em>Without reproach</em>- Timothy as the bishop at Ephesus was to be without reproach (<em><a href='B:610 3:2'>1Ti 3:2</a></em>). This strengthens the impression that "the commandment" was the command to Timothy to take care of Ephesus.</p><p><em>Until the appearing of our Lord Jesus Christ</em>- See on :14&nbsp;<em>Keep the commandment</em>.</p>


text:
<p><em><a href='B:610 6:15'>1Ti 6:15</a></em><em>&nbsp;In due time He shall reveal him, He who is the blessed and only Potentate, the King&nbsp;of kings and Lord of lords-&nbsp;</em>Caesar was seen as king of many subject kings, Lord of many conquered and inferior lords. In this we see the radical challenge of <em><a href='B:610 6:15-16'>1Ti 6:15-16</a></em>: that Jesus Christ is the&nbsp;<em>only</em>&nbsp;potentate, the Lord of Lords, the King of all Kings. The RV margin brings out the Greek even more radically: “them that rule as lords”- those who think they are lords when compared to the Lord Jesus they are nothing. Many of the terms used in relation to Caesar worship are deliberately used in the New Testament and redefined in an exclusive Christian context, setting the Christian view of them up against any other use of them, and insisting upon it as the only valid meaning of the term. Thus ‘<em>evangelion</em>’ was a well-known concept. It meant the good news of victory, and the corresponding duty to make thank and praise offerings for it. The Imperial Cult used the word for announcing Caesar’s victories, his birthdays, his accession to power, his granting of&nbsp;<em>salvation</em>&nbsp;to his people… Mark’s Gospel especially uses the word&nbsp;<em>evangelion</em>&nbsp;in a way which sets it up in contrast to the way it was used in the Imperial Cult. It is the good news of the birth, victory, resurrection and Kingdom of the Lord Jesus, and the&nbsp;<em>evangelion</em>&nbsp;calls men and women to make self-sacrifice in response to it. It has been noted that "King of kings and Lord of lords", along with the surrounding couplets, are rhythmical. They are likely a quotation from some early Christian liturgy- a hymn or prayer. This means that such radical challenge of the Caesar cult and the Roman empire would have been a regular part of church life; just as we should be constantly aware of our radical collision course with the spirit of this world.</p><p>When Paul exalts that Christ is King of Kings and Lord of Lords, dwelling in light which no man can approach unto, this isn’t just some literary flourish. It is embedded within a context of telling the believers to quit materialism, indeed to flee from its snare. <em><a href='B:610 6:6-14'>1Ti 6:6-14</a></em> concern this; and then there is the passage about Christ’s exaltation (:15,16), and then a continued plea to share riches rather than build them up (:17-19). Because He is Lord of all, we should quit our materialism and sense of self-ownership. For we are His, and all we have is for His service too. And the principle of His being Lord affects every aspect of our spirituality. Dennis Gillet truly observed in&nbsp;<em>The Genius Of Discipleship</em>: “Mastery is gained by crowning the Master as Lord and King".</p>


text:
<p><em><a href='B:610 6:16'>1Ti 6:16</a></em> See on <em><a href='B:20 32:30-32'>Exo 32:30-32</a></em>.</p><p><em>Who only has immortality, dwelling in light unapproachable</em>- This may be a final swipe at the Diana cult, which taught there were thousands of immortal gods; and of course they lived in the Artemisian temple at Ephesus, rather than "dwelling in light unapproachable". And it is also for sure a swipe at the imperial cult, which claimed that many of the dead emperors of Rome had been deified and were now immortal.</p><p><em>Whom no one has seen, nor can see. To whom be honour and power eternal. Amen</em>- This likewise is a contrast between the one true God, and the pathetic idea of a god who is a visible idol like the Diana statue or the silver images made of her.</p>


text:
<p><em><a href='B:610 6:17'>1Ti 6:17</a></em>&nbsp;<em>Instruct those that are rich in this present world-&nbsp;</em>The connection between wealth and world continues the theme of :7. We come into this world naked and exit naked. Any wealth is only for this present world- and we who have the sure hope of eternity are looking for the world to come.</p><p><em>That they are not proud, nor have their hope set on the uncertain riches; but instead on God, who gives us richly all things to enjoy</em>- The same Greek phrase for “not proud”, "be not high minded", is used in <em><a href='B:520 11:20'>Rom 11:20</a></em> about those who think they are spiritually superior to others. And so perhaps the idea was that the wealthy liked to think their wealth was a result of their spirituality, and therefore they despised the poorer brethren. And Paul directly warns against any such thinking, the like of which is seen so much in Pentecostal circles. The rich fool was not read by Paul as referring to some Hollywood millionaire; he saw that character as being in the ecclesia (<em><a href='B:470 19:21'>Mat 19:21</a></em> = <em><a href='B:610 6:17-19'>1Ti 6:17-19</a></em>).</p>


text:
<p><em><a href='B:610 6:18'>1Ti 6:18</a></em>&nbsp;<em>Let the rich do good, that they be rich in good</em>&nbsp;<em>works-&nbsp;</em>The true wealth is in giving away rather than accumulating.</p><p><em>Ready to distribute</em>- "Ready" suggests Paul is not envisaging selling all and giving away. The rich should be "ready" to share, rather than looking for reasons not to.</p><p><em>Willing to communicate</em>- Literally, 'to fellowship'. Fellowship is not an on paper agreement based on dry theology. Fellowship in practice means sharing wealth with others.</p>


text:
<p><em><a href='B:610 6:19'>1Ti 6:19</a></em>&nbsp;<em>Laying up in store for themselves a&nbsp;good foundation-&nbsp;</em>The Spirit describes our final redemption as our "soul" and "spirit" being "saved"; our innermost being, our essential spiritual personality, who we&nbsp;<em>really</em>&nbsp;are in spiritual terms, will as it were be immortalized (<em><a href='B:670 1:9'>1Pe 1:9</a></em>; <em><a href='B:530 5:5'>1Co 5:5</a></em>). This means that our spiritual development in this life is directly proportional to the type of person we will be&nbsp;<em>for evermore</em>. If, for example, we develop a generous spirit now, this is "a good foundation" for our future spiritual experience (<em><a href='B:610 6:19'>1Ti 6:19</a></em>). This is a stupendous conception, and the ultimate fillip to getting serious about our very personal spiritual development. Our mortal bodies will be changed to immortal, Spirit nature bodies according to the Spirit which&nbsp;<em>now</em>&nbsp;dwells in us (<em><a href='B:520 8:11'>Rom 8:11</a></em> Gk:). The attitude which we have to the Lord Jesus&nbsp;<em>now</em>&nbsp;will be the attitude we have to Him at the day of judgment (<em><a href='B:470 7:23'>Mat 7:23</a></em> cp. <em><a href='B:490 6:46'>Luk 6:46</a></em>). So the wealthy who give their wealth away are not buying a place in the Kingdom for themselves, but who they eternally will be shall eternally reflect the generous character they developed in this life. In this sense they have 'laid hold' on the eternal life; they have begun to live the kind of life which we shall eternally live.</p><p><em>Against the time to come</em>- They have 'laid up in store for themselves' spiritually, in that the future day "time to come" which in is subconsciously in the mind of all savers, hoarders and folk rich and poor::. is going to be revealed as the day of judgment. Those who have given away wealth so that they are left at a real minus, and not simply being generous in ways they wouldn't notice::. have laid up a store of wealth for&nbsp;<em>that</em>&nbsp;day.</p><p><em>That they may lay hold on the life which is life indeed-&nbsp;</em>God richly gives things to&nbsp;<em>all of us</em>, Paul says; and by our being “liberal and generous we thus lay up for ourselves a good foundation for the future, so that we may take hold of the life which is life indeed”. “The life which is life indeed” is not the lower middle class striving-for-security life of slowly saving and occasionally splashing out on something, building, building up, watching the interest slowly grow, worrying about inflation and the possible need for a new boiler or roof… Much as those things are all part of our human experience in this age, they’re not “the life which is life indeed”. That life begins now, in a counter-instinctive going against the grain of being generous.</p>


text:
<h4><em><a href='B:610 6:20'>1Ti 6:20</a></em>&nbsp;<em>O Timothy, guard</em>- We sense from Paul's emotional appeal that Paul really feared Timothy was not going to hold on, and would allow his weaknesses of character to dominate, with the result that the truth of Christ would be lost in Ephesus. The Lord's letter to the Ephesians some time later shows that Timothy did hold on and discharged his commission. The only problem was that all the emphasis on good works and maintaining purity of teaching was achieved without&nbsp;<em>agape&nbsp;</em>love- and this was why the Ephesian church was finally reprimanded. But from the point of view of Timothy's calling and mission- he fulfilled it, and out of weakness was made strong.</h4><p><em>That which was committed to you</em>- Paul urges Timothy a while later to guard or keep what was committed to him, i:e. the charge of <em><a href='B:610 1:3-4'>1Ti 1:3-4</a></em> of maintaining true teaching and good works in Ephesus, "by the power of the Holy Spirit which dwells within us" (<em><a href='B:620 1:14'>2Ti 1:14</a></em>). Given Timothy's weaknesses of personality, the only way he could have achieved his calling was by internal psychological strengthening. And that is exactly what the Holy Spirit / mind "which dwells&nbsp;<em>within</em>&nbsp;us" is all about. It works within the human mind. The ability to do miracles etc. was not in view. And Paul uses the same idea about keeping what the Lord committed to us in saying that the Lord is able to guard / keep what&nbsp;<em>we&nbsp;</em>have committed&nbsp;<em>to Him</em>&nbsp;(<em><a href='B:620 1:12'>2Ti 1:12</a></em>). He has committed His work to us to do, and we have committed our lives to Him. We have undertaken to be totally taken up with His work, and thus we have staked our entire lives and future on His existence and real working with us. There is thus an indescribable mutuality between God and man if we are committed to what He has committed to us.</p><p><em>Turning away from the profane babblings and oppositions of false knowledge-&nbsp;</em>Again we see a connection with the opening of the letter, where Paul has noted that some have 'turned away' unto vain ideas; and Paul urges Timothy to likewise 'turn away' these ideas, perhaps in practice by not granting a platform to those teaching them. The idea is not just that Timothy personally should turn away from such babblings, but should himself turn those babblings away- by stopping them being taught, according to his charge in <em><a href='B:610 1:3-4'>1Ti 1:3-4</a></em>. Again we note that Timothy was being asked to stem a tide which the prophetic word had said would not be turned away- for in the last days, men would depart from the faith (<em><a href='B:610 4:1'>1Ti 4:1</a></em>), and be turned away unto fables (<em><a href='B:620 4:4'>2Ti 4:4</a></em>). But Timothy was asked to bravely still battle that tide of apparent inevitability. Just as Moses prayed for the destruction of Israel not to happen. And it succeeded; for the Lord's summary of the Ephesian church in Revelation 2 stated that they were doctrinally intact. "False knowledge" is&nbsp;<em>gnosis</em>, possibly a reference to incipient Gnosticism, but more likely a criticism of the mentality which is alive and well to this day in the internet generation: 'I know something you don't, I've got access to sources you don't have access to::. so do what I say'. The immediate reference would have been to the Jewish fables taught by the old Jewish women, and the nonsense connected with the cults of Eve and Diana which Timothy had to engage in chapter 2.</p>


text:
<p><em><a href='B:610 6:21'>1Ti 6:21</a></em>&nbsp;<em>Which some professing</em>- The female false teachers of <em><a href='B:610 2:10'>1Ti 2:10</a></em> had 'professed Godliness' at their baptismal confession; and yet it seems they had also made some profession / confession to the Diana cult, and had seriously erred from the Christian faith as a result.</p><p><em>Have erred concerning the faith-&nbsp;</em>Another connection with the opening section of the letter, where Paul notes that some have 'swerved' (<em><a href='B:610 1:6'>1Ti 1:6</a></em>). "The faith" is a path, a road with an end point- spiritual mindedness, the imitation of Christ, resulting in eternity in God's Kingdom united with Christ. Smart ideas, philosophies, Jewish fables etc. all cause people to swerve from that path. <em><a href='B:620 2:18'>2Ti 2:18</a></em> uses the same word in giving concrete examples of those who have 'erred' by saying that the resurrection has already come-&nbsp; first century form of the Preterist heresy which is rife today. Those who hold false doctrines have "missed the mark concerning the faith" (<em><a href='B:610 6:21'>1Ti 6:21</a></em> RVmg:). The true faith has an aim, a mark to which it aims. A false 'faith' misses that aim. "Profane and vain babblings::. increase unto more ungodliness" (<em><a href='B:620 2:16'>2Ti 2:16</a></em>)- they precipitate a downward spiral of practical behaviour:&nbsp;<br/><em><br/>Grace be with you</em>- The word&nbsp;<em>charis</em>&nbsp;means literally 'the gift', and refers surely to the internal gift of Holy Spirit strengthening commented on under :20&nbsp;<em>Guard that::.</em></p>


text:
<p><em><a href='B:620 1:1'>2Ti 1:1</a></em>&nbsp;<em>Paul an apostle of Christ Jesus</em>- Paul begins by saying he has been called to be a sent out one, and then a few verses later backs it up by repeating that he was appointed to be an apostle (<em><a href='B:620 1:11'>2Ti 1:11</a></em>). The same pattern is to be seen in 1 Timothy; the opening verse speaks likewise of how he is an apostle (<em><a href='B:610 1:1'>1Ti 1:1</a></em>), and then <em><a href='B:610 2:7'>1Ti 2:7</a></em> says he was indeed appointed as an apostle. Perhaps Timothy was beginning to doubt Paul's credentials, and this was a factor in Timothy's lack of full devotion to his ministry? Or perhaps Paul is urging Timothy to follow his own example of commitment to the calling he had received. For the letters to Timothy suggest that Timothy needed to be stirred up to continue responding to the calling received.</p><p><em>Through the will of God</em>- Paul often begins his letters by saying this. But "the will of God" should not be understood by us as it is by Islam, where the will of God is understood as fulfilling anyway in a deterministic sense. The word carries the idea of the intention, the wish or pleasure of God. Paul could have turned down the call to be an apostle. He was not forced into obedience by an omnipotent Divine manipulator. All things were created for God's "pleasure" or will s:w. <em><a href='B:730 4:11'>Rev 4:11</a></em>, but clearly enough "all things" do not all perform God's wish. We pray for the Kingdom age when God's will shall be done on earth- for it is now generally not done. We are best therefore to understood the idea of God's wish, His desire, which of course He labours to see fulfilled. But He does not force or impose; He too deeply respects the freewill of His creatures. The art of Christian life is to willingly align ourselves with His will.</p><p><em>According to the promise of the life which is in Christ Jesus</em>- The promise of life is referred to in <em><a href='B:610 4:8'>1Ti 4:8</a></em> as concerning both life in Christ now, and the eternal form of that same life which is yet to come. Likewise in John's writings, eternal life is the promise we have (<em><a href='B:690 2:25'>1Jn 2:25</a></em>), and also our present experience. We have the eternal life in that we through the spirit of Christ can live now the kind of life which we shall eternally live.</p>


text:
<p><em><a href='B:620 1:2'>2Ti 1:2</a></em>&nbsp;<em>To Timothy, my beloved child. Grace, mercy, peace, from God the Father and Christ Jesus our Lord-&nbsp;</em>Although Paul had not converted nor baptized Timothy, he had played a huge formative part in his spiritual life, to the extent he could address him as his child in the faith. This is the significance of the relationships we an build up now through our spiritual interaction with and efforts for each other. Paul's increasing perception of sinfulness is shown by the way in which in his earlier letters he uses the greeting "Grace and peace"; but in Timothy and Titus, his last letters: "Grace,&nbsp;<em>mercy</em>, and peace::.". He saw the overriding, crucial importance of God's grace and mercy, and he wished this on all his brethren.</p>


text:
<p><em><a href='B:620 1:3'>2Ti 1:3</a></em> - see on <em><a href='B:520 8:16'>Rom 8:16</a></em>; <em><a href='B:690 3:18'>1Jn 3:18</a></em>.</p><p><em>I thank God, whom I serve from my forefathers in a pure conscience, how unceasing is my remembrance of you in my prayers, night and day</em>- How could Paul "thank God" that he remembered Timothy in prayer? "Thank" here translates&nbsp;<em>charis</em>, the usual word for gift or grace. Paul expresses his thanks in this way because he wishes to acknowledge that his feelings for Timothy are maintained by God's grace, the gift of the Spirit within. Perhaps Paul is here alluding to Anna as his model for continual thanksgiving (<em><a href='B:490 2:37'>Luk 2:37</a></em> = <em><a href='B:610 5:5'>1Ti 5:5</a></em>; <em><a href='B:620 1:3'>2Ti 1:3</a></em>). The language of constant prayer cannot mean that we are literally on our knees 24/7. It refers rather to how our spirit and His are united. It speaks of an incredible personal bonding in prayer between the Creator and each, specific one of His creatures. Only through our will, our essential person and spirit, becoming united with God’s can it be possible to live a life of prayer, whereby we are praying without ceasing, constantly, every moment (<em><a href='B:520 1:9'>Rom 1:9</a></em>; <em><a href='B:520 12:12'>Rom 12:12</a></em>; <em><a href='B:590 1:2'>1Th 1:2</a></em>; <em><a href='B:590 5:17'>1Th 5:17</a></em>; <em><a href='B:600 1:11'>2Th 1:11</a></em>; <em><a href='B:600 2:13'>2Th 2:13</a></em>; <em><a href='B:570 1:3'>Phi 1:3</a></em>; <em><a href='B:580 1:3'>Col 1:3</a></em>; <em><a href='B:620 1:3'>2Ti 1:3</a></em>). Our life, our person, our spirit, our being, is read as a prayer to God.</p><p>Paul claims that the Jewish forefathers served God with a pure conscience (<em><a href='B:620 1:3'>2Ti 1:3</a></em> NIV). Yet the Jewish fathers, dear Jacob particularly, must have had plenty of twinges of guilt over their years. Indeed, all the Jewish fathers had a bad 'conscience' because of their sins (<em><a href='B:650 9:9'>Heb 9:9</a></em>; <em><a href='B:650 10:2'>Heb 10:2</a></em>). Surely Paul must mean that they had such a firm faith in forgiveness that<em>&nbsp;in God's eyes</em>&nbsp;they had a pure conscience. &nbsp;</p>


text:
<p><em><a href='B:620 1:4'>2Ti 1:4</a></em>&nbsp;<em>Longing to see you, remembering your tears, wanting to be filled with joy for you</em>- The tear stained cheeks of Timothy were such a haunting memory for Paul because he perceived Timothy's weakness and his heart bled for his protégé. Timothy had not attained the Christian joy which Paul knew was potentially possible for him; and he so wished the spiritual growth of Timothy in this respect. We too should long for the spiritual maturity of others; to not feel that way is to be spiritually selfish. Being "filled with joy" is an expression used specifically about the filling of a believer with joy as a result of the indwelling of the Spirit (<em><a href='B:500 15:11'>Joh 15:11</a></em>; <em><a href='B:500 16:24'>Joh 16:24</a></em>; <em><a href='B:510 13:52'>Act 13:52</a></em>; <em><a href='B:520 15:13'>Rom 15:13</a></em>). Paul wished for Timothy to open himself up more to the work of the Spirit, and this would lead to Paul feeling that fullness of joy in Timothy within himself. As explained more fully on <em><a href='B:530 5:4'>1Co 5:4</a></em>, the Spirit in Paul found connection with the Spirit in other believers, thereby creating "the fellowship of the Spirit". In this way, the joy of Timothy would be Paul's joy, just as the joy of Titus was his joy (see on <em><a href='B:540 7:13'>2Co 7:13</a></em>).</p>


text:
<p><em><a href='B:620 1:5'>2Ti 1:5</a></em>&nbsp;<em>I am often reminded of the sincere faith that is in you, which dwelt first in your grandmother Lois and your mother Eunice; and I am persuaded dwells in you also-&nbsp;</em>Faith can become just vague hope for something better, rather than a "confident assurance", a seeing of the unseen. Paul's reference to "unfeigned faith" (<em><a href='B:610 1:5'>1Ti 1:5</a></em>; <em><a href='B:620 1:5'>2Ti 1:5</a></em> AV) as the goal of personal and ecclesial life would suggest that he realized the temptation to have a fake, feigned faith. See on <em><a href='B:500 8:30'>Joh 8:30</a></em>. The faith "in within you" connects with the gift "in you" (:6).</p>


text:
<p><em><a href='B:620 1:6'>2Ti 1:6</a></em>&nbsp;<em>Because of this I remind you to stir up the gift of God which is in you through the laying on of my hands</em>- Because Paul knew that Timothy had faith (:5), he encouraged him to use the gift of the Spirit within him to greater potential. That same gift had been given to the Corinthians, as they are often reminded, but they were still "not spiritual" (<em><a href='B:530 3:1'>1Co 3:1</a></em>). Likewise Timothy is being urged to use to the full the potential created by the Spirit gift within him. That gift or&nbsp;<em>charisma</em>&nbsp;was "in you", within Timothy, and refers to the same Spirit gift in the heart which is given to all believers. Yet that gift could be given multiple times; not just at baptism, but also through the laying on of hands of believers like Paul.</p>


text:
<p><em><a href='B:620 1:7'>2Ti 1:7</a></em>&nbsp;<em>For God did not give us a spirit of fearfulness, but of power and love and a disciplined mind</em>- The "us" suggests this is a general reference to the gift of the Spirit to all believers, and doesn't reference any specific gift given only to Timothy. Likewise :14 speaks of the gift of the Spirit "which dwells in&nbsp;<em>us</em>". The reference is to an internal gift, within us, and not to miraculous gifts. See notes to this effect on :4,5 and 6. The same words for 'giving' and 'Spirit' are found in describing the gift of the Spirit given at baptism (<em><a href='B:510 5:32'>Act 5:32</a></em>; <em><a href='B:510 8:18'>Act 8:18</a></em>). They are likewise found in <em><a href='B:520 5:5'>Rom 5:5</a></em>, which speaks of God's love being "shed abroad in our hearts by the Holy Spirit which is given unto us". The domain of operation of this Spirit gift is clearly within the human heart or mind. Likewise the same words for gift and Spirit are found in <em><a href='B:540 1:22'>2Co 1:22</a></em>; <em><a href='B:540 5:5'>2Co 5:5</a></em>: "Who has sealed us and given us the earnest of the Spirit&nbsp;<em>in our hearts</em>". This gift can be given at points after baptism- hence Paul prayed for the baptized Ephesians that God would "Give you::. to be strengthened with might by His Spirit&nbsp;<em>in the inner man</em>" (<em><a href='B:560 3:16'>Eph 3:16</a></em>). The gift of the Spirit (<em><a href='B:590 4:8'>1Th 4:8</a></em>) results in our internal awareness,&nbsp;<em>within us</em>, that the Father and Son are abiding with us and we in them (<em><a href='B:690 3:24'>1Jn 3:24</a></em>; <em><a href='B:690 4:13'>1Jn 4:13</a></em>).</p><p>"Because you are sons (already born again through response to the Gospel), God has&nbsp;<em>sent forth</em>&nbsp;the Spirit of His Son into your hearts, crying, Abba, Father" (<em><a href='B:550 4:6'>Gal 4:6</a></em>). We become sons of God by birth of the Spirit as promised in the word of the Gospel (<em><a href='B:670 1:23'>1Pe 1:23</a></em>; <em><a href='B:660 1:18'>Jas 1:18</a></em>), and therefore God sends this Spirit of Sonship into our hearts. Notice that the prerogative in this is with God, not us. Likewise Paul prayed that God "may&nbsp;<em>give</em>&nbsp;unto you the spirit of wisdom and revelation and knowledge of Him: the eyes of your understanding being enlightened" (<em><a href='B:560 1:17-18'>Eph 1:17-18</a></em>). The gift of the Spirit didn't mean that Timothy would not be fearful, or be loving and disciplined. But he, as all of us, had been given that Spirit. It is for us to allow the path of the Spirit in transforming our spirit; and Timothy's fearfulness and lack of mental power meant that he had not let the Spirit act as he could have done. Likewise the Corinthians were given these Spirit gifts but remained "not spiritual" (<em><a href='B:530 3:1'>1Co 3:1</a></em>); they failed to allow the Spirit gift to work within them.</p>


text:
<p><em><a href='B:620 1:8'>2Ti 1:8</a></em> - see on <em><a href='B:520 1:16'>Rom 1:16</a></em>.</p><p><em>Therefore do not be ashamed of the testimony of our Lord, nor of me his prisoner, but suffer hardship for the gospel according to the power of God</em>- The possession of the Spirit within us is an earnest or guarantee of the Lord's abiding with us and of our future salvation. Therefore Timothy was to be unashamed of testifying for the Lord Jesus and suffering because of it. According to the power / spirit of God, the gift within, Timothy was to not be ashamed but "suffer hardship". His weak nature seems to have found "hardship" hard to endure, for the word is used repeatedly (<em><a href='B:620 2:3'>2Ti 2:3</a></em>; <em><a href='B:620 2:9'>2Ti 2:9</a></em>; <em><a href='B:620 4:5'>2Ti 4:5</a></em>). Clearly the Lord chooses those who are least humanly qualified for the job required; but the example of Timothy is that he was strengthened through the Spirit to achieve what was so hard for him. His sense of 'shame' was surely before the church- for he was called to take in hand a belligerent and forceful opposition in the Ephesian church. So being ashamed of Christ's words doesn't just apply to not speaking up for the Truth when someone invites us to a topless bar after work. It's equally true, and the punishment for it just the same, in the context of not speaking out Christ's word in the ecclesia, to our very own brethren (<em><a href='B:480 8:38'>Mar 8:38</a></em> = <em><a href='B:620 1:8'>2Ti 1:8</a></em>).</p><p>Paul was clearly frustrated by imprisonment, and laments his bonds and limitations. But he saw himself as the Lord's prisoner; even the most oppressive of circumstances are under His control and can be endured 'as unto Him'.</p>


text:
<p><em><a href='B:620 1:9'>2Ti 1:9</a></em> - see on <em><a href='B:560 2:6'>Eph 2:6</a></em>.</p><p><em>Who saved us and called us with a holy calling, not according to our works, but according to His own purpose and grace, which was given to us in Christ Jesus before times eternal</em>- The allusion is to the salvation of Israel out of Egypt- although they were still able to fall from that 'saved' position. Natural Israel was called out of Egypt by their Red Sea baptism to be “a holy nation” (<em><a href='B:20 19:6'>Exo 19:6</a></em>). After our baptism, the members of spiritual Israel likewise receive “a holy calling” (<em><a href='B:620 1:9'>2Ti 1:9</a></em>). After baptism we “become slaves of::. holiness” (<em><a href='B:520 6:19'>Rom 6:19</a></em>; <em><a href='B:520 6:22'>Rom 6:22</a></em> and context). Our calling is according to God's purpose- the same words and argument as used in <em><a href='B:520 8:28'>Rom 8:28</a></em>; <em><a href='B:520 9:11'>Rom 9:11</a></em>. Paul there cites the whole concept of calling as the great example of grace. The fact God's "purpose" means some are called and some aren't is a parade of grace (<em><a href='B:520 9:11'>Rom 9:11</a></em>). Instead of getting caught up on the imponderables about those who are not called, the fact we have been called and are in God's purpose should be read as His grace being poured&nbsp;out upon us. We know we are called because without doubt we have heard the call to the Kingdom. But this calling was in fact given to us in Christ from infinity- "before times eternal". This is mind-blowing- that God's plan to save us was given for us not just at the creation of the world, but from some infinite point before time existed. To say 'from the beginning' would be to miss the wonder of it:&nbsp;</p>


text:
<p><em><a href='B:620 1:10'>2Ti 1:10</a></em>&nbsp;<em>But has now been manifested by the appearing of our Saviour Christ Jesus, who abolished death, and brought life and immortality to light through the gospel</em>- The plan to save us which was made from infinity 'back' (see on :9) was actualized by the death of the Lord Jesus. What had been for so long in God's mind for us has now been revealed to us. It would be tragic indeed to shrug it all off as unimportant or exaggerated in wonder. There is no immortality for any of us apart from "through the Gospel"; it was the Lord Jesus who brought our immortality to the light of real possibility. This not only means that there is no immortal soul; our immortality, on a personal level, is the context of :9. And this plan from infinite time (:9) had as it were been in the dark, but in Christ, it was brought out into the light of day. The "appearing of our Saviour" refers both to His appearing to abolish death on the cross, and also to His appearance in glory at the last day, when in reality death shall be abolished. This is the "that day" referenced in :12.</p><p>Paul says that Jesus has "abolished death" in that death as the world has to face it, final and total death, does not happen to us in Christ. This is why those who truly follow the Lord will never taste of death (<em><a href='B:500 8:51-52'>Joh 8:51-52</a></em>); everyone who lives and believes in Him shall never die (<em><a href='B:500 11:26'>Joh 11:26</a></em>). It really is but a sleep. I know the hard reality of the loss still hurts, still registers. But in the end, because He abolished death in Himself, so has He done already for all those in Him.</p>


text:
<p><em><a href='B:620 1:11'>2Ti 1:11</a></em>&nbsp;<em>Of which I was appointed a preacher and an apostle and a teacher</em>- The wonder of extending the grace of God's calling to others is compelling. All who hear are surely called, and despite the masses of those not called and all our curious questions about them, the wonder is that all those called had a wonderful eternity planned for them from before infinity (see on :9). These reflections are a great motivation&nbsp;to preach and teach these things to others.</p>


text:
<p><em><a href='B:620 1:12'>2Ti 1:12</a></em>&nbsp;<em>For which cause I suffer also these things. Yet I am not ashamed-</em>&nbsp;Paul is asking Timothy to copy his example of suffering hardship&nbsp; and not being ashamed. The wonder of being saved, and knowing that all our witness work is extending the calling to others and bringing them to the real possibility of eternal life and glory to God::. all this empowers us to suffer and not be ashamed for the sake of the Gospel.</p><h4><em>For I know him whom I have believed, and I am persuaded that he is able to guard what I have committed to him against that day-&nbsp;</em>As we along with Paul have committed our "all things" to Him, so He commits the "all things" of the Gospel to us (<em><a href='B:620 1:12'>2Ti 1:12</a></em> cp. 14; <em><a href='B:610 6:20'>1Ti 6:20</a></em>). There is a mutuality here between us. But some manuscripts offer an alternative, to the effect that He is able to guard what&nbsp;<em>He&nbsp;</em>has committed unto&nbsp;<em>me</em>. The gift of the Spirit, through which God's power / ability "is able" operates, will enable us to hold on to the ministry we have received from Him. And Timothy is then urged in :14 to use the power of the Spirit to maintain the ministry which&nbsp;<em>he</em>&nbsp;had received.</h4><p>"I know Him" clearly speaks of relationship, rather than mere theological awareness, no matter how pure. It is the knowledge of Jesus, the mutual relationship with Him, knowing His presence in the Spirit, which makes us not ashamed. "That day" is the appearing of the Lord Jesus at His return, when death shall be abolished (see on :10). Paul's persuasion that he would be 'guarded' until that last day is another way of saying that he knew that he really now had the Spirit as an earnest / guarantee of future salvation. For His 'ability',&nbsp;<em>dunatos</em>&nbsp;("able"), is through the&nbsp;<em>dunamis</em>&nbsp;of the Spirit which we have been given.</p>


text:
<p><em><a href='B:620 1:13'>2Ti 1:13</a></em>&nbsp;<em>Hold the pattern of sound words which you have heard from me, in faith and love which is in Christ Jesus</em>- The "pattern of sound words" could refer to some defined body of teaching which Paul had passed on to Timothy. The problem with any such 'statement of teaching / faith' is that it tends to be held in anything other than love or faith. As soon as definitions and boundaries are potentially established, there arise disputes, lack of love and an associated loss of faith. Hence the urge to hold this form of sound teaching in faith and love.</p>


text:
<p><em><a href='B:620 1:14'>2Ti 1:14</a></em>&nbsp;<em>That good thing which was committed to you guard through the Holy Spirit which dwells in us</em>- See on :7. The "good thing" may refer to the prophecies committed upon Timothy to "war a&nbsp;<em>good</em>&nbsp;warfare" (<em><a href='B:610 1:18'>1Ti 1:18</a></em>). The reference may be simply to his calling to the ministry at Ephesus. Just as Paul had been given a ministry which the Spirit empowered him to fulfil (see on :12). The only other time we read of the Spirit dwelling in us with tis Greek phrase is in <em><a href='B:520 8:11'>Rom 8:11</a></em> "His Spirit that dwells in you". As here, the Spirit is operative&nbsp;<em>within</em>&nbsp;the human mind and person. No reference to the miraculous gifts, but to the internal gift of the Spirit which is promised to all believers for all time. The Spirit likewise distributes to each believer a ministry, a role or part within the body of Christ; and the same Spirit empowers us to maintain it.</p>


text:
<p><em><a href='B:620 1:15'>2Ti 1:15</a></em>&nbsp;<em>This you know, that all that are in Asia turned away from me. Of whom are Phygelus and Hermogenes</em>- Paul lamented on his deathbed that all the believers in Asia had turned away (<em><a href='B:620 1:15'>2Ti 1:15</a></em>; Gk:&nbsp;<em>apostrupho</em>, to apostasize). But at roughly the same time, the Lord Jesus wrote to seven ecclesias in Asia, commending some of their members for holding on to the Truth. Paul was a man of great love, who really tried to see the best in his brethren, having been touched by the grace of God. He even would have given up his eternal life, so that the Jews would be saved (<em><a href='B:520 9:3'>Rom 9:3</a></em> cp. <em><a href='B:20 32:32'>Exo 32:32</a></em>). But even Paul, in the time of his greatest spiritual maturity, thought that all the Asian Christians were apostate; when in the Lord's eyes, this wasn't the case. As noted on Galatians 1, it would seem that Paul over personalized issues; their turning away from him he took as a turning away from the Lord, when the letters of Revelation 2, 3 show this was not the case. We too can take the lesson, that personal fall out with ourselves doesn't mean that a believer is no longer with the Lord. The names Phygelus "fugitive" and Hermogenes "born of Hermes" may be code words, nick names created so as not to allow the naming of specific individuals for reasons of security. Perhaps Phygelus was seen as a fugitive slave on the run from the Lord Jesus; and Hermogenes had returned to the worship of Hermes.</p>


text:
<p><em><a href='B:620 1:16'>2Ti 1:16</a></em> - see on <em><a href='B:470 5:7'>Mat 5:7</a></em>.</p><p><em>The Lord grant mercy to the house of Onesiphorus, for he often refreshed me and was not ashamed of my chain</em>- The family or house church? of one faithful individual were blessed for his singular kindness and grace shown to Paul. Blessing and the reverse often comes upon third parties as a result of the spiritual position of another. Thus the paralyzed man was forgiven his sins for the sake of the faith of his friends (<em><a href='B:480 2:5'>Mar 2:5</a></em>). Association with prisoners has never been an easy thing to do, and Onesiphorus was unashamed of association with Paul. The implication could be that the Rome ecclesia generally were ashamed of such association. This brother's example was cited as an encouragement to Timothy whose sensitive, timid spirit was concerned at being ashamed for the Gospel and of Paul personally (:8).</p><p><em><a href='B:620 1:16'>2Ti 1:16</a></em> records Paul praying that the Lord would&nbsp;<em>give mercy</em>&nbsp;to the house of Onesiphorus; yet the same phrase is used in :18 about receiving mercy at judgment day. Here it seems that the whole household of Onesiphorus is to be granted mercy, at that day, because of his faithfulness. Does this imply that some will be in the Kingdom only due to the efforts of a third party?</p>


text:
<p><em><a href='B:620 1:17'>2Ti 1:17</a></em>&nbsp;<em>But, when he was in Rome, he diligently searched for me and found me</em>- This diligent searching and finding surely takes us to the Lord as the good shepherd doing just the same for the lost sheep. Perhaps Paul means to imply that he was spiritually weak and needed the refreshment and 'finding' due to the efforts of this brother.</p>


text:
<p><em><a href='B:620 1:18'>2Ti 1:18</a></em>&nbsp;<em>(The Lord grant to him that he find the mercy of the Lord in that day); and in how many things he gave service to me at Ephesus, you know very well</em>- Paul obviously thought that his prayers and wishes for Onesiphorus could affect the outcome of the judgment seat "in that day" for him. If we really can affect the eternal destiny of each other, and Paul's letters, prayers and example show that we surely can- then we should like Paul be constantly in prayer and concern for each others' path towards the Kingdom.</p>


text:
<p><em><a href='B:620 2:1'>2Ti 2:1</a></em>&nbsp;<em>You therefore, my child, be strengthened in the grace that is in Christ Jesus-&nbsp;</em>Having exhorted Timothy to be strengthened in the Lord, Paul speaks of how the Lord has strengthened&nbsp;<em>him</em>&nbsp;in his last court appearance (<em><a href='B:620 2:1'>2Ti 2:1</a></em>; <em><a href='B:620 4:17'>2Ti 4:17</a></em>). "Grace",&nbsp;<em>charis,&nbsp;</em>often refers in the New Testament to the internal gift of the Spirit which is given to all believers. It was given to the Corinthians, but they were "not spiritual" (<em><a href='B:530 3:1'>1Co 3:1</a></em>). We must allow that gift to work. Paul has urged Timothy about this elsewhere- see on <em><a href='B:620 1:14'>2Ti 1:14</a></em>. And here Paul is stating it explicitly; Timothy as all of us is to allow the strengthening process. We lack the iron in our soul to force change to any significant extent; but the way to progress is an opening to the superhuman strengthening of the Spirit which is already potentially at work in us. It's tragic that so many are so nearly there- but will not allow the Spirit to work. This can be due to pride in their own strength, and because of theological denial of the work of the Spirit.</p>


text:
<p><em><a href='B:620 2:2'>2Ti 2:2</a></em>&nbsp;<em>And the things which you have heard from me among many witnesses, you are to commit the same to faithful men, who shall be able to teach others also</em>- Paul wanted Timothy to fulfil his ministry, and that required more than Timothy personally remaining strong to the end. If we take seriously our calling, we realize we have goals to achieve which are beyond us personally. We need to think ahead to a future generation, to rope in others to help achieve the goals. The Lord's later letter to Ephesus, where Timothy had his ministry, would indicate that for all his timidity and weakness, Timothy did actually achieve his goals. For in a later generation, there were still "faithful men" in that church.</p>


text:
<p><em><a href='B:620 2:3'>2Ti 2:3</a></em>&nbsp;<em>Suffer hardship with me, as a good soldier of Christ Jesus-&nbsp;</em>Paul tells Timothy to “endure hardness” and “endure afflictions” in the Gospel’s work, and then goes on to use the same Greek word to describe how he himself ‘suffered trouble’ in the same work (<em><a href='B:620 2:3'>2Ti 2:3</a></em>; <em><a href='B:620 2:9'>2Ti 2:9</a></em>; <em><a href='B:620 4:5'>2Ti 4:5</a></em>). He sets himself up as a role model for Timothy, his child in the faith (:1). He seeks to draw a parallel between himself in a Roman prison, and Timothy doing his ministry in Ephesus.</p>


text:
<p><em><a href='B:620 2:4'>2Ti 2:4</a></em>&nbsp;<em>No soldier in service entangles himself in the affairs of this life, so that he may please whoever enrolled him as a soldier</em>- There is nothing morally wrong with the pragmatic things of this life; but they can so easily entangle us and take us away from our focus on the Lord Jesus and His service. This is to be paramount. Problems with a leaking roof can take us far away from the Lord's service::. The one who enrolled Timothy as a soldier could refer to God who called him to the service of His Son. But we suspect Paul has himself in view, as the one who introduced Timothy to ministry. And again we see Paul's tendency to over personalize things, as noted on <em><a href='B:620 1:15'>2Ti 1:15</a></em>. Personal loyalty to Paul meant, it seems, far too much for him. Much of his&nbsp;<em>angst</em>&nbsp;in dealing with the Corinthians, especially in 2 Corinthians, hinged around this issue of expecting personal loyalty.</p>


text:
<p><em><a href='B:620 2:5'>2Ti 2:5</a></em>&nbsp;<em>And if also a man competes in the games, he is not crowned unless he competes according to the rules</em>- We can have an appearance of spiritual progress towards the crown, as did the man who quickly built his house on the sand. But it was the man who perhaps didn't finish his house (we are left to imagine) but who had hacked away at the rock of his own heart, striving to seriously obey the&nbsp;<em>essence</em>&nbsp;of his Lord's words, who was accepted in the end. We can deduce that Timothy was tempted to take short cuts in his ministry; and Paul urges him to see his ministry at Ephesus as a work which had to be done according to principles, rather than meeting each issue&nbsp;<em>ad hoc</em>. "According to the rules" is literally 'according to the law', and Paul consistently argues against keeping any legal code as the basis for salvation. I suggest that he is putting a simple riddle to Timothy, and he gives another in :6, concluding in :7 that Timothy should "consider" these things and the Lord will give him understanding as to Paul's sense. He may be saying that although we are no longer under law, this doesn't mean that we are without principle in any sense; and likewise in :6, Paul wishes Timothy to understand that "labour" is still required- but as a response to grace and faith in the fact we shall be saved by grace. So he is inviting him to not go too far in thinking that freedom from the Mosaic law means no guiding principles or labour at all. Hence he urges Timothy to the disciplined life of a soldier (:3,4). Maybe Timothy had gone too far in not having any principles at all guiding him.</p>


text:
<p><em><a href='B:620 2:6'>2Ti 2:6</a></em>&nbsp;<em>The husbandman that labours must be the first to partake of the fruits</em>- I suggested on :5 that this and :5 are riddles Paul is putting to Timothy, with the invitation in :7 to consider them and let the Lord guide him to understanding. The ending of the Mosaic law didn't mean that labour is not required- although in response to grace. If Timothy laboured in trying to help spiritual fruit to develop in Ephesus, he would partake in the fruits of it. We too receive blessing from trying to help others towards spiritual fruitfulness. But the riddle includes the obvious connection with the fact that according to 1 Corinthians 15, the Lord Jesus partakes of the firstfruits first. And Matthew 21 is clear that the Jewish leadership were the husbandmen who had been fired and replaced with new husbandmen; timid Timothy was therefore invited to see himself as directly replacing the Jewish rabbis and synagogue leadership, who were behind the effort to undermine the Christian mission in Ephesus. Yet "My father is the husbandman" (<em><a href='B:500 15:1'>Joh 15:1</a></em>). God works through our efforts in bringing forth spiritual fruit in others. And the Lord Jesus clearly identified Himself with the husbandman in His parable of <em><a href='B:490 13:8'>Luk 13:8</a></em>. His labour involved spreading manure around the tree of Israel. This humbling work was required of Timothy, and he would be manifesting the Lord Jesus in such work.</p>


text:
<p><em><a href='B:620 2:7'>2Ti 2:7</a></em>&nbsp;<em>Consider what I say. And may the Lord give you understanding in all things-&nbsp;</em>As noted on :5 and :6, this applies to the two riddles Paul has given Timothy to think about in the preceding two verses. Our obedience leads to greater obedience, in an upward spiral. The dynamic in this spiral is God's spirit. It is through the Spirit that God draws near to us if we draw near to Him (<em><a href='B:660 4:7-8'>Jas 4:7-8</a></em>). This is neatly summarized in <em><a href='B:620 2:7'>2Ti 2:7</a></em>: "Consider what I say: and the Lord give thee understanding in all things". Thus our freewill 'considering' will result in the Lord adding to our understanding even more that we could ever achieve unaided. 'Considering', literally 'exercising the mind', is one thing; but the Lord will act directly on the human heart to bring about greater "understanding". And that is taught in <em><a href='B:580 1:9'>Col 1:9</a></em>; <em><a href='B:580 2:2'>Col 2:2</a></em>, where the ministry of the Spirit leads to a filling of believers with "understanding". Clearly the Lord is prepared and eager to act directly upon the mind of believers. Yet too many in conservative circles have left things at just 'considering' Scripture, resistant to the extra element of the Lord adding understanding to their mental gymnastics with Scripture.</p>


text:
<p><em><a href='B:620 2:8'>2Ti 2:8</a></em>&nbsp;<em>Remember Jesus Christ, risen from the dead, of the seed of David, according to the gospel I preached</em>- Paul appeals for Timothy to take a Christ-centered approach. Knowing that he is under attack as a charlatan, he emphasizes that his Gospel was what as it were resurrected Christ from the dead. In our hearts, the Lord remains dead until the Gospel reveals His resurrection to us. "Remember" is a similar idea in Greek to the word used for "Consider" in :7; it implies the exercise of the mind. The most basic truths of the Gospel and their implications can easily be forgotten or become swamped in significance by all the&nbsp;<em>angst</em>&nbsp;which goes with grappling with church politics.</p>


text:
<p><em><a href='B:620 2:9'>2Ti 2:9</a></em> - see on <em><a href='B:620 2:3'>2Ti 2:3</a></em>.</p><p><em>Because of this I suffer hardship, even to bonds, as a criminal; but the word of God is not bound</em>- "Suffer hardship" is the same word as used in encouraging Timothy to do the same in :3. Paul is encouraging Timothy to take himself as a pattern to himself. "A criminal" is the word only elsewhere used about the criminals crucified with the Lord, and "bonds" is used of the binding of the Lord at that time, both immediately before and after His crucifixion (<em><a href='B:470 27:2'>Mat 27:2</a></em>; <em><a href='B:500 19:40'>Joh 19:40</a></em>); Paul sees in all his sufferings a fellowship with the Lord in His time of dying. He deeply resented his "bonds" and, by implication, the limitations of freedom they imposed upon him. He realized however that he was "bound in the Spirit"; his bonds were of the Spirit rather than simply of men (<em><a href='B:510 20:22'>Act 20:22</a></em>). And yet through his prison experience, he came to write the letters which have had such major significance. Our limitations likewise can be used by God for far wider things than we can ever realize at the time. Paul never once hints that he perceived that his letters were going to have significance for millennia to come; and that is the wonder of the lesson to us. What we experience as a limitation of freedom, as intense frustration, can be used by the Lord for eternal significance in ways we can never understand at the time. The word of God, the basic Gospel of :8, is unbound- perhaps Paul perceived that his bonds, his limitations, were playing a part in a wider unbound experience. In <em><a href='B:580 4:3'>Col 4:3</a></em>, Paul had asked for prayers that he could be given an opportunity to spread the Gospel despite being in bonds. Perhaps he is saying here at the end of his life that in fact this had worked out; for in chapter 4 he writes of how the Gospel had spread and become "fully known" through is bonds (<em><a href='B:620 4:17'>2Ti 4:17</a></em>). If we pray for opportunities to preach we will be granted them. Let's pray daily for meetings with people whom we can witness to successfully.</p>


text:
<p><em><a href='B:620 2:10'>2Ti 2:10</a></em>&nbsp;<em>Therefore I endure all things for the elect's sake, so that they may also obtain the salvation which is in Christ Jesus with eternal glory</em>-&nbsp;<em>Their</em>&nbsp;salvation was dependent upon&nbsp;<em>his</em>&nbsp;enduring. And therefore he endured for their sakes. Paul as noted above has been seeing his sufferings as part of the Lord's sufferings; and His suffering led to our salvation, just as our sufferings likewise play a part in the salvation of others, if we are suffering in and with Him. Salvation is "in Christ"; not in any particular ecclesia or fellowship, but through being an active part of His body in the Biblical sense. See on <em><a href='B:560 2:6'>Eph 2:6</a></em>. Paul "endured", he held on himself, for the sake of the elect. And likewise the Lord Himself died above all&nbsp;<em>for us</em>, His desire for&nbsp;<em>our&nbsp;</em>salvation lead Him to endure for Himself. And on a mundane level; the husband who does his Bible readings a second time for the sake of his wife or children or because a brother has paid an unexpected visit::. this kind of spiritual effort for others keeps us going ourselves. See on <em><a href='B:590 3:8'>1Th 3:8</a></em>. All this opens up a fuller understanding of <em><a href='B:540 4:17'>2Co 4:17</a></em> - our sufferings lead to an eternal weight of glory "for us", in the plural.</p>


text:
<p><em><a href='B:620 2:11'>2Ti 2:11</a></em>&nbsp;<em>Faithful is the saying: For if we died with him, we shall also live with him</em>- "The saying" would refer to one of the pithy "faithful sayings" which the New Testament church committed to memory. These would have been especially valuable for the illiterate. Paul has explained that our sufferings for others can play a part in their salvation, if our sufferings are part of the Lord's crucifixion sufferings. So he is giving another dimension to the well known truth that we are to die with Him; our death is not isolated from His death, and our sufferings are not isolated from His- if we are baptized believers "in Him". And so it shall come to pass that because He lives, we in Him shall live also; His life becomes ours, both now and eternally. The tense of "we died with Him" surely alludes to baptism, the one-time moment when we died with Him.</p>


text:
<p><em><a href='B:620 2:12'>2Ti 2:12</a></em> - see on <em><a href='B:470 26:70'>Mat 26:70</a></em>.</p><p><em>If we endure, we shall also reign with him; if we shall deny him, he also will deny us</em>- The allusion to death with the Lord in baptism in :11 must be tempered by the fact that we must also "endure". Paul has just written of enduring all things for the sake of the chosen (:10), so that they may be saved. By writing here that thereby&nbsp;<em>we</em>shall also reign with Him, Paul has his mind on the fact that our endurance in Him can lead to "we", others, not just himself, reigning with the Lord in glory. On the other hand, our denial of Him can lead to Him denying us- not just us personally, but our failure can lead to others likewise being denied at the last day, for we all have more influence upon others than we realize. Paul was clearly alluding to Peter's denials- and the grace shown by the Lord. For He will not automatically deny those who deny Him, but works instead for their restoration.</p>


text:
<h4><em><a href='B:620 2:13'>2Ti 2:13</a></em>&nbsp;<em>If we are faithless, he abides faithful. For he cannot deny himself</em>- "Faithless" in Greek more suggests a loss of faith. This was and is at the root of denying Him; for losing faith is here paralleled with denial. The faithfulness of God is hard to understand unless we understand it as faithfulness towards us. Unlike the tendency in human relationships, God will not break His hope, faith and love toward us in response to our withdrawal of them toward Him. he does not mirror our behaviour towards Him; and we should seek to be like Him when we encounter withdrawal of relationship towards us from others. 'He', "Himself", stands for total commitment to His people throughout their lives, and He will not deny His fundamental self.</h4>


text:
<p><em><a href='B:620 2:14'>2Ti 2:14</a></em>&nbsp;<em>Of these things put them in remembrance, instructing them in the sight of the Lord, that they do not fight about words, to no profit, to the catastrophic destruction of those that hear them</em>- The "them" in view appear to be the teachers at Ephesus. The fact the Lord later commends this church in his letter to them indicates that Timothy successfully obeyed Paul's command here. The teachers were to be redirected towards the basic issues of the Gospel and the implications which arise from it, rather than using their teaching ministry to provoke profitless arguments about words and meanings. Such teachers would lead to the eternal destruction of those who heard them. And this is a profound warning to those right wing groups whose teachers have filled them with third hand garbled stories about "the original Hebrew actually means::." whatever, and demanding everyone accepts their particular peculiar take on a matter of semantics. This warning was especially required in Ephesus, which was under attack from Judaizers who would have insisted that they had superior knowledge of the Hebrew language, and would easily have dominated the Gentile audience with various arguments about Hebrew words. The wicked will be “overthrown” in the final condemnation (<em><a href='B:680 2:6'>2Pe 2:6</a></em>)- but this is the very same word used for ‘apostasy’ or ‘subversion’ (AV) or "catastrophic destruction". If we apostatize, we are overthrowing or condemning ourselves and others ahead of time. Israel in the wilderness "rejected" the land- and so they didn't enter it (<em><a href='B:40 14:31'>Num 14:31</a></em> RV).</p>


text:
<p><em><a href='B:620 2:15'>2Ti 2:15</a></em> - see on <em><a href='B:470 7:24'>Mat 7:24</a></em>.</p><p><em>Exert yourself, to prove you are pleasing to God, a workman that needs not to be ashamed, handling correctly the word of truth</em>- The AV "Study to show thyself::." has been tragically misunderstood as meaning that Bible study makes us pleasing to God. But that is a result of misreading "study"- in the days of King James it means 'to try', and that is the idea of the Greek. For not all are Bible students nor have the apparatus to be that. The context of :14 is specific commandment to the teachers within the church. They were workmen, working on the church of God, and their work with others would be examined at the last day. And they would be ashamed if those under their teaching are given the shame of condemnation. Effort must consciously be made to build up others. We must ‘rightly divide’, or cut straight, the word of truth in our preaching of it. The LXX uses the same word in <em><a href='B:240 3:6'>Pro 3:6</a></em>: “He will make straight your paths”. We are to offer people a clear, straight way to the Kingdom; to span that gulf between the word of God and the mind of man. "The word of truth" refers to the basic Gospel, according to the context, which Paul has redirected their attention to. By involving their audience in strife about semantics and words, they were not using the word of truth correctly. The whole of Paul’s exhortation to zealous service in the ecclesia in <em><a href='B:620 2:15-20'>2Ti 2:15-20</a></em> is based on the returned exiles, confirming that they are indeed ‘types of us’; and the teachers are the manual workers, slaving away to build up Zion:</p><table><tr><td></p><h4>2 Timothy 2</td><td>Nehemiah</td><td></td></tr><tr><td>“If a man therefore purge himself from these, he shall be a vessel unto honour, sanctified and meet for the master’s use” (:21)</td><td>“I commanded the Levites that they should cleanse themselves, and that they should come and keep the gates… thus cleansed I them from all strangers” (<em><a href='B:160 13:22'>Neh 13:22</a></em>; <em><a href='B:160 13:30'>Neh 13:30</a></em>). Also a reference to the cleansing of the Jews from mixed marriages.</td><td></td></tr><tr><td>“A workman that needeth not to be ashamed” (:15)</td><td>The workmen rebuilding Zion</td><td></td></tr><tr><td>“The foundation of God standeth sure” (:19)</td><td>The laying of the foundation stone</td><td></td></tr><tr><td>“The Lord knoweth them that are his” (:19)</td><td>The spirit of <em><a href='B:290 44:5'>Isa 44:5</a></em> - that although at the time of the restoration not all knew their genealogy, they were accepted in any case, being surnamed with the Name of Jehovah and that of Jacob</td><td></td></tr><tr><td>“A great house” (:20)</td><td>The temple (<em><a href='B:130 22:5'>1Ch 22:5</a></em>)</td><td></td></tr><tr><td>“Vessels of gold and of silver” (:20)</td><td>“Vessels of gold and silver” (<em><a href='B:150 5:14'>Ezr 5:14</a></em>)</td><td></td></tr></table>


text:
<p><em><a href='B:620 2:16'>2Ti 2:16</a></em> - see on <em><a href='B:610 6:21'>1Ti 6:21</a></em>.</p><p><em>But shun profane babblings of false teachers; for they will result in progressive ungodliness</em>- The preceding verses have taught Timothy how to teach the teachers; so the shunning would mean not allowing the false teachers to teach. Their "babblings" referred to the endless striving about the meaning of original Hebrew words, profitless arguments about semantics, words and meanings (:14). It's simply not true that just teaching something about the Bible or Biblical words will lead to spiritual growth; these teachers with their emphasis upon semantic games actually elicited increasing ungodliness in the behaviour of the flock. This is because the need to act and think in a Christ-like way, denying the flesh, is excused by instead focusing upon semantics and hyper interpretation of original words and phrases. And this has been witnessed in so many groups, who have focused upon 'doctrine' and supposed intellectual purity of interpretation- whilst in private life being so far from the spirit of Christ in daily thought and living.</p>


text:
<p><em><a href='B:620 2:17'>2Ti 2:17</a></em>&nbsp;<em>And their word will eat away like a cancer. An example would be Hymenaeus and Philetus</em>- The "progressive" nature of ungodliness (:16) elicited by their wrong usage of "the word of truth" is likened to the spreading of cancer. Teaching has a real effect upon listeners; we may assume that everyone dozes through Bible studies and teaching, but in fact something- a lot- goes in. Especially in illiterate societies, the word preached by the teacher is their only access to God's word. The Greek&nbsp;<em>gangraina</em>&nbsp;refers to gangrene, leading to the loss of limbs, and spreading from one infected limb to damage the whole body. Paul surely had in mind the overall damage to the body of Christ by losing some who had been taken away from the body by the gangrene of false teaching. Hymenaeus had been "delivered to satan" for blasphemy in <em><a href='B:610 1:20'>1Ti 1:20</a></em> - but had not been corrected, apparently. The orthodox view of Satan as a cosmic being falls right down in the light of this. The Lord's commendation of Ephesus in His later letter indicates that Timothy did indeed save the body of the church by cutting out this gangrene. But we note that what is being taught here is not guilt by association, nor a call to excommunicate individuals who believe the wrong things. The context is instruction to Timothy regarding who he allowed onto the platform to teach:&nbsp;</p><p>Hymenaeus had destroyed his own faith, and as such often do, wanted to destroy that of others (see on <em><a href='B:610 1:20'>1Ti 1:20</a></em>). Despite having been "delivered unto satan" he was now back in the teaching ministry. Perhaps Timothy had not fully supported Paul's discipline of Hymenaeus, and this was the fruit of that.</p>


text:
<p><em><a href='B:620 2:18'>2Ti 2:18</a></em>&nbsp;<em>Men who concerning the truth have erred, in saying that the resurrection is past already; and they ruin the faith of some</em>- "The truth" may refer specifically to the Lord Jesus. These men may have been influenced by the kind of incipient Gnosticism which was pushed by the Judaizers, coming to term in the teachings of the kabbala which deny the significance of the body and of bodily resurrection. The denial of bodily resurrection was associated with "unGodliness" in practice (:16). If we are living only for today, and bodily resurrection both of the Lord and ourselves is minimalized to the point of denial, then there will be "ungodliness" in practice. And this is the danger of preterism. Faith is 'ruined' if the bodily aspect of resurrection is minimized or removed. "Ruin the faith" is a Greek word only elsewhere used in <em><a href='B:630 1:11'>Tit 1:11</a></em>, where the motive for such false teaching was money. If we do not need to face a future judgment for the things "done in the body" (<em><a href='B:540 5:10'>2Co 5:10</a></em>), then the flesh can be pleased just as we wish. And this was so attractive that some were even prepared to pay money for that to be true. We see here how the root of much doctrinal, theological heresy is psychologically based; a desire to justify the flesh.</p>


text:
<p><em><a href='B:620 2:19'>2Ti 2:19</a></em> - see on <em><a href='B:470 7:23'>Mat 7:23</a></em>.</p><p><em>However the firm foundation of God stands sure, having this seal: The Lord knows those that are his. And: Let every one that names the name of the Lord depart from unrighteousness-&nbsp;</em>The implication is that despite false teachers, those known by the Lord Jesus? are on God's firm foundation and will not be shifted from it. But that firm foundation, as Paul uses the metaphor in Corinthians, is a living relationship with the Lord Jesus. Those who know Him, and are known by Him, are thereby in relationship with Him. And having named His Name, calling it upon themselves in baptism, they will "depart from unrighteousness". Any teaching which leads them to unrighteous behaviour will be intuitively rejected by them. In expounding 1 Timothy 2, I noted there were many allusions there to the idol temples of Ephesus, especially the temple of Artemis. The reference to firm foundations likewise refers to that same temple. The two "seals" quoted are likely "faithful sayings" popular amongst the illiterate of the first century Christian community. The seal of God is in the mind, "in the forehead" (<em><a href='B:730 9:4'>Rev 9:4</a></em>), likely a reference to the gift of the Holy Spirit in the heart / mind of every believer. This is what knowing the Lord and being known by Him is all about- living relationship with the Lord Jesus through the gift of His Spirit. And the function of that Spirit in practice will be a departure from unrighteousness. The term "depart from" usually refers to departing from persons; and this is the context of this verse- an appeal to depart from false teachers and their teachings. The same word has been used in <em><a href='B:610 6:5'>1Ti 6:5</a></em> about withdrawing from those who taught like this.</p>


text:
<p><em><a href='B:620 2:20'>2Ti 2:20</a></em>&nbsp;<em>Now in a great house there are not only vessels of gold and of silver, but also of wood and of earth; and some to honour and some to dishonour-</em>&nbsp;As noted on :19 and earlier, the context here is of separation from false teachers and their teachings; not allowing them to teach, and not giving heed to their teachings. Those who teach rightly from God's word will not be ashamed (:15); whereas those who do not shall be ashamed. The honourable vessels here refer to the true teachers, and the dishonourable vessels to the false teachers. This is why :21 will go on to speak of separation from the dishonourable. Gold, silver and wood are listed in <em><a href='B:530 3:12'>1Co 3:12</a></em> as the kinds of building which a teacher makes in his or her pastoral work. We note that the existence of dishonourable vessels within the "great house" of the church is taken as something inevitable; there is significantly no call for them to be excommunicated, but rather they should not be given a platform nor their ideas given credence.</p>


text:
<p><em><a href='B:620 2:21'>2Ti 2:21</a></em>&nbsp;<em>If a man therefore purge himself from these, he shall be a vessel to honour, sanctified, fulfilling the use intended by the master, prepared to do every good work</em>- As noted on :20, the context is about separation from false teaching and not allowing false teachers the platform. The purging from the dishonourable vessels = false teachers, see on :20 therefore doesn't speak of excommunication but of not allowing God's house to have such people teaching within it. The Master of the great house (:20) is surely the Lord Jesus; and He has a use intended for all the apparatus "vessels" within the large household. There were good works intended for us from the foundation of the world (<em><a href='B:560 2:10'>Eph 2:10</a></em>). We need to pray to God to reveal to us what those works are, and which uses He has in mind for us. The language in :20 and :21 is alluding to <em><a href='B:290 22:20-24'>Isa 22:20-24</a></em> about the temple. "Prepared to do every good work" must link with <em><a href='B:620 3:16-17'>2Ti 3:16-17</a></em>, which says that the word of God enables the man of God to be "perfect, thoroughly furnished unto all good works". Thus the sanctifying and purging power is the word (as <em><a href='B:500 17:17'>Joh 17:17</a></em>; <em><a href='B:560 5:26'>Eph 5:26</a></em>):&nbsp;</p>


text:
<p><em><a href='B:620 2:22'>2Ti 2:22</a></em>&nbsp;<em>Enthuse about righteousness, faith, love and peace with those who call on the Lord out of a pure heart</em>- Some manuscripts, followed by the AV, add: "Flee youthful lusts". It is possible that Timothy went through a mid-life crisis, as Hezekiah did. Paul's warning to middle aged Timothy to "flee youthful lusts" was a sure reference back to Joseph fleeing from the advances of Potiphar's wife. If indeed Timothy was now middle aged, Paul would be reasoning that his sexual crushes were the immaturity of youth which by this stage he ought to have left behind. I noted on 1 Timothy 3 that Timothy was the bishop at Ephesus, and the commands concerning bishops and their relationships with their wives were therefore being spoken directly to Timothy. We can assume he was therefore married. And yet Paul sensed Timothy needed exhortation about "youthful lusts". The antidote to these lusts was positive- the energy should instead go into enthusing about spiritual things, not consorting with women in questionable relationships, but taking strength instead from others who "call on the Lord out of a pure sexually pure? heart". This rechannelling of energy from sin to righteousness is a common Biblical theme (e:g. "Not coarse joking but rather giving of thanks", <em><a href='B:560 5:4'>Eph 5:4</a></em>); and Paul's redirection from persecutor of Christ to ambassador for Him would be the parade example. And so here,<em>&nbsp;pheugo</em>&nbsp;"flee" lusts, and instead&nbsp;<em>dioko</em>&nbsp;"enthuse about" righteousness:&nbsp;<em>Dioko</em>&nbsp;is the standard term for persecution, used about Paul's persecution of the Christians. His energy for persecution was redirected into a chasing after of righteousness.</p><p>Those with a pure or purified heart / mind are those who have allowed the sanctifying / purifying of the Spirit to cleanse their minds, conscience and thinking (<em><a href='B:670 1:22'>1Pe 1:22</a></em>; <em><a href='B:650 10:22'>Heb 10:22</a></em>). We must be&nbsp;<em>made</em>&nbsp;clean by the Lord Jesus, it is not of ourselves (<em><a href='B:500 15:3'>Joh 15:3</a></em>; <em><a href='B:500 13:10-11'>Joh 13:10-11</a></em>). Paul recognizes that not all in the church will have allowed this purifying work of the Spirit, even though all believers have potentially been given the Spirit gift at baptism. But he urges Timothy to associate with those who have.</p>


text:
<p><em><a href='B:620 2:23'>2Ti 2:23</a></em>&nbsp;<em>But foolish and ignorant questions refuse, knowing that they only cause strife</em>- The command to Timothy to "refuse" surely means in line with :14 and :16 not allowing the platform to teachers who "babble" with issues of semantics, words and meanings. These issues cause strife- the same word used in <em><a href='B:630 3:9'>Tit 3:9</a></em> of how the Judaist false teachers caused "strivings about the law". Teaching with a view to helping others towards spiritual fruitfulness does not leave the hearers with a mass of questions with no answers. This is destabilizing, and such teachers aren't aiming to help anyone towards God's Kingdom; all they will do is cause tension between persons, because different answers will be presented to the questions raised. The style of teaching which throws out a mass of questions was clearly the style of the Judaizers, in their program of destabilizing the Pauline churches. This is not an appeal for simplistic attitudes; rather for direct guidance of the flock, especially the illiterate, towards true spirituality. And this may involve ignoring certain questions, just as the Lord often avoided giving direct answers to leading questions and replied in terms of mega principles.</p>


text:
<p><em><a href='B:620 2:24'>2Ti 2:24</a></em>&nbsp;<em>And the Lord's servant must not quarrel but be gentle towards all, eager to teach, patient of ills and wrongs</em>- As noted on :23, a minister / teacher will be eager to teach, and not simply present a mass of questions to an illiterate, newly baptized audience which will only destabilize. This was the style of the Judaizers. Such presentation of questions was not teaching, being didactic, as the term means. The new converts needed a didactic approach, instructing them, rather than destabilizing them with endless questions and provoking quarrels. The Judaist false teachers were apparently not gentle, nor patient with disagreement. This dogmatism is somehow attractive to some audiences; Catholic and Orthodox priests were at least in the past renowned for their aggressive attitude to their flock. And many like it that way- to be made to feel unworthy and weak, because that is how they feel themselves, and to trust that a firm leadership might somehow lead them to salvation at the end of the day; although they have no firm hope in salvation for that would demand too much of them in mental and secular life. This attitude was prevalent in Judaism and amongst the false teachers. <em><a href='B:540 11:20'>2Co 11:20</a></em> suggests the false teachers beloved of the Corinthians demanded money from them and even hit them on the face.</p><p>All teaching must be after the pattern of the Lord Jesus, who taught "as His manner was", i:e. He was "eager to teach". When Paul wrote that “the servant of the Lord must not strive” in his preaching ministry (<em><a href='B:620 2:24'>2Ti 2:24</a></em> AV), he was alluding back to how the servant song described the Lord Jesus in His preaching as not striving or lifting up His voice in proud argument (<em><a href='B:290 42:2'>Isa 42:2</a></em> cp. <em><a href='B:470 12:19'>Mat 12:19</a></em>). And Paul goes on: “:::but be gentle unto all men, apt to teach, patient, in meekness instructing::.". This is all a pen picture of the Lord’s witness to men in Galilee. And yet it is applied to&nbsp;<em>us</em>. “Apt to teach” is surely an allusion to the way in which the Lord taught the people “as he was wont” (<em><a href='B:480 10:1'>Mar 10:1</a></em>). So it’s not just that we should witness because the Lord, in whom we are, was the “faithful and true witness” (<em><a href='B:730 1:5'>Rev 1:5</a></em>; <em><a href='B:730 3:14'>Rev 3:14</a></em>); because we are in Him, we must witness&nbsp;<em>as He did</em>, with something of that same ineffable mixture of candour, meekness and Divine earnestness for man’s salvation</p><p>Paul makes a series of allusions to Moses, which climax in an invitation to pray like Moses for the salvation of others:&nbsp;</p><table><tr><td></p><h4><em><a href='B:620 2:24-25'>2Ti 2:24-25</a></em></td><td>Moses</td><td></td></tr><tr><td>“the servant of the Lord</td><td>A very common title of Moses</td><td></td></tr><tr><td>must not strive</td><td>As Israel did with him (<em><a href='B:40 26:9'>Num 26:9</a></em>)</td><td></td></tr><tr><td>but be gentle unto all</td><td>The spirit of Moses</td><td></td></tr><tr><td>apt to teach</td><td>As was Moses (<em><a href='B:20 18:20'>Exo 18:20</a></em>; <em><a href='B:20 24:12'>Exo 24:12</a></em>; <em><a href='B:50 4:1'>Deu 4:1</a></em>; <em><a href='B:50 4:5'>Deu 4:5</a></em>; <em><a href='B:50 4:14'>Deu 4:14</a></em>; <em><a href='B:50 6:1'>Deu 6:1</a></em>; <em><a href='B:50 31:22'>Deu 31:22</a></em>)</td><td></td></tr><tr><td>patient</td><td>As was Moses</td><td></td></tr><tr><td>in meekness</td><td>Moses was the meekest man (<em><a href='B:40 12:3'>Num 12:3</a></em>)</td><td></td></tr><tr><td>instructing those that oppose themselves</td><td>at the time of Aaron and Miriam’s self-opposing rebellion</td><td></td></tr><tr><td>if God&nbsp;<em>peradventure</em>&nbsp;will give them repentance i:e. forgiveness”</td><td>“<em>Peradventure</em>&nbsp;I shall make an atonement for your sin” (<em><a href='B:20 32:30'>Exo 32:30</a></em>)- and he prayed 40 days and nights for it.</td><td></td></tr></table><p>And note too: <em><a href='B:620 2:19'>2Ti 2:19</a></em> = <em><a href='B:40 16:5'>Num 16:5</a></em>; <em><a href='B:40 16:26'>Num 16:26</a></em>; <em><a href='B:40 2:20'>Num 2:20</a></em> = <em><a href='B:40 12:7'>Num 12:7</a></em>; <em><a href='B:40 2:21'>Num 2:21</a></em> = <em><a href='B:40 16:37'>Num 16:37</a></em>; <em><a href='B:40 2:22'>Num 2:22</a></em> = <em><a href='B:40 12:2'>Num 12:2</a></em>; <em><a href='B:40 16:3'>Num 16:3</a></em>; <em><a href='B:40 2:26'>Num 2:26</a></em> = <em><a href='B:40 16:33'>Num 16:33</a></em>. This is quite something. The height of Moses’ devotion for His people, the passion of his praying, shadowing as it did the matchless intercession and self-giving of the Lord, really is our example. It isn’t just a height to be admired. It means that we will not half-heartedly ask our God to ‘be with’ brother x and sister y and the brethren in country z, as we lie half asleep in bed. This is a call to sustained, on our knees prayer and devotion to the salvation of others. For the Judaists, an appeal to be like Moses, to emulate him in teaching, was blasphemous; for they considered Moses at such a level that he could never be imitated. Yet Paul urges timid Timothy and all teachers to realistically be Moses to our audience.</h4>


text:
<p><em><a href='B:620 2:25'>2Ti 2:25</a></em> - see on <em><a href='B:510 18:6'>Act 18:6</a></em>; <em><a href='B:620 3:7'>2Ti 3:7</a></em>; <em><a href='B:630 1:1'>Tit 1:1</a></em>.</p><p><em>In meekness correcting those that contradict themselves, so that God may give them repentance to the acknowledging of the truth</em>- Arrogance is so easily companion of holding a superior understanding about something. To realize we have the correct position and to correct with humility- is really the supreme qualification of a teacher. And the context here is about teachers. If the contradictions can be corrected in humility,&nbsp;<em>then</em>&nbsp;God may give them repentance. He is prepared to confirm the efforts of a sincere teacher, by acting on the mind of the person being corrected. Repentance is a gift, as stated clearly in <em><a href='B:510 5:31'>Act 5:31</a></em>. This is more than forgiveness. Repentance itself is a psychological gift, a direct operation upon the human heart. And the text here says that God will grant this when a teacher has humbly corrected a person; so He works with our teaching of others. Repentance is an outcome of having corrected someone who is contradicting themselves; the contradiction is therefore a moral issue, a way of life being lived in contradiction to principles espoused. There is no reference here to simply correcting someone whose theology or intellectual process is self contradictory or logically twisted. That has for too long passed as 'evangelism' or 'preaching'. The issue here is essentially&nbsp;<em>moral</em>, because the resolved contradictions are confirmed by the Lord granting repentance. And a fair case can be made for "contradict themselves" really meaning 'contradict' in the sense of those who contradict the teachers; the same group are mentioned with a similar word in <em><a href='B:610 6:20'>1Ti 6:20</a></em> and <em><a href='B:630 1:9'>Tit 1:9</a></em>. "Correcting" is a word used about training of children; it is to the spiritual elders / fathers / teachers that these words are addressed.</p><p>"The acknowledging of the truth" doesn't mean 'I accept you are right and I am wrong'. This is the stuff of Socratean debate which has been so attractive to conservative Protestants, whereby "Bible truth" becomes a battleground upon which one side strives to win the victory of 'truth' in intellectual, expositional terms; as if Bible study is a concourse with only one glorious winner and many eternal losers. I have demonstrated above that "repentance" means that moral issues are in view. The repentance granted by the Lord leads to "the knowledge of the truth"; "acknowledging" is an unfortunate translation, because it suggests that the contradicting side acknowledges logical defeat. But it is the same word used as in <em><a href='B:560 1:17'>Eph 1:17</a></em>; <em><a href='B:560 4:13'>Eph 4:13</a></em>, speaking of the effect of having the gift of the Spirit, leading to "the knowledge of Him". Repentance leads to relationship, a knowledge of the Lord Jesus who is "the truth". The very phrase "the knowledge of the truth" is used in <em><a href='B:610 2:4'>1Ti 2:4</a></em> see note there as meaning 'being saved'. Repentance results finally in salvation, when we shall know the final truth- which is of God's grace in Christ for eternity. Indeed <em><a href='B:620 3:7'>2Ti 3:7</a></em> contrasts "ever learning" with "coming to the knowledge of the truth". It is all a moral dimension, rather than an intellectual one of learned intellectual knowledge.</p>


text:
&nbsp;<p>.</p><p>The RV reflects an alternative manuscript reading: "Having been taken captive by the Lord's servant unto the will of God". It seems to me that whilst on one hand preaching can be likened to a warfare, a tearing down of the bastion of unbelief, the Lord’s servant taking people captive unto the will of God, this is only one facet of the picture. Taken too far, we can become motivated perhaps by a fear of failure, we try harder and only get into a verbal battle, a jousting match, or worse. We will often ‘lose’ these exchanges, because we were unable to convince our 'adversary'. Thus such exchanges become like a court battle of who's right and who's wrong, one-upmanship and point scoring. We will then end up feeling that the person has rejected the calling of the Father simply because&nbsp;my argument wasn't good enough. This need to win, this fear of failure, is the way of the world not the way of God, it is not “reasoning together". There is too much ego involved. Preaching, though it might seem otherwise at times, is not a competitive sport. If we failed it's not because we did not try hard enough, nor is it because we did not&nbsp;know enough, perhaps it's because we tried too hard driven by a fear of failure, or perhaps we have thought too highly of ourselves, thinking we speak for our God?</p>


text:
<p><em><a href='B:620 3:1'>2Ti 3:1</a></em>&nbsp;<em>But know this, that in the last days grievous times shall come-&nbsp;</em>As noted on <em><a href='B:610 4:1'>1Ti 4:1</a></em>, Timothy was called to stem what seemed an inevitable tide. Men were going to fall away from the faith, but his ministry was to stop this happening. And according to the Lord's view of the Ephesian church in Revelation 2, he succeeded against all odds, despite his own weaknesses.</p>


text:
<p><em><a href='B:620 3:2'>2Ti 3:2</a></em>&nbsp;<em>For men shall be lovers of self</em>- These "men" were within the church, for :5 speaks of them having the form of Godliness. The list of sins here recalls that in <em><a href='B:520 1:29'>Rom 1:29</a></em>, which appears to be about the spirit of the unbelieving world. The point being that the spirit of the age shall affect the church. We note that these bad characteristics all arose from the false teachings which Timothy had been called upon to stamp out in Ephesus (<em><a href='B:610 1:3-4'>1Ti 1:3-4</a></em>). False teaching without doubt brings forth bad fruit, and thus a teacher or teaching is to be known by its fruit. Perhaps Paul is telling Timothy that such things will be found within the church because Timothy was somehow shocked and disappointed that they were present. We note that he was not called to isolate the guilty individuals and cast them out by some formal process of disfellowship; but rather to always seek to turn things around.</p><p><em>Lovers of money, boastful, proud, argumentative, disobedient to parents, unthankful, unholy</em>- “Argumentative” is really “blasphemers”. Paul himself had been one of them (see on <em><a href='B:610 1:13'>1Ti 1:13</a></em>) but had turned around; likewise the predictions here are not to be read as an inevitable tide. Timothy was called to fight against them; just as Nineveh was to be destroyed after 40 days, and yet that prophetic word was annulled by their repentance.</p><p>It's possible to understand <em><a href='B:620 3:1-3'>2Ti 3:1-3</a></em> as specifically talking about our last days: “In the last days,&nbsp;fierce (Gk:) times shall come. For men (in an ecclesial context) shall be lovers of their own selves::. proud::. without natural affection::. despisers of those that are good, traitors (cp. <em><a href='B:470 24:10'>Mat 24:10</a></em>)::. highminded, lovers of pleasures more than lovers of God (implying they&nbsp;<em>do</em>&nbsp;love God); having a form of Godliness, but denying the power thereof". The spirit of fierce aggressiveness which is increasingly seen in the world will enter the ecclesias; brethren will become proud, argumentative, materialistic, despising the truly righteous, disregarding the needs of the household. And there are other NT passages which suggest that this was indeed the ecclesial situation in the prelude to AD70. The increasing bitterness and subdivision amongst us indicates this will all be seen in the latter day body. Ultimately, human relationships within the ecclesia will go crazy; brethren will hate and betray each other. There will be little real spiritual mindedness; the power of Godliness, the spirit / mind of Christ, will be denied, and only the outward form of Godliness remain (cp. <em><a href='B:560 3:20'>Eph 3:20</a></em>; <em><a href='B:560 6:10'>Eph 6:10</a></em>; <em><a href='B:580 1:11'>Col 1:11</a></em>). The abounding wickedness of the world will so permeate the ecclesia that true agape-love will grow cold amongst us (<em><a href='B:470 24:12'>Mat 24:12</a></em>). The antidote to this is offered in <em><a href='B:620 3:14'>2Ti 3:14</a></em> to <em><a href='B:620 4:3'>2Ti 4:3</a></em>: Love the word, hold on to the doctrine you were taught by faithful brethren, study the word, make it your life, challenge the apostate majority of the ecclesia with no fear of the result, preach to the world, look to the blessed day of Christ's coming.</p><p>The Old Testament as well as New is written in such a way as to encourage memorization, although this is often masked by the translation. There are several devices commonly used to assist in this. Not least is alliteration, i:e. similarly sounding syllables. In <em><a href='B:620 3:2-3'>2Ti 3:2-3</a></em> nearly all words end in (-<em>oi</em>), the masculine plural case termination- when it would surely have been possible to construct the sentence in another way.</p>


text:
<p><em><a href='B:620 3:3'>2Ti 3:3</a></em>&nbsp;<em>Without natural affection, implacable, slanderers</em>&nbsp;- There were such within the church at Ephesus (<em><a href='B:610 3:11'>1Ti 3:11</a></em> s:w:)</p><p><em>Without self-control, fierce, not&nbsp;lovers of good</em>- AV "despisers of those that are good". Timothy had been despised by some within the church (<em><a href='B:610 4:12'>1Ti 4:12</a></em>); these people were within the church (see on :2).</p>


text:
<p><em><a href='B:620 3:4'>2Ti 3:4</a></em><em>&nbsp;Traitors, headstrong-&nbsp;</em>Both words used about Judas, a member of the ecclesia (<em><a href='B:490 6:16'>Luk 6:16</a></em>; <em><a href='B:510 1:18'>Act 1:18</a></em> "falling headlong"), who typified these Christians in the church at Ephesus.</p><p><em>Puffed up-&nbsp;</em>The word is only elsewhere used in <em><a href='B:610 3:6'>1Ti 3:6</a></em>; <em><a href='B:610 6:4'>1Ti 6:4</a></em> about the proud within the church at Ephesus.</p><p><em>Lovers of pleasure rather than lovers of God</em>- "Rather than" is better "more than" (AV). These people had a love of God, but their love of pleasure was greater. They were within the ecclesia, having the form of Godliness (:5).</p>


text:
<p><em><a href='B:620 3:5'>2Ti 3:5</a></em>&nbsp;<em>Holding a form of reverence towards God, but having denied the power of it</em>- Paul notes that the opposition to Timothy within the church had a "form of Godliness possibly referring to their upholding some kind of statement of faith but were denying the power&nbsp;<em>dunamis</em>" of that form of Godliness, i:e. the doctrines of the Gospel (<em><a href='B:620 3:5'>2Ti 3:5</a></em>). Paul has spoken of the "form of sound words" as referring to some kind of corpus of Gospel teaching in <em><a href='B:620 1:13'>2Ti 1:13</a></em>. This has unpleasant similarities with those of our day who loudly profess their Biblicism, their holding of some "form of Godliness" in the Gospel; but who deny the operation of the power /&nbsp;<em>dunamis</em>&nbsp;which is associated with it, in that those who accept the Gospel shall be given the Spirit. And this element within the church of today deny this, insisting that the Spirit is not given in response to belief of the Gospel, and that the days of Spirit operation ceased in the first century. It is this&nbsp;<em>dunamis</em>, this power from the Lord, which provides us with all things required for spiritual life and Godliness, and keeps us unto salvation (<em><a href='B:670 1:5'>1Pe 1:5</a></em>; <em><a href='B:680 1:3'>2Pe 1:3</a></em>). See on <em><a href='B:610 1:14'>1Ti 1:14</a></em>&nbsp;<em>And the grace:::&nbsp;</em>Paul has spoken much to Timothy about the "power" /&nbsp;<em>dunamis</em>&nbsp;which can strengthen him as it did Paul. He wishes Timothy to make use of the same strengthening: "Be strong in the grace Gk. 'the gift' that is in that comes from being in Christ" (<em><a href='B:620 2:1'>2Ti 2:1</a></em>). And at the end of his days, Paul could reflect that the Lord Jesus stood with him at his final trial and strengthened him (<em><a href='B:620 4:17'>2Ti 4:17</a></em>). The same word is used of how weak believers like us were strengthened out of their weakness to be strong in faith- again a reference to psychological strengthening (<em><a href='B:650 11:34'>Heb 11:34</a></em>), just as Abraham's weak faith was strengthened (<em><a href='B:520 4:20'>Rom 4:20</a></em> s:w:). The same power strengthens believers s:w:&nbsp; unto internal characteristics such as endurance, patience and joy (<em><a href='B:580 1:11'>Col 1:11</a></em>), the "power" in view being the spirit of Christ. This same power /&nbsp;<em>dunamis&nbsp;</em>is referred to in <em><a href='B:520 15:13'>Rom 15:13</a></em> as the source of these same internal, mental attributes: God fills us with "all joy and peace::. that you may abound in hope, through the power /&nbsp;<em>dunamis</em>&nbsp;of the Holy Spirit". To deny the operation of power is not simply a matter of missing out on so much; it is a denial of the essence of the transforming Gospel. A related word is found in <em><a href='B:560 3:16'>Eph 3:16</a></em> - we are "strengthened with might&nbsp;<em>dunamis</em>&nbsp;by His spirit in the inner man". This is where the gift of the Spirit operates; the reference is to "the inner man" and not the public display of the Spirit in special miracles etc. Paul's whole ministry, like ours, is a result of "the operation of His power /&nbsp;<em>dunamis</em>" (<em><a href='B:560 1:19'>Eph 1:19</a></em>; <em><a href='B:560 1:21'>Eph 1:21</a></em>; <em><a href='B:560 3:7'>Eph 3:7</a></em>). On this basis, Paul urges timid Timothy to allow the spirit /&nbsp;<em>dunamis&nbsp;</em>of love and a sound mind to work in him again, internal attributes, not referring to any ability to perform miracles; and this would drive out his "spirit of fear" (<em><a href='B:620 1:7'>2Ti 1:7</a></em>). It was this&nbsp;<em>dunamis</em>&nbsp;which would enable Timothy to endure "the afflictions of the Gospel" which were clearly making Timothy balk (<em><a href='B:620 1:8'>2Ti 1:8</a></em>).</p><p>It may be that those who have "a the form of Godliness" but deny its power are those who merely accept the propositions as outlined, e:g:, in a statement of faith, but deny their living power in practice. And let us note that Paul lists this as an especial temptation of the last days. <em><a href='B:620 3:5-8'>2Ti 3:5-8</a></em> has some telling parallels:</p><table><tr><td></p><h4>Having a form of Godliness</td><td>denying Gk. ‘contradicting’, ‘going against’, the power thereof</td><td></td></tr><tr><td>Ever learning Gk. Studying</td><td>but never acknowledging the truth the ‘form of Godliness’</td><td></td></tr><tr><td>Resisting the truth</td><td></td><td></td></tr></table><p>All this implies that there is a power in the “form of Godliness”, perhaps the basic “form” of doctrinal teaching delivered to baptism candidates. This power can be resisted in that lives remain unchanged; yet acknowledging the true implications of the Gospel will radically transform life. One can ‘hold the truth’ and study it academically, yet not acknowledge its power. Thus one can hold to a statement of faith and regularly study Scripture, and yet live the life outlined in <em><a href='B:620 3:1-3'>2Ti 3:1-3</a></em>, of lying, deceit, boasting, dividing etc:- all because we do not acknowledge the power of the demands of the doctrines which we study. Hence, there is an urgent need to discern and accept the practical, lifestyle demands of each of the doctrines which are fundamental to the Gospel. If we do not see the connection between doctrine and practice, if we don't perceive how doctrine and practice are linked, then the life of thought without action reduces our faith to mere intellectualism and endless theological debate, with all the resultant division this creates.</h4><p>In <em><a href='B:610 4:1'>1Ti 4:1</a></em>, Paul warns of a coming apostasy in the last days. 2 Timothy 3 repeats this theme by saying that in the last days, men will be “lovers of their own selves, covetous" etc:; these men / brethren will be "holding a form of godliness but denying the power thereof" (<em><a href='B:620 3:5'>2Ti 3:5</a></em> RV). Their keeping the faith was meaningless. This "form" of teaching which they held is that of <em><a href='B:520 6:17'>Rom 6:17</a></em> - the form of doctrine which they accepted at baptism. They will 'hold the truth' but deny its real power. "From such turn away" (<em><a href='B:620 3:5'>2Ti 3:5</a></em>) is the equivalent of the command in <em><a href='B:620 2:21'>2Ti 2:21</a></em> to separate from those vessels unto dishonour which exist in the house of God, the ecclesia. So the problem of 'holding the faith' but denying its practical meaning is going to be&nbsp;<em>the</em>&nbsp;major apostasy of the last days, Paul reasons. Continuing in and keeping the Faith is parallel with running the gruelling marathon of struggle against ourselves, wrestling not with flesh and blood in the fight for real spirituality (<em><a href='B:620 4:7'>2Ti 4:7</a></em>). There have been theologians at times who have argued that 'God did not command certain things because they are right, but certain things are right because God commanded them'. I sense this attitude at times amongst us too. But the Father doesn't seek obedience just for the sake of it. There is reason and purpose to His commands- hence David so praises them for this in Psalms 119. And so it is with all 'doctrine'.</p><p><em>From such people- turn away</em>- Timothy as the bishop of the church could not just personally ignore some church members. His commission at Ephesus had been to stamp out false teaching and inculcate a culture of good works (<em><a href='B:610 1:3-4'>1Ti 1:3-4</a></em>). So I would read this as meaning that he was to turn away such people- from the platform. The next verse goes on to speak about the same group of largely female false teachers in the church who were the burden of 1 Timothy.</p>


text:
<p><em><a href='B:620 3:6'>2Ti 3:6</a></em>&nbsp;<em>For of these are they that creep into houses and take captive weak minded women laden with sins</em>- This entering the house churches which comprised the larger Ephesian church and creating havoc is exactly the scene we found in <em><a href='B:610 5:13'>1Ti 5:13</a></em>. There, according to the reconstruction offered in our notes there, we encountered a group of young widows, the same group of gaudily dressed prostitutes within the church who were slammed in 1 Timothy 2, "going about from house to house". These women were getting more adherents in the house groups which comprised the church at Ephesus. Note how <em><a href='B:630 1:13'>Tit 1:13</a></em> speaks of a similar scenario, whereby the church at Crete suffered whole 'houses' being subverted; i:e. house groups were taken over by the false teachers. The G:N:B. does well in translating "weak women who are burdened by the guilt of their sins". Most of the Gentile converts had come from the Diana cult, and perhaps these women had been part of the thousands of Ephesian women involved in the cult prostitution of the Diana cult. The false teaching women kidded these other women that actually they need not feel bad about it, and could join them in essentially the same behaviour under a Christian guise. The 'creeping in' to the house churches is very much the language of Jewish false teachers in <em><a href='B:550 2:4'>Gal 2:4</a></em>; <em><a href='B:720 1:4'>Jud 1:4</a></em> and <em><a href='B:680 2:1'>2Pe 2:1</a></em>. Yet in our reconstruction, these female false teachers were Gentiles who had once been involved in the Diana cult. But we have noted repeatedly that there was a heady mix of Jewish myth and Gentile paganism at Ephesus. The constant fear that 'Satan', the adversary, would use the situation refers to the organized Jewish campaign to undermine Christianity. And they would be eager to use the women who were involved in this false teaching.</p><p><em>Led away by various lusts-&nbsp;</em>This along with the "sins" earlier in the verse are fairly obviously sexual in character. The false teaching sisters of 1 Timothy 5, who feature here too, were therefore offering some kind of justification for sexual misbehaviour. We note that by the time the Lord wrote His letter to Ephesus in Revelation 2, the problem had been resolved. But it was not resolved immediately, for between the first and second letters to Timothy, the problem was still present.</p>


text:
<p><em><a href='B:620 3:7'>2Ti 3:7</a></em>&nbsp;<em>Ever learning</em>- I have shown in commentary so far in this chapter that the persons referred to were within the church. They continued learning, attending teaching sessions; but could never acknowledge "the truth". The reference is not to people who hear the Gospel but fail to come to "the truth" by some intellectual refusal to accept it. Rather the "learning" must refer to Timothy's teaching of the church, and the fact that some 'learned' but never came to the repentance which is signified by "the knowledge of the truth". This would have been comfort to Timothy lest he get discouraged by the apparent failure of his teaching ministry with these individuals.</p><p><em>And never able to come to the knowledge of the truth-&nbsp;</em><em><a href='B:300 5:1'>Jer 5:1</a></em> says that “if ye can find a man… that seeketh the truth… I will pardon it”. To seek truth is therefore to repent. Those moments of realization of our sinfulness, of accurately perceiving the gap between the personas we act out and the real, Christ-self within us- in those moments, we have come to truth. And this is the repentance that leads to true, authentic pardon. There is a moral link between any falsehood and an unspiritual life. And so repentance is an acknowledgment of the truth (<em><a href='B:620 2:25'>2Ti 2:25</a></em>). A person can learn the theory of God’s truth but never come to acknowledge it- i:e. to repent and life the life of the truth (<em><a href='B:620 3:7'>2Ti 3:7</a></em>), never being transparent before God and brutally honest with oneself. However, as noted on <em><a href='B:610 2:4'>1Ti 2:4</a></em>, "the knowledge of the truth" is a phrase also used there, but referring to final salvation. God wills "all men" to come to this "knowledge of the truth". Their inability to "learn" is therefore a wilful rejection of God's attempts to bring them to His great salvation. Their inability to convert 'learning' to "the knowledge of the truth" is therefore due to their own moral failure, and not simply some intellectual barrier, an honest failure to connect ideas together as they should be.</p><p>The parallel is with those having the form of Godliness cp. "ever learning" but denying the power thereof cp. "never able to came to the knowledge of the truth" (<em><a href='B:620 3:5'>2Ti 3:5</a></em>). I explained that "the power thereof" referred to internal strengthening by the Holy Spirit. It could be argued that the 'true knowledge' here also refers to the knowing of God, in terms of relationship, which is made possible by correct response to the gift of the Spirit in human hearts. For this is how "knowledge" is used in <em><a href='B:560 1:17'>Eph 1:17</a></em>; <em><a href='B:560 4:13'>Eph 4:13</a></em>; <em><a href='B:570 1:9'>Phi 1:9</a></em>; <em><a href='B:580 1:9-10'>Col 1:9-10</a></em>; <em><a href='B:580 2:2'>Col 2:2</a></em>; <em><a href='B:580 3:10'>Col 3:10</a></em>).</p>


text:
<p><em><a href='B:620 3:8'>2Ti 3:8</a></em><em>&nbsp;Just as Jannes and Jambres withstood Moses-&nbsp;</em>Some Jewish fables claimed that these two magicians of Pharaoh were converted to support Moses. But Paul makes it clear that they "<em>withstood&nbsp;</em>Moses". Jewish fables were a major problem at Ephesus, according to several passages in 1 Timothy. Paul is often weaving into his argument inspired corrections of the Jewish myths.</p><p><em>So do these also withstand the truth-&nbsp;</em>The same word is used in <em><a href='B:620 4:15'>2Ti 4:15</a></em> about the false teacher who "withstood our words". Resisting Moses, "the truth" and "our words" are thus all paralleled. It was an incredible calling for weak minded, self doubting, half Jewish Timothy to realize that he was being put on the level of the revered Moses. But speaking forth God's word does that.</p><p><em>Men corrupted in mind-&nbsp;</em>Used in <em><a href='B:610 6:5'>1Ti 6:5</a></em> about believers in the Ephesus church.</p><p><em>Reprobate concerning the faith-&nbsp;</em>GNB "failures in the faith". The idea is that these are not random people from the world but those who had been "in the faith".</p>


text:
<p><em><a href='B:620 3:9'>2Ti 3:9</a></em> - see on <em><a href='B:730 16:15'>Rev 16:15</a></em>.</p><p><em>But they shall proceed no further-&nbsp;</em>Does Paul refer to his certainty that the Lord's coming will be experienced by that generation, and declare their folly at the day of judgment? Or is he certain in faith that the Lord through Timothy is going to turn around the Ephesian church and expose these people? Or is he hopeful that they will in fact repent, realizing their folly and confessing it to others? He may have in view the idea that the false teaching is not going to proceed- Timothy is going to put it down, which according to Revelation 2 he succeeded in doing. Paul notes that evil men in the world will proceed in their evil- for :13 uses the same word: "they shall grow worse and worse s:w. "proceed"".</p><p><em>For their folly shall be made evident to all men, as theirs also came to be</em>- Not least, their folly will be made evident to themselves at the very end. Parables like that of the rich&nbsp;<em>fool</em>, the&nbsp;<em>foolish</em>&nbsp;virgins::. they will all be crystal clear to them:&nbsp;<em>Then&nbsp;</em>the Kingdom of Heaven will be likened to wise and foolish virgins (<em><a href='B:470 25:1'>Mat 25:1</a></em>), after the judgment experience. The materialist "at his end rejection at the judgment shall be a fool" (<em><a href='B:300 17:11'>Jer 17:11</a></em>). The utter&nbsp;<em>folly&nbsp;</em>of the rejected is a major theme (<em><a href='B:240 14:8'>Pro 14:8</a></em>; <em><a href='B:240 14:18'>Pro 14:18</a></em>; <em><a href='B:230 5:5'>Psa 5:5</a></em>; <em><a href='B:230 49:13'>Psa 49:13</a></em>; <em><a href='B:470 7:26'>Mat 7:26</a></em>; <em><a href='B:470 25:8'>Mat 25:8</a></em>). Rejected Israel were made to drink the wine of astonishment (<em><a href='B:230 60:3'>Psa 60:3</a></em>), and the rejected in like manner will gape: "When saw we thee:::?". They will be turned back from the Kingdom "in dismay::. clothed with shame and confusion" (<em><a href='B:230 35:5'>Psa 35:5</a></em>; <em><a href='B:230 35:26'>Psa 35:26</a></em>). Confusion will then give way to panic and then to a level of agitated dementia well beyond the paradigms of present psychiatry.<br/>Often the Spirit points out that the sinner is only harming himself by his actions- and yet he earnestly pursues his course, in the name of self-interest and self-benefit (<em><a href='B:40 16:38'>Num 16:38</a></em>; <em><a href='B:240 19:8'>Pro 19:8</a></em>; <em><a href='B:240 20:2'>Pro 20:2</a></em>; <em><a href='B:420 2:20'>Hab 2:20</a></em>; <em><a href='B:490 7:30'>Luk 7:30</a></em>). Sin is therefore associated by God with utter and derisible foolishness (e:g. <em><a href='B:40 12:11'>Num 12:11</a></em>; <em><a href='B:620 3:9'>2Ti 3:9</a></em>); but this isn't how man in his unwisdom perceives it at all. Indeed, to him self-denial is inexplicable folly and blindness to the essentials of human existence. "This their way is their folly: yet their posterity approve their sayings. Selah (pause to meditate)" (<em><a href='B:230 49:13'>Psa 49:13</a></em>). The&nbsp;<em>folly</em>&nbsp;of sin is only&nbsp;<em>fully&nbsp;</em>evident to God:&nbsp;<br/>3:10 As he prepared to die for his Lord, Paul's openness increased yet more:&nbsp; He tried to motivate Timothy to resist apostasy in the ecclesia by reminding Timothy of how well he knew Paul's example: "But thou hast fully known my doctrine, manner of life, purpose, faith, long-suffering, patience" (<em><a href='B:620 3:10'>2Ti 3:10</a></em>). The sense of&nbsp;<em>purpose</em>&nbsp;and&nbsp;<em>determination</em>&nbsp;in Paul comes over so often (e:g. <em><a href='B:510 19:21'>Act 19:21</a></em>). The constant energy of his mind comes over in the record (e:g. <em><a href='B:510 28:23'>Act 28:23</a></em>), and also in his letters (note the urgency of " today" in <em><a href='B:650 3:7'>Heb 3:7</a></em>; <em><a href='B:650 3:13'>Heb 3:13</a></em>; <em><a href='B:650 3:15'>Heb 3:15</a></em>; <em><a href='B:650 4:7'>Heb 4:7</a></em>; <em><a href='B:540 6:2'>2Co 6:2</a></em>). It makes a good exercise to read through the record of Paul in Acts and highlight words like "reasoned", "persuaded", “convinced", "purposed", "disputing" (e:g. <em><a href='B:510 18:4-5'>Act 18:4-5</a></em>; <em><a href='B:510 18:11'>Act 18:11</a></em>; <em><a href='B:510 18:19'>Act 18:19</a></em>; <em><a href='B:510 19:8-9'>Act 19:8-9</a></em>; <em><a href='B:510 19:21'>Act 19:21</a></em>). And he really is our example, not just a historical figure to be admired. &nbsp;</p>


text:
<p><em><a href='B:620 3:10'>2Ti 3:10</a></em>&nbsp;<em>But you, follow my teaching-&nbsp;</em>Paul could only write such things without pride because of his deep sense of what he wrote at the beginning of 1 Timothy; because of his serious sins and the depth of grace shown to him, he had been set up as a parade example to other Christians. The idea could equally be as in AV that Timothy had "fully known" Paul's teaching etc:- by reason of having travelled so much with him.</p><p><em>Conduct, purpose, faith, longsuffering, love, patience-&nbsp;</em>Paul could say that Timothy had fully known his “purpose” (<em><a href='B:620 3:10'>2Ti 3:10</a></em>). The Greek&nbsp;<em>prothesis</em>&nbsp;is the same used in the New Testament about the shewbread- the bread openly on display before God. Paul is saying that his essential and real self was transparent, openly shown to both God and man. To say ‘You’ve fully known how open and transparent I am’ is really quite something. Who Paul showed himself to be was who he really was.</p>


text:
<p><em><a href='B:620 3:11'>2Ti 3:11</a></em>&nbsp;<em>Persecutions, sufferings-&nbsp;</em>I suggest the "sufferings" refer to the mental and spiritual temptations which arise from the literal, physical persecutions. The same word is translated "sinful passions" (<em><a href='B:520 7:5'>Rom 7:5</a></em>; <em><a href='B:550 5:24'>Gal 5:24</a></em>). The rest of the verse goes on to talk about the Lord's spiritual deliverance of Paul from these spiritual temptations (see commentary).</p><p><em>Think of what things befell me&nbsp;at Antioch, at Iconium, at Lystra-&nbsp;</em>Timothy had been with Paul and was being asked to model himself on Paul.</p><p><em>What persecutions I endured</em>- Paul uses the same word for "endured" in explaining that we can only bear or endure our trials because a way of escape is made for us out of them (<em><a href='B:530 10:13'>1Co 10:13</a></em>). And so the Lord's deliverance of Paul was through making ways of escape every time. The comment that the Lord had 'delivered' Paul from those persecutions therefore refers to not suffering him to spiritually collapse as a result of them. Paul seems to constantly feel that Timothy is on the verge of spiritual collapse; the fact he fulfilled his ministry at Ephesus, according to the Lord's judgment of the church in Revelation 2, shows that despite so much teetering on the edge, the Spirit finally made Timothy strong out of weakness. Timothy was being encouraged that despite all the trauma that Paul had endured, the Lord had delivered him from spiritually stumbling as a result of them; and Paul is consciously setting himself as Timothy's example.</p><p><em>And out of them all, the Lord delivered me</em>- I noted above that this deliverance was more in spiritual terms than deliverance from literal hardship. The bad experiences were not allowed to make Paul stumble. We find the same word in the Lord's prayer, regarding deliverance from temptation (<em><a href='B:470 6:13'>Mat 6:13</a></em>); and of our deliverance from spiritual temptation (<em><a href='B:680 2:9'>2Pe 2:9</a></em>). Paul's confidence that he would always be "delivered" (<em><a href='B:620 4:18'>2Ti 4:18</a></em>) surely refers to his confidence that he would be delivered from spiritually falling; for in the same breath he recognizes that the time of his death is near, and he did not expect any last minute reprieve from it. This is huge encouragement for us all; we shall be delivered from spiritual temptation if this is our true desire. Truly "The sceptre of wickedness won’t remain over the allotment of the righteous; so that the righteous won’t put forth their hands to do evil" (<em><a href='B:230 125:3'>Psa 125:3</a></em>).</p>


text:
<p><em><a href='B:620 3:12'>2Ti 3:12</a></em>&nbsp;<em>Yes, and all who would live godly in Christ Jesus shall suffer persecution-&nbsp;</em>Paul sees himself as being set up as a model for all believers, not just for Timothy (<em><a href='B:610 1:13'>1Ti 1:13</a></em>). And we will likewise be delivered from the spiritual temptations which go along with those persecutions- if that is our dominant desire.</p>


text:
<p><em><a href='B:620 3:13'>2Ti 3:13</a></em>&nbsp;<em>But evil men and impostors shall grow worse and worse-&nbsp;</em>As noted on <em><a href='B:610 4:1'>1Ti 4:1</a></em>, Timothy was called to fight what seemed an inevitable tide of declension from the faith. As were the elders of Ephesus in Acts 20. And just as Moses succeeded in changing Israel's destiny, it seems they succeeded. For the Lord's letter to Ephesus commends the church for keeping out false teaching and excelling in good works. The problem was that they lacked&nbsp;<em>agape&nbsp;</em>love.</p><p><em>Deceiving and being deceived-&nbsp;</em>This is surely a pointer to Jacob:Allusions to Jacob in later Scripture often comment on his negative side.</p>


text:
<p><em><a href='B:620 3:14'>2Ti 3:14</a></em>&nbsp;<em>But you, grow in the things which you have learned-&nbsp;</em>The downward spiral of :13 is matched by this upward spiral language. We can never stand still in spiritual life; there are forces propelling us either downwards or upwards. The command is not simply to retain what we learned before baptism; but to grow in those things, ever seeing new and wondrous implications in those basic truths.</p><p><em>Knowing from whom you have learned them-&nbsp;</em>The integrity and manner of life of those who converted us is what inspires us to carry on. Thus Paul urges Timothy to “continue” because he knew “of what persons” he had been taught them (<em><a href='B:620 3:14'>2Ti 3:14</a></em> RVmg:). The reference would be not only to Paul, but to his mother and grandmother who first taught him the Gospel. Paul is writing from the psychological viewpoint of Timothy; the integrity of the teacher was and is associated with the truth of the message taught. This is basic human psychology. And it explains why there is so much emphasis in Timothy's ministry upon not allowing immoral people to teach. Because especially with illiterate audiences, the power of the message will be compromised by the integrity of the messenger. It is too easy to take the high ground that people should believe the message despite the messenger, because it is ultimately from God. That may be true on a theoretical level, but reality is that people do associate the message with the messenger. Hence Paul's request that Timothy reflect on the integrity of those who brought him the message, so that he might continue believing the message.</p>


text:
<p><em><a href='B:620 3:15'>2Ti 3:15</a></em>&nbsp;<em>And that from a child-&nbsp;</em>This continues the argument of the preceding phrase in :14; because Timothy had been taught the scriptures from childhood by his mother and grandmother who were of integrity (<em><a href='B:620 1:5'>2Ti 1:5</a></em>)- therefore he should continue to reverence the scriptures. See on :14&nbsp;<em>Knowing from whom</em>.</p><p><em>You have known the sacred writings-&nbsp;</em>Literally, 'the holy letters' (s:w. <em><a href='B:540 3:7'>2Co 3:7</a></em>; <em><a href='B:550 6:11'>Gal 6:11</a></em>), as if referring to how his mother and grandmother taught him to read letter by letter from the Scriptures. Considering the low literacy rate in the Roman empire of the first century, we can assume that Timothy's background was of reasonable wealth. This would explain much of his weakness of character and personality which we have noted elsewhere; the weaknesses are typical of a 'rich kid'.</p><p><em>Which are able to make you wise to salvation through the faith which is in Christ Jesus-&nbsp;</em>Paul is not saying that Bible reading will save us. It is faith in Christ which saves us, and we are made wise to that fact by the content of the entire Scriptures. The Old Testament scriptures were opened up by faith in Christ; that is what provided the key to interpretation which made them useful.</p>


text:
<p><em><a href='B:620 3:16'>2Ti 3:16</a></em> - see on <em><a href='B:620 4:2-3'>2Ti 4:2-3</a></em>.</p><p><em>Every scripture&nbsp;is inspired of God, and is profitable for teaching, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness-&nbsp;</em>The Hebrew Bible was split up into small sections, such as "The Bush", referring to Moses and the burning bush. Each section was Divinely inspired.</p><p>A comparison of <em><a href='B:620 3:16'>2Ti 3:16</a></em> with <em><a href='B:620 4:2-3'>2Ti 4:2-3</a></em> makes it clear that because the inspired word is profitable:<br/>for doctrine&nbsp;<em>therefore</em><br/>preach the word; be instant in season, out of season (i:e. whether&nbsp;<br/>you naturally feel in the preaching mood or not)<br/>for reproof&nbsp;<em>therefore</em>&nbsp;<br/>reprove<br/>for correction&nbsp;<em>therefore</em><br/>rebuke<br/>for instruction in righteousness&nbsp;<em>therefore</em><br/>exhort with all long-suffering and doctrine.</p>


text:
<h4><em><a href='B:620 3:17'>2Ti 3:17</a></em>&nbsp;<em>So that the man of God may be complete-&nbsp;</em>Note how Peter says that the prophet was a ‘man of God’ who was moved by God’s Spirit to write Scripture; whereas Paul says that the Spirit-inspired Scriptures are what makes a ‘man of God’- us- who he is (<em><a href='B:620 3:17'>2Ti 3:17</a></em> cp. <em><a href='B:680 1:21'>2Pe 1:21</a></em>). There is a mutuality here, in which even we in this age can have a part.</h4><p><em>Completely empowered to every good work</em>- Yet we so often blame our lack of good works on a lack of resources or abilities. But the Scriptures speak to us, if we let them and read them in faith, and thus inspire us to good works. The Lord later commended the Ephesus ecclesia on their "good works", so it would seem that Timothy really obeyed the spirit of all this. He pursued the teaching ministry he had been given, even if it was initially against the grain of his character. And it did indeed empower others to good works. Sadly, this was all done without&nbsp;<em>agape</em>, and this was the Lord's serious criticism of the later Ephesian church.</p>


text:
<p><em><a href='B:620 4:1'>2Ti 4:1</a></em>&nbsp;<em>I charge you&nbsp;in the sight of God and of Christ Jesus</em>- Paul several times writes this to Timothy. Paul always seemed so worried as to whether Timothy was going to hold on, and we could dynamically translate him as meaning 'Get a grip'. But it may be that Paul had been given charges by the Lord which he was duty bound to soberly pass on to Timothy- hence the reference here to the charge being given in the presence of the Father and Son.</p><p><em>Who shall judge the living and the dead</em>- The charge to preach to others is made in the light of judgment to come. We shall be judged according to whether we have shared the light with others or not. This is not to say that our acceptance is determined by our works; but the final judgment shall in some form take into account the life we lived now.</p><p><em>And by his appearing and his kingdom-&nbsp;</em>Because there really will be a Kingdom of God on earth and people really can eternally live there because of their response to the Gospel- therefore we should preach.</p>


text:
<p><em><a href='B:620 4:2'>2Ti 4:2</a></em>&nbsp;<em>To preach the word. Preach it urgently, whether the occasion seems appropriate or not-&nbsp;</em>Our task of witness may seem hopeless. But we are to be prepared to preach “in season and out of season” (<em><a href='B:620 4:2'>2Ti 4:2</a></em> AV). Paul wrote to Timothy at Ephesus, and his language in 2 Timothy has many allusions to his own behaviour whilst at Ephesus. He spoke at Ephesus of how he had preached the word "at all seasons" (<em><a href='B:510 20:18'>Act 20:18</a></em>)- and he tells Timothy to do likewise (<em><a href='B:620 4:2'>2Ti 4:2</a></em> AV); Paul had taught what was profitable to others (<em><a href='B:510 20:20'>Act 20:20</a></em>); and this was to be Timothy's pattern (<em><a href='B:620 3:16'>2Ti 3:16</a></em> RV). “Out of season” translates a Greek word only elsewhere rendered ‘lacking opportunity’ (<em><a href='B:570 4:10'>Phi 4:10</a></em>). Whether there is apparent opportunity or not, we must still witness- not just wait until someone asks us if we are religious. This is a common fallacy we all fall into at times. By contrast, there is to be a sense of urgency to our witness. Several times the Lord invites us to “go” and preach- we are all to feel a spirit of outgoing witness, rather than the defensive, tell-them-if-they-ask attitude which has dominated so many of us for so long. We need the same spirit of heroism in our witness which Jeremiah and Ezekiel had, as they reflected the indomitable Spirit of God in this matter of human salvation. Our unbelieving families, our workmates, our neighbours, seem to be stony ground to the point that it just isn’t worth bothering. But we need a positive spirit.</p><p><em>Reprove, rebuke, exhort, as you patiently&nbsp;teach-&nbsp;</em>The patience or<em>&nbsp;makrothumia</em>&nbsp;which God has is intended to be had by us too (<em><a href='B:680 3:9'>2Pe 3:9</a></em>; <em><a href='B:680 3:15'>2Pe 3:15</a></em>; <em><a href='B:520 2:4'>Rom 2:4</a></em>; <em><a href='B:560 4:2'>Eph 4:2</a></em>). And especially is the preacher encouraged to have this&nbsp;<em>makrothumia</em>&nbsp;(<em><a href='B:620 4:2'>2Ti 4:2</a></em>; <em><a href='B:620 3:10'>2Ti 3:10</a></em>). God waits / is patient for repentance, amazingly so (we recall His waiting 120 years before the flood came)… and we are to have it in this same way too.</p>


text:
<p><em><a href='B:620 4:3'>2Ti 4:3</a></em>&nbsp;<em>For the time will come when they will not endure sound teaching</em>- See on :4&nbsp;<em>Will turn away</em>.</p><p><em>But having itching ears, will gather around themselves teachers&nbsp;to suit their own lusts-&nbsp;</em>"Lusts" in Timothy refer to lusts for illicit wealth and sex (<em><a href='B:610 6:9'>1Ti 6:9</a></em>; <em><a href='B:620 2:22'>2Ti 2:22</a></em>; <em><a href='B:620 3:6'>2Ti 3:6</a></em>), of the type justified and indulged in by the group of female false teachers whom Timothy had struggled with in Ephesus. We have noted that there were sinful Christian women of <em><a href='B:620 3:6'>2Ti 3:6</a></em> who were led astray by female false teachers seeking to justify their lusts. But those women were led astray because they subconsciously wanted to have such teaching. The whole theme of the Timothy letters is that Timothy has been given a charge to teach true doctrine and stop false teaching in Ephesus. Paul is warning him about these particular false teachers, and helping Timothy understand that false teaching is actually a psychological function of the desires of the audience, ever seeking self-justification. Paul may be saying that even although Timothy has sorted out the immediate problem in Ephesus, it will recur- because that is the way of human nature.</p>


text:
<p><em><a href='B:620 4:4'>2Ti 4:4</a></em>&nbsp;<em>And will turn away their ears from the truth-&nbsp;</em>Paul had told the Ephesian elders the same (<em><a href='B:510 20:29'>Act 20:29</a></em>; <em><a href='B:510 20:32'>Act 20:32</a></em>). It is the more impressive, therefore, to read the Lord's judgment that the church at Ephesus had maintained the faith and driven out false teaching. Timothy had fulfilled his ministry against incredible odds, and had changed, at least for a generation, the direction which the Spirit had foretold.</p><p>The phrase “the truth” is used in Scripture as a summary of the Godly life, rather than a set of particular theologies; for truth telling, and being truthful with oneself and God, is the epitome of the life which God intends. All too often it has been assumed that because we know and believe true propositions about the Gospel, therefore we are somehow automatically ‘of the truth’. The following passages make clear enough that “the truth” refers not so much to intellectual purity of understanding as to a righteous way of life. If someone understands a matter of Biblical interpretation differently to how we do, e:g. over matters of prophecy, this doesn’t mean they have ‘left the truth’. Yet if we e:g. lie, then we have ‘left the truth’ despite holding a correct understanding of the doctrines of the Gospel. Sinners turn away from truth (<em><a href='B:620 4:4'>2Ti 4:4</a></em>; <em><a href='B:630 1:14'>Tit 1:14</a></em>). They are bereft of the truth (<em><a href='B:610 6:5'>1Ti 6:5</a></em>). God has revealed the truth, indeed has sent his Son to live it and to proclaim it, but sinful people have refused to listen.</p><p><em>And turn aside to fables-&nbsp;</em>Gk. 'be turned aside'. As men turn away their ears (of their own volition) from the truth, so God will turn their ears to fables. If you turn away your ears from truth, Paul says that you are turned unto what is untrue. He doesn’t say that a person turns their ears away from truth and then turns their ears to untruth. By turning away from truth, God confirms the person in that- and He turns them towards untruth. He sends strong delusion upon those who love and want to believe in lies (<em><a href='B:600 2:11'>2Th 2:11</a></em>). The fables in view are those which Timothy had been asked to stamp out in <em><a href='B:610 1:4'>1Ti 1:4</a></em>; <em><a href='B:610 4:7'>1Ti 4:7</a></em>. According to the Lord's estimation in Revelation 2, he succeeded in stamping them out. But Paul is saying that there will always be a desire for people to believe in them, and God will even turn people towards them if they do not want to hear truth.</p>


text:
<p><em><a href='B:620 4:5'>2Ti 4:5</a></em> - see on <em><a href='B:620 2:3'>2Ti 2:3</a></em>.</p><p><em>But you, be sober in all things-&nbsp;</em>The word means literally to be sober as in not being drunk. Every time it is used, it is in the context of being prepared for the Lord's second coming and not being caught off guard (<em><a href='B:590 5:6'>1Th 5:6</a></em>; <em><a href='B:590 5:8'>1Th 5:8</a></em>; <em><a href='B:670 1:13'>1Pe 1:13</a></em>; <em><a href='B:670 4:7'>1Pe 4:7</a></em>; <em><a href='B:670 5:8'>1Pe 5:8</a></em>). The reference is surely to the Lord's parable about the household servants who are to remain sober and care for the others in the household (<em><a href='B:470 24:45-50'>Mat 24:45-50</a></em>). Timothy had been set over the church at Ephesus (<em><a href='B:610 1:3'>1Ti 1:3</a></em>) and thus that parable spoke to him directly as one "whom his lord has set over his household". The soberness or awareness was therefore in relation to looking out for the needs of the household.</p><p><em>Suffer hardship-&nbsp;</em>The same words used about Paul himself, and his earlier encouragement to Timothy to endure hardship (<em><a href='B:620 2:3'>2Ti 2:3</a></em>; <em><a href='B:620 2:9'>2Ti 2:9</a></em>). Paul so consciously sets himself up as Timothy's pattern (<em><a href='B:610 1:13-16'>1Ti 1:13-16</a></em>).</p><p><em>Do the work of an evangelist, fulfil your ministry-&nbsp;</em>Paul encouraged Timothy to "do the work of an evangelist"&nbsp;<em>despite</em>&nbsp;all the doctrinal and pastoral problems and needs at Ephesus. These are never to be an excuse for not evangelizing. This was in addition to "fulfil your ministry"- which according to <em><a href='B:610 1:3-4'>1Ti 1:3-4</a></em> was to stamp out false teaching and encourage good works. In other words, his pastoral calling should not mean that he overlooked evangelizing fresh blood for the church. So often evangelism has been overlooked because of pastoral concerns, and yet it is fresh blood which is so helpful in moving beyond the pastoral problems.</p>


text:
<p><em><a href='B:620 4:6'>2Ti 4:6</a></em>&nbsp;<em>For I am already being offered-&nbsp;</em>Paul has in view his imminent death, but he sees it as on ongoing death. Alternatively we can read this as GNB "the hour has come for me to be sacrificed". But there is the idea as reflected in the AV that "I am now&nbsp;<em>ready</em>&nbsp;to be offered". It seems that Paul wrote 2 Timothy 4 when news of his imminent death had just been broken to him. As Paul faced his death, there was a deep self-knowledge within him that he was ready, that he was "there". As we face the imminent return of the Lord, it should be possible for us to have a similar sense: "I am now ready::.". If we don't know that we are "in the faith" and that "Christ is in you", then we are "reprobates" (<em><a href='B:540 13:5'>2Co 13:5</a></em>). All those who will be accepted&nbsp;<em>must</em>, therefore,&nbsp;<em>will</em>, therefore, have a measure of self-knowledge and appreciation of how far they've grown in Christ. Growth is a natural process, it's impossible to feel it happening. But by looking back on our lives and attitudes and comparing them with the experience of successful believers, it&nbsp;<em>is</em>&nbsp;possible to get some idea of our readiness for the judgment.</p><p><em>And the time of my departure comes</em>- Paul had earlier spoken&nbsp; of his "departure" (<em><a href='B:570 1:23'>Phi 1:23</a></em>), he had told Timothy and the Ephesian elders that he must finish his course with joy (<em><a href='B:510 20:24'>Act 20:24</a></em>); and he knew his time had come; he could speak of having reached "the time of my&nbsp;<em>departure</em>" (<em><a href='B:620 4:6'>2Ti 4:6</a></em>). The level of self-knowledge he had as he faced the end is remarkable. Yet it really is possible for each of us; for his glorious race to the finish is our pattern. Despite his surface sadness and depression, Paul was finishing his course&nbsp;<em>with joy</em>.</p><p>As Paul's sense of his own sinfulness grew, so did his confidence of salvation. These two elements, meshed together within the very texture of human personality, are what surely give credibility and power to our witness to others. On one hand, a genuine humility, that we are sinners, that we are the last people who should be saved; and yet on the other, a definite confidence in God's saving grace and the achievement of Jesus to save sinners. Paul at the very end had a wonderful confidence in the outcome of the day of judgment. He had spoken earlier of running the race (<em><a href='B:530 9:24-26'>1Co 9:24-26</a></em>; <em><a href='B:610 6:12'>1Ti 6:12</a></em>). Now he says that he has finished it, in victory. His final words consciously allude back to what he wrote to the Philippians a few years earlier:</p><table><tr><td></p><h4>Philippians</td><td>2 Timothy 4</td><td></td></tr><tr><td>What I should like is to depart (<em><a href='B:570 1:23'>Phi 1:23</a></em>)</td><td>The hour for my departure s:w. is come (<em><a href='B:620 4:6'>2Ti 4:6</a></em>)</td><td></td></tr><tr><td>If my life-blood is to crown the sacrifice (<em><a href='B:570 2:17'>Phi 2:17</a></em>)</td><td>Already my life blood is being poured out on the altar of sacrifice s:w. (<em><a href='B:620 4:6'>2Ti 4:6</a></em>)</td><td></td></tr><tr><td>I have not yet reached perfection finishing but I press on (<em><a href='B:570 3:12'>Phi 3:12</a></em>)</td><td>I have run the great race, I have finished s:w. perfected the course (<em><a href='B:620 4:7'>2Ti 4:7</a></em>)</td><td></td></tr><tr><td>I press toward the goal to win the prize (<em><a href='B:570 3:14'>Phi 3:14</a></em>)</td><td>Now the prize awaits me (<em><a href='B:620 4:8'>2Ti 4:8</a></em>)</td><td></td></tr></table><p>Paul felt that he had attained the maturity which he had earlier aimed for. To have the self-knowledge to say that is of itself quite something. May it be our ultimate end too. These parallels and Paul's commentary becomes all the more poignant if we accept the view that actually, Paul did not die soon after 2 Timothy 4 was written- rather was he released, did much work for the Lord, and died under Nero at a later date. In this case his commentary in 2 Timothy 4 is a reflection not so much of a dying man's last words and hopes, but of a mature, reasoned conviction that in fact he had arrived at a point of believing in salvation.</h4>


text:
<p><em><a href='B:620 4:7'>2Ti 4:7</a></em> - see on <em><a href='B:490 13:24'>Luk 13:24</a></em>.</p><p><em>I have fought the good fight, I have finished the course-&nbsp;</em>Paul has used the metaphors of a soldier and athlete in challenging Timothy to a disciplined life. And now he says that he has himself fulfilled those images, yet again setting himself up as Timothy's pattern. In nearly all his letters, Paul asks his readers to pray for him. But not in these final letters to Timothy. "I am now ready to be offered". He knew he had finished the fight (<em><a href='B:620 4:7'>2Ti 4:7</a></em>). The Greek for "fight" occurs in <em><a href='B:570 1:29-30'>Phi 1:29-30</a></em> concerning the struggle we have to truly take up the cross of Christ, and also in <em><a href='B:530 9:25'>1Co 9:25</a></em> regarding the battle we have for total self-control. Paul knew these were the aims his Lord had hoped to achieve in him. And Paul knew that he was through, he'd finished and achieved them. He had achieved self-control. He knew his Lord, he had been made conformable to the dying Lord Jesus on the cross, he&nbsp;<em>knew</em>&nbsp;the fellowship of his sufferings. He had filled up the whole measure of Christ's sufferings (<em><a href='B:570 3:10'>Phi 3:10</a></em>).</p><p>Paul felt very clearly his sense of mission. He speaks in Troas of how “none of these things move deflect me, neither count I my life dear unto myself, so that I might finish my course with joy” (<em><a href='B:510 20:24'>Act 20:24</a></em>). Some years later at the end of his life he could write that “I have finished my course” (<em><a href='B:620 4:7'>2Ti 4:7</a></em>). He didn’t let anything distract him- and our age perhaps more than any other is so full of distractions. In his time of dying (at which he wrote 2 Tim:), John his hero was still in Paul's mind. Paul speaks of finishing his course (<em><a href='B:510 20:24'>Act 20:24</a></em>; <em><a href='B:620 4:7'>2Ti 4:7</a></em>), using a word only used elsewhere concerning John finishing&nbsp;<em>his</em>&nbsp;course (<em><a href='B:510 13:25'>Act 13:25</a></em>). &nbsp;&nbsp;<br/>On a series of long Russian train journeys, I read through the Gospels and epistles, noting down all the times Paul makes a direct or indirect allusion to the Gospels. I then worked out how many times in each epistle he alludes, on average, to the Gospels. I found that on average, he did it once every six verses. But when you list his epistles chronologically, the general trend suggests that in his writing, Paul&nbsp;<em>increasingly</em>&nbsp;alluded to the Gospels. And in his time of dying (in which he wrote 2 Timothy), the intensity of his allusions to the Gospels reaches an all time high. In 2 Timothy he is referring to the Gospels at least once every 3:9 verses- and almost certainly more than that, seeing that my analysis is incomplete. As he faced death in 2 Timothy 4, he more intensely modelled his words (probably unconsciously) upon those of Christ. Thus when he speaks of how he is about to&nbsp;<em>finish</em>&nbsp;his course (<em><a href='B:620 4:7'>2Ti 4:7</a></em>), he is combining allusions to <em><a href='B:470 26:58'>Mat 26:58</a></em>; <em><a href='B:490 12:50'>Luk 12:50</a></em>; <em><a href='B:490 18:31'>Luk 18:31</a></em>; <em><a href='B:490 22:37'>Luk 22:37</a></em> and <em><a href='B:500 13:1'>Joh 13:1</a></em>. He speaks of how he wished that “all the gentiles might hear” (<em><a href='B:620 4:17'>2Ti 4:17</a></em>) in the language of his Lord, also facing death, in John 17 - where He spoke of His desire that all “the world might know”. &nbsp;</p><p><em>I have kept the faith-&nbsp;</em>Paul breathes a sigh of relief at the end of his life when he says that he has “fought a good fight::. finished my course, I have kept the faith” (<em><a href='B:620 4:7'>2Ti 4:7</a></em>). To keep believing true doctrine (“the faith”) is likened to a lifelong struggle, a gruelling race. It hardly appears like this when we first learn the basic doctrines and are baptized. That it will be a struggle to continue believing them properly hardly seems possible in those innocent days. But living out true doctrine is a pre-requisite for acceptance into the Kingdom: “Open ye the gates, that the righteous nation which keepeth the truths (AV mg:) may enter in” (<em><a href='B:290 26:2'>Isa 26:2</a></em>).</p><p>Paul at his bitter end could say that he had kept the Faith; but he brackets this together with finishing the race and fighting a good fight (<em><a href='B:620 4:7'>2Ti 4:7</a></em>; <em><a href='B:560 6:12'>Eph 6:12</a></em>). These ideas of running the marathon and wrestling through the fight he uses elsewhere; but in the sense of striving for spiritual mastery over ourselves. It is&nbsp;<em>this</em>&nbsp;which is keeping the Faith. The need to remain in the Faith, to hold onto it, is one of the classic themes of the NT (<em><a href='B:510 14:22'>Act 14:22</a></em>; <em><a href='B:530 16:13'>1Co 16:13</a></em>; <em><a href='B:570 1:27'>Phi 1:27</a></em>; <em><a href='B:580 1:23'>Col 1:23</a></em>; <em><a href='B:610 3:9'>1Ti 3:9</a></em>; <em><a href='B:620 4:7'>2Ti 4:7</a></em>). Jude begins by appealing for his readers to be keeping the faith, to contend for the faith; and concludes by asking them to build up each other in that faith. To preserve it is in order to build up; for our growth is on the basis of the pure Gospel which we believe. It is this which leads us on "from faith to faith" in an upward spiral of growth (<em><a href='B:520 1:17'>Rom 1:17</a></em>). These passages do not mean that we must religiously hold on to our understanding of the doctrines of a 'Statement of Faith',&nbsp;<em>and nothing more</em>. It is true that the need to maintain doctrinal purity&nbsp;<em>is</em>&nbsp;taught in these passages; but those doctrines are not just things which have been delivered to us to 'keep' in the sense of maintaining a correct understanding of them. If this were the case, God would be rather like the Roman slave owner who endlessly dropped a spoon and asked his slave to pick it up, then he dropped it again, asked him to pick it up::. There was no&nbsp;<em>purpose</em>&nbsp;in the exercise itself, it was simply a test of the slave's obedience. But God is not like this. He has commanded us to keep the faith, to preserve the doctrines of the Faith, but there is a reason for this. Those doctrines are not just arbitrary statements which God invented as part of the boundless theological fantasy of an omnipotent being. They are intended to produce&nbsp;<em>behaviour</em>, and&nbsp;<em>this</em>&nbsp;is why they must be defended; because without the understanding of true doctrine, true spiritual behaviour is impossible. To simply hold on to the same doctrines we learnt before baptism, e:g. that God is one not three, is not holding the Faith in the sense the NT requires. This is simply clinging on to what we have always believed, just as most human beings cling on to their belief systems, especially as they grow older.</p>


text:
<p><em><a href='B:620 4:8'>2Ti 4:8</a></em>&nbsp;<em>From this time forward-&nbsp;</em>Was Paul given some special assurance that he would be saved at the last day? Otherwise it is hard to understand the force of him saying that he is sure of his salvation "from this time forward".</p><p><em>There is laid up for me the crown of righteousness-&nbsp;</em>It could be that the reward is to be made righteous. Or that the reward / crown is the reward for righteousness. Yet Paul elsewhere is very aware of "our unrighteousness" (<em><a href='B:520 3:5'>Rom 3:5</a></em>), and how righteousness is imputed to us, final salvation not being any function of "works of righteousness which we have done" (<em><a href='B:630 3:5'>Tit 3:5</a></em>). Perhaps he means that he now finally believed in practice what he had so eloquently explained to the Romans in theory- that he was righteous by faith. And he saw that there was indeed a crown for that faith.</p><p><em>Which the Lord, the righteous judge-&nbsp;</em>This title is to be connected with the way that He will give us "the crown of righteousness". The 'justness' or 'rightness' of His judgment is not to be measured in human terms; for it shall involve counting us righteous who are not- if we have believed it. But this is&nbsp;<em>His</em>&nbsp;rightness / justice.</p><p><em>Shall give to me at that day; and not to me alone, but also to all those that have loved his appearing-&nbsp;</em>The Lord said that all those whom he finds&nbsp;<em>watching</em>&nbsp;will be welcomed into the marriage feast (<em><a href='B:490 12:37'>Luk 12:37</a></em>). And <em><a href='B:620 4:8'>2Ti 4:8</a></em> is plain enough: "All them also that love his appearing" will be rewarded along with Paul. Paul's own confidence in salvation was because he knew the earnestness of his desire to be "present with the Lord" Jesus (<em><a href='B:540 5:8'>2Co 5:8</a></em>), such was the closeness of his relationship with him. Is this really our attitude too? Can we feel like Simeon, that we are quite happy to die after we have just seen our Lord with our own eyes (<em><a href='B:490 2:29'>Luk 2:29</a></em>)? Is there really much&nbsp;<em>love</em>&nbsp;between us and our Lord? The faithful are described as "those that&nbsp;<em>seek&nbsp;</em>(God)::. such as&nbsp;<em>love</em>&nbsp;thy salvation" (<em><a href='B:230 40:16'>Psa 40:16</a></em>). None truly seek God (<em><a href='B:520 3:11'>Rom 3:11</a></em> - the context concerns all of us, believers and unbelievers); and yet we are those who seek Him. We must be ambitious to do the impossible. Those who truly&nbsp;<em>love</em>&nbsp;righteousness and the Kingdom will be rewarded with it. Likewise Paul in <em><a href='B:530 8:2-3'>1Co 8:2-3</a></em> describes the faithful man as one who accepts he knows nothing as he ought to know, but truly loves God. <em><a href='B:650 9:28'>Heb 9:28</a></em> is clear: "Unto them that look for (Christ) shall he appear the second time::. unto salvation". Those who truly look for Christ will be given salvation. People from all over the world, the living responsible, will see the sign of the son of man, will know His return is imminent, and wail with the knowledge that they have crucified Him afresh and must now meet Him (<em><a href='B:470 24:30-31'>Mat 24:30-31</a></em> cp. <em><a href='B:730 1:7'>Rev 1:7</a></em>; <em><a href='B:450 12:10'>Zec 12:10</a></em>). Their response to the certain knowledge that His return is imminent will in that moment effectively be their judgment. See on <em><a href='B:490 12:37'>Luk 12:37</a></em>. The idea that whoever truly loves the Lord's coming will therefore be accepted by Him can easily be abused by those who reason that anyone who has the emotion of love towards Christ will be rewarded by him. We know that true love involves both having and keeping his commands. But for those of us in Christ, these verses are still a major challenge. If we truly "look for" Christ's second coming, if we "love his appearing", this will lead us to acceptance with him. So the point is surely clinched: our attitude towards the second coming is an indicator of whether we will be saved. Time and again in the Psalms, David expresses his good conscience in terms of asking God to come and judge him (e:g. <em><a href='B:230 35:24'>Psa 35:24</a></em>). Was this not some reference to the future theophany which David knew some day would come?</p><p>As Job's emphasis on the coming of Christ and judgment increased, so his concentration on his present sufferings decreased. His heart was consumed within him with desire for that day (<em><a href='B:220 19:27'>Job 19:27</a></em> AVmg:). 2 Timothy 4 can be regarded as Paul's most mature spiritual statement, written as it was just prior to his death. In <em><a href='B:620 4:1'>2Ti 4:1</a></em>; <em><a href='B:620 4:8'>2Ti 4:8</a></em>, Paul's mind was clearly on the second coming and the certainty of judgment. He realized, in that time of undoubted maturity, that the common characteristic of all the faithful would be that they all&nbsp;<em>loved</em>&nbsp;the appearing of Christ. This isn't, of course, to say that anyone who loves the idea of Christ's coming will thereby be saved. A true love of His appearing is only possible with a correct doctrinal understanding, and also a certain level of moral readiness for His appearing. But do we&nbsp;<em>love</em>&nbsp;the appearing of Christ as Job did? Is it&nbsp;<em>really</em>&nbsp;all we have in life? Is our conscience, our faith in the grace of God, our real belief in the blood of the cross, so deep that we&nbsp;<em>love</em>&nbsp;the idea of the coming of judgment, that we would fain&nbsp;<em>hasten</em>&nbsp;the day of His coming? The graph constructed above shows how Job's&nbsp;<em>love</em>&nbsp;of the Lord's coming grew very rapidly. Before, he was too caught up with bitterness about his unspiritual fellow 'believers', effectively justifying himself in the eyes of his ecclesia and his world, full of passive complaints about his own sufferings::. and so he didn't&nbsp;<em>love</em>&nbsp;that day as he later came to.</p>


text:
<p><em><a href='B:620 4:9'>2Ti 4:9</a></em>&nbsp;<em>Make an effort to come to me soon-&nbsp;</em>"Make an effort" again seems to reflect Paul's knowledge of Timothy's tendency to inaction and laziness, and the need to 'stir himself up'. By inviting him to Rome, Paul clearly believed that Timothy did not have to be permanently in Ephesus, but must have been confident that Timothy could pass over his duties to faithful brethren there for a time.</p>


text:
<p><em><a href='B:620 4:10'>2Ti 4:10</a></em> - see on <em><a href='B:470 13:22'>Mat 13:22</a></em>; <em><a href='B:490 13:27'>Luk 13:27</a></em>.</p><p><em>For Demas</em>- In <em><a href='B:580 4:14'>Col 4:14</a></em>, Demas is a fellow prisoner with Paul, or at least with Paul in Rome. Either he fell away, or the difference is evidence of a second imprisonment. Demas was certainly within Paul's inner circle to have been with him in Rome, and a great loss.</p><p><em>Forsook me-&nbsp;</em>Paul does take things rather personally, although that is just a function of being human. We would rather expect him to speak of forsaking the Lord. There are so many references to "I" and "me" in these final words that we can assume that Paul was in deep depression as he faced death alone and deserted. "Only Luke is&nbsp;<em>with me</em>::. profitable&nbsp;<em>unto me</em>&nbsp;(:11)::. did&nbsp;<em>me</em>&nbsp;much evil (:14)::. no man stood with me, but all forsook me (:16)::. that&nbsp;<em>through me</em>&nbsp;the message might be fully proclaimed" (:17).</p><p><em>Having loved this present world, and went to Thessalonica; Crescens to Galatia, Titus to Dalmatia</em>- Translated to Hebrew, the<em>&nbsp;olahm hazzeh</em>&nbsp;“present world” is the term used by Judaism for the Jewish system. So it seems that Demas went off to Judaism, another casualty of the Jewish plot and machinations against Paul and his work.</p>


text:
<p><em><a href='B:620 4:11'>2Ti 4:11</a></em>&nbsp;<em>Only Luke is with me. Take Mark, and bring him with you-&nbsp;</em>As Paul in his time of dying remembered his fallout with Mark, so awareness of sinfulness is a sign of spiritual maturity in us all. Paul must surely have had twinges of guilt over his behaviour at times (not least over the bust up with Barnabas and Mark, <em><a href='B:510 15:39'>Act 15:39</a></em>); and yet he insists that he always had a good conscience; so convinced was he of forgiveness. It seems Paul was aware of his error of years before in pushing Mark away. We have seen that he alluded to it in his letters. And now, right at the very end, the memory of his earlier pride and brashness to his brethren stayed with him. Every, every one of us has done the same thing to our brethren, countless times. Will we remember them on our deathbeds? Will our sensitivity to sin be that great? Paul in his time of dying was a man who had reached a spiritual peak, the love which was the bond of spiritual completion and maturity. Yet this didn't stop him being depressed, or from so desperately wanting his brethren, or from meditating upon past mistakes.</p><p><em>For his service is profitable to me-&nbsp;</em>AV "Profitable to me for the ministry". Paul at his last gasp was still thinking about fulfilling his ministry / service of the Lord. And he saw that the fulfilment of his ministry required others, including those whom previously he had considered unhelpful. We all go through this path, coming to realize that we ourselves desperately need our weak brethren, that no man is an island, not even me. The term has just been used by Paul in saying that if a man separate himself from the vessels which are to dishonour, then he can be "profitable" in ministry (<em><a href='B:620 2:21'>2Ti 2:21</a></em>). It could be that Paul considered the vessels unto dishonour to be the Judaists, for he uses similar language about those under the Mosaic law in Romans. Perhaps he was satisfied that Mark had now separated himself from those Judaistic influences which had limited his service previously. Or perhaps Paul in his desperation to fulfil his ministry, simply lowered the bar and accepted the likes of Mark, even though he disagreed with those with whom Mark fellowshipped. Again, this path has been trodden by so many of the Lord's servants as they come towards the end of their service.</p>


text:
<p><em><a href='B:620 4:12'>2Ti 4:12</a></em>&nbsp;<em>But Tychicus I sent to Ephesus</em>- Timothy was the bishop at Ephesus, and Paul has charged him about how to lead the church there. But really wanting Timothy to personally come to him, he had arranged for Tychicus to go to Ephesus to temporarily relieve Timothy. We see here how intensely valuable and encouraging Paul found Timothy's presence. And yet there is probably no other single individual over whom Paul worried so much, and feared his weakness and possible spiritual collapse. Such fears are evident throughout the letters to Timothy. But it is a mark of Paul's final maturity that he took such encouragement from a brother whose weaknesses he so clearly perceived.</p>


text:
<p><em><a href='B:620 4:13'>2Ti 4:13</a></em>&nbsp;<em>When you come, bring the cloak that I left at Troas with Carpus</em>- Paul's situation is very different from that presented at the end of Acts, where he lives in a large rented home capable of accommodating many visitors. He is presumably cold and needed the cloak. There are many links between Paul's time of dying (as recorded in 2 Timothy 4) and the death of the Lord Jesus. Paul felt that he had at last approximated to the fellowship of his Lord's sufferings, and therefore he looked ahead with confidence to the day of resurrection. His awareness of his cloak, as his one treasured worldly possession, was maybe fuelled by a realization that this too was the only significant worldly possession of his Lord, at the end (<em><a href='B:620 4:13'>2Ti 4:13</a></em>).</p><p><em>And the books, especially the parchments</em>- He wanted to have his own copies of the Scriptures, which implies his relationship with the Jews in Rome had soured to the point where nobody would provide copies of the Scriptures to him. His desire for parchment reflects how he had no local source of them, even though Luke was with him, they perhaps had no money to buy parchment. Whereas previously Paul had the funds to rent his own accommodation in the prison. His desire for parchment suggests he wanted to write more letters; and yet 2 Timothy appear to be his final letter preserved. Perhaps his intention never came to anything; but he surely desired to serve his Lord until his last breath, and he realized that letter writing was a significant ministry.</p>


text:
<p><em><a href='B:620 4:14'>2Ti 4:14</a></em>&nbsp;<em>Alexander&nbsp;the coppersmith did me much evil; may the Lord render to him according to his works</em>- The individual was clearly known to both Paul and Timothy, and it seems he was present with Timothy in Ephesus. He is the Alexander who had left the faith in <em><a href='B:610 1:20'>1Ti 1:20</a></em>. It cannot surely be coincidence that <em><a href='B:510 19:33'>Act 19:33</a></em> records that there was a friend of Paul's called Alexander in Ephesus who attempted to defend him when the crowd of silversmiths called for Paul's destruction, angry that the collapse of the Diana cult had put them out of business. We can reconstruct that Alexander as a metalworker likewise depended upon the Diana cult for his livelihood. He initially converted and stood with Paul- but the pull of the Diana cult and the love of wealth and his former status had meant that he had turned against Paul. To regain his credibility in Ephesus, he had started a campaign against the Christians in Ephesus which affected Timothy and also led to Paul's suffering from him even in prison in Rome. This is fairly commonly seen amongst once zealous converts who fall away, and contributes towards the picture of Paul feeling so forsaken at the end.</p>


text:
<p><em><a href='B:620 4:15'>2Ti 4:15</a></em>&nbsp;<em>You also need to be on guard about him, for he greatly withstood our words</em>- The same word in <em><a href='B:620 3:8'>2Ti 3:8</a></em> about the men of corrupt minds within the Ephesian church who resisted the Truth. There the parallel is drawn between them and Jannes and Jambres, the magicians who did false miracles to withstand the teaching of Moses. Perhaps Alexander repeated the false miracles claimed by the Diana cult; and the parallel would put Paul and timid Timothy in the place of Moses, who was seen as someone way above all other human spiritual endeavour. Paul often alludes to Moses as an example who is to be realistically followed, rather than admired as an icon from a distance.</p>


text:
<h4><em><a href='B:620 4:16'>2Ti 4:16</a></em>&nbsp;<em>At my first defence no man stood with me, but all forsook me</em>- Paul was obviously deeply hurt by this. His call for Timothy to join him in Rome was therefore an invitation to persecution; for people didn't stand with Paul for fear of guilt by association and persecution. "All forsook me" obviously recalls the Lord in Gethsemane and Paul continues this allusion further. This is how 'Jesus is with us', in that life situations are clearly designed to be repetitions of what He experienced.</h4><p><em>May it not be held against them</em>- Paul saw that his own tribunal appearance was nothing compared to the appearance we shall all make before the judgment seat of Christ. Things like not standing up for a brother in court will perhaps be raised. But Paul understood that his forgiveness and prayer in this life, regardless of their repentance, could influence the nature of their judgment experience. His forgiveness of them could mean that the issue would not be raised with them then (AV "laid to their charge"). Whilst Paul doesn't speak with absolute certainty "May it not::.", this possibility opens up huge issues for us. It gives eternal weight to our decisions regarding forgiveness, and our need to implore others to forgive us when we have sinned against them.</p>


text:
<p><em><a href='B:620 4:17'>2Ti 4:17</a></em> - see on <em><a href='B:620 2:1'>2Ti 2:1</a></em>; <em><a href='B:620 4:7'>2Ti 4:7</a></em>; <em><a href='B:620 4:13'>2Ti 4:13</a></em>.</p><p><em>But the Lord stood by me and strengthened me-&nbsp;</em>There in the empty witness box, Paul sensed the Lord Jesus standing. The 'strengthening' is that spoken of in the notes on <em><a href='B:620 3:5'>2Ti 3:5</a></em>. It was psychological strengthening, against the pain of being left alone there, against bitterness, against unforgiveness:&nbsp; The Lord had such a wide experience of human life and suffering so that not one of us could ever complain that He does not know in essence what we are going through. This is my simple answer to the question of why, exactly why, did Jesus have to suffer so much and in the ways that He did. Take one example of how His earthly experiences were the basis of how He later administered “grace to help in time of need” for a believer:&nbsp; The Lord’s one time close friend Judas is described as "standing with" those who ultimately crucified Jesus in <em><a href='B:500 18:5'>Joh 18:5</a></em>. Paul says that none of the brethren 'stood with' him when he was on trial, but "the Lord Jesus stood with me". It seems to me that the Lord knew exactly what it felt like to be left alone by your brethren, as happened to Him in Gethsemane and at His trials; and so at Paul's trial He could 'stand with' him, based on His earthly experience of being left to stand alone. In our lives likewise, the Lord acts to help us based on His earthly experiences; He knows how we feel, because He in essence went through it all. John maybe has the image of Judas and Peter standing with the Lord's enemies in mind when he writes that the redeemed shall stand with Jesus on Mount Zion (<em><a href='B:730 14:1'>Rev 14:1</a></em>), facing the hostile world.</p><p><em>That through me the message might be fully proclaimed-&nbsp;</em>Paul's intention of going to Rome in order to make a public witness for the Gospel was therefore fulfilled. His trial was presumably high profile, so that many Gentiles heard the Gospel.</p><p><em>And so all the Gentiles might hear</em>- As he faced death, Paul more intensely modelled his words upon those of Christ (see on :7). And yet despite this, perhaps because of his increasing identification with Christ and sense of Christ's supremacy, Paul's concern was constantly for doctrine; he pounded away, time and again, at the danger of apostasy. As he got older, this was a bigger and bigger theme with him. His last words just before his death are full of this theme, more than any other of his writings. And yet that same letter has more reference (relatively) to the Gospels and to the Lordship of Christ than anything else he wrote. On average, Paul refers to Christ as "the Lord" once every 26 verses in his letters. But in 2 Timothy, he calls Christ "Lord" once every six verses; and in his very last words in 2 Timothy 4, once every 3 verses, nine times more than average His appreciation of the&nbsp;<em>excellency</em>&nbsp;and the supremacy of Christ, of the height of His Lordship, grew and grew. Paul seems to have seen in Christ's prophecy that the Gospel would be fully known world-wide in the last days as being a specific, personal command to him (<em><a href='B:470 24:14'>Mat 24:14</a></em> = <em><a href='B:620 4:17'>2Ti 4:17</a></em>):&nbsp;The Gospel is to be preached; Paul realized this in these his very last words, as even then, he makes one of his last plays on words: “… that through me the proclamation might be fully proclaimed” (<em><a href='B:620 4:17'>2Ti 4:17</a></em> RVmg:). The Gospel, the proclamation of the Kingdom, is to be proclaimed. We cannot possess a proclamation, designed to be proclaimed, without proclaiming it.</p><p><em>And I was delivered out of the mouth of the lion</em>- As a Roman citizen, Paul's death would have been by execution. So he may be expressing gratitude that the form of his death was not going to be so awful as death in the arena. But he may also mean that he was spared the death penalty. But in this case, why does he write with urgency to Timothy as if he is about to die shortly? Perhaps he realized he had a terminal illness? Surely such language would be inappropriate if he had just been acquitted from a death penalty. This is why I take him here to be simply grateful for the form of death which had been decreed for him. We must also factor in the historical records of Paul's execution at the time of Nero's persecution. The reference to salvation from the lion was alluding to the Lord's experience on the cross, as described in <em><a href='B:230 22:13'>Psa 22:13</a></em>; <em><a href='B:230 22:21'>Psa 22:21</a></em>. He felt forsaken by his disciples, just as Christ had been at His arrest and judgment (<em><a href='B:620 4:16'>2Ti 4:16</a></em>). The Lord's deliverance from the lion was through resurrection- and not through temporary release from its power. And it seems Paul understood that. But maybe he was also alluding to Daniel, who was literally saved from the mouth of the lion.</p><p>Whatever, Paul's mind was full of allusions to John the Baptist, Daniel, Moses and above all his Lord. All his years, his hours and minutes, of sustained meditation, of bringing the mind back from its&nbsp;natural wandering, were now paying their glorious reward. The picture of Paul in prison, having reached this spiritual pinnacle, fired the minds and living of "many of the brethren in the Lord" (<em><a href='B:570 1:21'>Phi 1:21</a></em>). And for me too, the old and brave Paul in that cell is the man I fain would be. Nero is reported as having said that the time would come, when men would call their sons Nero and their dogs Paul, as veiled with all the pomp and the power and the pride of this life, he watched Paul led out to his death. And yet that Paul is the man we fain must be; and doubtless he had in his mind words he had penned years before: "::. those I counted loss for Christ. Yea doubtless, and I count all things but loss for the excellency of the knowledge of Christ Jesus my Lord, for whom I have suffered the loss of all things::. and be found in him::. being made conformable unto&nbsp;<em>his</em>&nbsp;death; if by any means I might attain the resurrection of the dead::. forgetting the things which are behind, and reaching forth::. I press toward the mark for the prize" (Philippians 3). This is a far cry from the Paul who just a few years earlier had ‘refused to die’, who wanted to fight for his life (<em><a href='B:510 25:11'>Act 25:11</a></em>). Now he felt ready to be offered, to be poured out as a drink offering upon the lives of his brethren (<em><a href='B:570 2:17'>Phi 2:17</a></em> Gk:); he held nothing back, but&nbsp;<em>gave</em>&nbsp;his life rather than have it forced from him by the inevitable death that must&nbsp; come to all men. What he had once counted gain- and the Greek suggests material, financial gain- he now counted loss. He came to despise the materialism of the world, as did Jacob in his maturity:&nbsp;The power of all this is not just in its relevance to the elderly or terminally ill. We are all old men now, we are all on borrowed time. We believe the Lord's return, the end,&nbsp;<em>the ultimate end,</em>is imminent. If we are living expecting the imminent second coming;&nbsp;<em>are we&nbsp;</em>ready? Have we reached the completeness?</p>


text:
<p><em><a href='B:620 4:18'>2Ti 4:18</a></em>&nbsp;<em>The Lord will deliver me from every evil work&nbsp;and will save me to his heavenly kingdom; to him be the glory for ever and ever. Amen</em>- Paul writes to Timothy as if he is shortly to die. So I don't take this as meaning that he was confident of deliverance from death at the hands of the Romans. Rather is this confidence that despite the "evil work" of his execution, he would be delivered from that through resurrection of the body at the Lord's return. He was using the very words of the Lord's payer, "Deliver us from evil, for Yours is the Kingdom::." (<em><a href='B:470 6:13'>Mat 6:13</a></em>). He understood this as ultimately a prayer for deliverance from death into the Kingdom of God on earth at the Lord's return. Admittedly he has spoken of past deliverance from his persecutions (<em><a href='B:620 3:11'>2Ti 3:11</a></em>), but here he speaks of deliverance as a 'saving me to His heavenly Kingdom', the Kingdom of Heaven to come on earth at the Lord's return. The Greek term for "evil work" however may well not refer to the 'evil work' of his execution. The plural "every evil work" suggests many evil works. And the phrase is consistently used in the NT of sins (<em><a href='B:580 1:21'>Col 1:21</a></em>; <em><a href='B:690 3:12'>1Jn 3:12</a></em>; <em><a href='B:700 1:11'>2Jn 1:11</a></em>; <em><a href='B:710 1:10'>3Jn 1:10</a></em>), specifically those committed by Judaism against Jesus (<em><a href='B:500 3:19'>Joh 3:19</a></em>; <em><a href='B:500 7:7'>Joh 7:7</a></em>). At the end of his life, faced with death, Paul's mind was inevitably on the serious sins he had committed against Jesus under the influence of Judaism. And as he surveys his future, he is confident that he will be delivered from them, and accepted into God's Kingdom. And that is enough for him to face death calmly. And it is with this issue of forgiveness and subsequent salvation in view that he can comment: "to him be the glory for ever and ever. Amen". This language is more appropriate to the triumph of Divine forgiveness and salvation than it is to Paul's being delivered from Roman punishment and released from prison.</p>


text:
<p><em><a href='B:620 4:19'>2Ti 4:19</a></em>&nbsp;<em>Greet Prisca and Aquila&nbsp;and the house of Onesiphorus-&nbsp;</em>His old friends Priscilla and Aquila were now at Ephesus.</p>


text:
<p><em><a href='B:620 4:20'>2Ti 4:20</a></em> - see on <em><a href='B:510 20:25'>Act 20:25</a></em>&nbsp;<em>I know</em>.</p><p><em>Erastus remained at Corinth, but Trophimus I left at Miletus sick</em>- Perhaps this is a lament of loneliness. Instead of coming to Paul, Erastus had remained at Corinth. Hence Paul's urging of&nbsp;<em>Timothy</em>&nbsp;to not be like the rest and find excuses not to come to him.</p>


text:
<p><em><a href='B:620 4:21'>2Ti 4:21</a></em>&nbsp;<em>Try by all means-&nbsp;</em>At the bitter end, the way Paul begs nervous, spiritually and physically weak Timothy to try to get to him before he dies has something pathetic about it: "Do thy diligence to come::. do thy diligence to come", he repeats twice over (<em><a href='B:620 4:9'>2Ti 4:9</a></em>; <em><a href='B:620 4:21'>2Ti 4:21</a></em> AV). The spiritual weakness of Timothy and his need for Paul's encouragement is quite a theme (<em><a href='B:530 16:10'>1Co 16:10</a></em>; <em><a href='B:610 4:12'>1Ti 4:12</a></em>; <em><a href='B:610 4:14'>1Ti 4:14</a></em>; <em><a href='B:620 1:6-8'>2Ti 1:6-8</a></em>; <em><a href='B:620 4:2'>2Ti 4:2</a></em>).</p><p><em>To come before winter-&nbsp;</em>The urgency may be because without the cloak he would have frozen in his cell (:13). But he knows that the time of his departure is near. He knows that travelling to Rome by sea in Winter is dangerous- as he had experienced. So he wished Timothy to come immediately and not miss the shipping season.</p><p><em>Eubulus greets you, and Pudens and Linus and Claudia, and all the brothers</em>- We note his grace in passing on these greetings; because these would have been amongst those who sadly did not stand with Paul in support at his trial (:16).</p>


text:
<p><em><a href='B:620 4:22'>2Ti 4:22</a></em>&nbsp;<em>The Lord be with your spirit. Grace be with you</em>- As noted on <em><a href='B:620 1:14'>2Ti 1:14</a></em> and elsewhere, Paul was very conscious of the work of the Spirit as an internal strengthening within Timothy's spirit. "Grace" or 'gift',&nbsp;<em>charis</em>, refers to the gift of the Spirit; so we see here the way Lord's Spirit intertwines with the human spirit. This is Paul's closing wish to Timothy, because he realized the supreme importance of having the mind or spirit of Christ. We should give it a like importance.</p>


text:
<p>1:1&nbsp;<em>Paul, a servant of God and an apostle of Jesus Christ-&nbsp;</em>Paul several times calls himself "a servant of God". In the light of all his other allusions to Moses, Paul is surely alluding to the frequent descriptions of Moses as God's servant.</p><p><em>For the sake of the faith of God's elect</em>- Paul in Romans understands election as evidence of grace; some are called to 'know the truth', to have faith, and others are not. This immediately removes any pride from any spiritual achievement, be it of faith or understanding.</p><p><em>And their knowledge of the truth-</em>&nbsp;Or 'acknowledging'. There is a tremendous power in the basic doctrines of the One Faith. We come, over time in our spiritual growth, to acknowledge "the Truth" (<em><a href='B:620 2:25'>2Ti 2:25</a></em>), to be led to a Godly way of life by not only&nbsp;<em>knowing</em>&nbsp;the Truth but&nbsp;<em>acknowledging</em>&nbsp;its power (<em><a href='B:630 1:1'>Tit 1:1</a></em>).</p><p><em>The truth which is ultimately all about reverence towards God-&nbsp;</em>The NIV in <em><a href='B:630 1:1'>Tit 1:1</a></em> speaks of “the truth which leads to Godliness". Truth doesn’t save of itself. Thus true understanding&nbsp;<em>is</em>&nbsp;related to true Godly living-&nbsp;<em>if</em>&nbsp;we translate the doctrines into practice. The Passover would only be properly kept, Moses explained, if the meaning of it was understood (<em><a href='B:50 6:20-25'>Deu 6:20-25</a></em>). Again we note that 'the truth' is not a phrase which refers to set of theologies correctly understood. Perhaps this was a misconception even in those days which Paul is correcting, by saying that this phrase is instead ultimately practical and not theoretical.</p>


text:
<p><em><a href='B:630 1:2'>Tit 1:2</a></em>&nbsp;<em>In hope of eternal life</em>- This is to be connected with the fact that God promised this "<em>before</em>&nbsp;times eternal". The mind boggles at the huge significance which our eternity has to God. He had the idea of it before eternity and He intends to give us eternity.</p><p><em>Which God, who cannot lie, promised before times eternal</em>- This is an intentional tautology. There can be no point before infinity. But the contradiction achieves its end- we are blown away by the thought that somehow, in a beginning before eternity, the most precious thing in our hearts was promised. And that is, our eternity, our deepest and most passionate hope, that which we fear losing above everything else::. was in fact secured and promised. How was it promised at that 'point'? The Greek can mean 'to assert to oneself', and this is I think the idea. God asserted within Himself that we would come to eternity. And God cannot lie, not to us nor to Himself. And He has spent infinity preparing this for us, through developing this earth with its unique possibilities for our existence, our personal gene pool, our calling etc. What a wonderful day it will be when finally all this work of infinity comes to term in our immortalization at the Lord's return to earth This is all a rather deep and intellectual way of saying that God passionately wishes to give us that which is our master passion too- acceptance in His Kingdom. Another take on this phrase would be to go with the AV "Before the world began" and to understand the promise of eternal life made in the promises to Abraham as being before the Jewish world began at the Sinai covenant:&nbsp;</p>


text:
<p><em><a href='B:630 1:3'>Tit 1:3</a></em>&nbsp;<em>But in his own time manifested His word in the message-&nbsp;</em>The message / word is simply that God wishes to give us eternal life. We are playing a part in God's eternal purpose; the idea of giving us eternal life began 'before infinity', God asserted this plan within Himself; and He waited all this time to use us to go take that message to people who could accept it and thus come to eternity. This is why any genuine attempt to spread that message has His eternal power and strengthening and enablement behind it. It could also be said that the manifestation of that word of eternal life / salvation was in the person of the Lord Jesus.</p><p><em>The message with which I was entrusted-</em>&nbsp;In a sense God requires not help from man; and yet in another sense He has delegated His work to us, and limits His achievements according to what we are willing to do. C:S. Lewis in&nbsp;<em>The World’s Last Night&nbsp;</em>observes: “He seems to do nothing of Himself which He can possibly delegate to His creatures. He commands us to do slowly and blunderingly what He could do perfectly and in the twinkling of an eye. Creation seems to be delegation through and through. I suppose this is because He is a giver”. As any employer soon learns, delegation is a risk. We have been “entrusted with the Gospel” (<em><a href='B:630 1:3'>Tit 1:3</a></em> RV); and therefore the world God so wants to love, the world God is appealing to, may never see Him; for He makes His appeal through us, as Paul told the Corinthians. The same word is found in <em><a href='B:610 1:11'>1Ti 1:11</a></em> (see notes there). The Gospel has been entrusted to us; in a sense, the progress of God’s work depends upon us. He could save who He wishes as He wishes, but it seems He prefers to work through the mechanism of preachers sharing His word with others. See on <em><a href='B:630 2:11'>Tit 2:11</a></em>.</p><p><em>According to the commandment of God our Saviour-&nbsp;</em>A reference to the great commission? Or to the specific calling given to Paul at this conversion? Recall how Paul does at times begin his letters with an appeal to the fact he has been specifically commissioned as a preacher (<em><a href='B:550 1:1-12'>Gal 1:1-12</a></em>; <em><a href='B:530 1:1'>1Co 1:1</a></em>; <em><a href='B:520 1:1-4'>Rom 1:1-4</a></em>; <em><a href='B:610 1:11'>1Ti 1:11</a></em>; <em><a href='B:620 1:11'>2Ti 1:11</a></em>). He has just written that the message was entrusted to him personally. But this is not to say that we have not also been commissioned to share the same message.</p>


text:
<p><em><a href='B:630 1:4'>Tit 1:4</a></em>&nbsp;<em>To Titus, my true child</em>- There is no evidence that Paul had converted or baptized Titus. But clearly Paul had much influence in his life. Timothy was likewise Paul's son in the faith (<em><a href='B:610 1:2'>1Ti 1:2</a></em>) although it was due to Eunice and Lois that Timothy had come to faith. This shows that our pastoral efforts for others can make them just as much our children in the faith; and these are the family ties which shall last eternally. "My&nbsp;<em>own&nbsp;</em>child" (AV) would suggest that there was some unique influence of Paul upon Titus, just as in natural families.</p><p><em>After a common faith-&nbsp;</em>Whoever is baptized after believing the doctrines of the true Gospel is our brother or sister- regardless of who baptized them, or what name they go under. Titus was Paul's son "after the common (Gk:&nbsp;<em>koinos</em>) faith" (<em><a href='B:630 1:4'>Tit 1:4</a></em> AV). The faith, the doctrines which he had been taught by Paul and been baptized upon believing, were what had made him Paul's son; and therefore that faith was what bound them together in fellowship. The Faith in Jesus, as in the basic doctrines which make baptism valid, are the basis of our commonality, our fellowship, with each other. Perhaps Paul is saying that Titus had become his son due to the Gospel, i:e. he had converted him. But see above.</p><p><em>Grace and peace&nbsp;from God the Father and Christ Jesus our Saviour-&nbsp;</em>AV "Grace, mercy and peace". Peace with God comes from knowing His mercy in forgiving us, and that is because of His grace. Paul wished that Titus would feel this; there was real meaning in this otherwise standard greeting.</p>


text:
<h4><em><a href='B:630 1:5'>Tit 1:5</a></em>&nbsp;<em>The reason I left you in Crete was so you would</em>- The letters to Timothy begin with Paul saying he has left Timothy in Ephesus for the same reasons. The letter to Titus can be seen as a kind of template upon which those to Timothy are written; for there are many similarities of wording. The fact Paul speaks with such authority regarding matters in Crete suggests he had been instrumental in starting the work there. For he is careful not to get involved in any pastoral work which was the responsibility of others, and he did not build upon others' foundations (<em><a href='B:540 10:16'>2Co 10:16</a></em>; <em><a href='B:520 15:20'>Rom 15:20</a></em>). His mission and vision was to begin the Lord's work afresh in each place- no bad policy for any true missionary. But when was Paul in Crete? The only time mentioned is during his journey to Rome, when they stayed for a short time near Lasea (<em><a href='B:510 27:7-9'>Act 27:7-9</a></em>), but because it was such a small place and not much fun to spend the Winter in, the sailors wished to sail further along Crete towards the larger port of Phenice (<em><a href='B:510 27:12'>Act 27:12</a></em>). It was whilst trying to sail there that they got blown right off course and ended up on Malta. It would seem that during the stay near Lasea at the inlet known as Fair Havens, Paul preached in Crete. It would have been no more than a village. And from that work there arose churches throughout Crete, for Titus was to "appoint elders in every city". They were pushing towards Rome, and so they surely would not have spent long at Fair Havens. And yet there is a strange turn of phrase about their stay there in <em><a href='B:510 27:9'>Act 27:9</a></em>: "Now when much time was spent::.". The modern versions seek to avoid the difficulty by suggesting that much time had been spent on the journey overall; but the Greek really suggests that they had spent "much time" at Fair Havens. They hadn't, really. But it was a significant amount of time from God's viewpoint, because as a result of this witness, several churches developed. And the witness began in a remote village, a mere anchorage rather than a harbour, near Cape Leonda, from where they had to walk five miles to the nearest shops in Lasea, itself little more than a village by modern standards. And from that remote spot the Gospel spread throughout the island. This to me has the hallmark of the divine:&nbsp;</h4><p><em>Set in order</em>- Used by medical writers of setting broken limbs or straightening crooked ones. The reference is to the body of Christ.</p><p><em>The things that were lacking-&nbsp;</em>Literally, the things lacking in time to fix up. This was just the right word to use considering how brief was Paul's time in Crete. No wonder he wanted Titus to remain there and establish the new churches. Although we note that Paul wrote the letter from Macedonia, according to the endnote attached to the letter. This would be reason to think that Paul was released from the house confinement with which the Acts record ends, and from Rome went to Macedonia; and then returned to prison in Rome by the time of 2 Timothy 4, when he is clearly awaiting his death in Rome.</p><p><em>And appoint elders in every city-&nbsp;</em>"Every city" suggests the Gospel had spread throughout the island; although the 'cities' were no more than villages or towns by modern European standards. Paul's approach to pastoral work was that it needed elders; the congregations were not left to just take it in turns to teach and run their meetings. This was not because they had the miraculous gifts of the Spirit and we in this age do not. It was simply that a system of eldership has always been God's way of structuring the life of His people, and there is no reason to think it is not to this day.</p><p><em>As I instructed you-&nbsp;</em>The implication could be, as with Timothy in Ephesus, that Titus had not initially done what Paul had asked him.</p>


text:
<p><em><a href='B:630 1:6'>Tit 1:6</a></em> - see on <em><a href='B:550 6:4'>Gal 6:4</a></em>.</p><p><em>If anyone is blameless, the husband of one wife-&nbsp;</em>This could mean 'not polygamous', or could refer to not being a womanizer. He was to be a man of one woman.</p><p><em>Having children that believe-&nbsp;</em>The converts on Crete had not long been baptized. The idea may be that it was quite acceptable for "children" to also convert; the elders should be heads of households who had accepted the faith. This was the more necessary because there is no archaeological evidence for dedicated Christian meeting places in the first century; the churches met in homes. The reference to "whole houses" (:11) would be to house churches.</p><p><em>Who are not accused of riot or unruly</em>- But a related word is used about the behaviour of God’s son, the prodigal (<em><a href='B:490 15:13'>Luk 15:13</a></em>). The implication would therefore be that these brethren had done all they reasonably could so that the child wouldn’t turn out like this.</p>


text:
<p><em><a href='B:630 1:7'>Tit 1:7</a></em>&nbsp;<em>For the bishop, as God's steward</em>- Literally, a household manager. This is saying that the elder must have demonstrated ability to manage his own family well; family life is the training ground for work in God's family. The same is true today; an elder cannot really be a person who has clearly failed in family life because of their own faults.</p><p><em>Must be blameless-&nbsp;</em>This is the language of priesthood. There are many allusions to the language of priesthood in the New Testament, both as major statements and also in passing, as here.</p><p><em>Not arrogant or quick-tempered or a drunkard</em>&nbsp;<em>or violent or greedy for gain-&nbsp;</em>Clearly there were such people within the church membership, who formed the potential group from which Titus was to choose elders. He is told not to choose these types. We get the impression of a church completely open to all manner of sinners, including violent alcoholics; but the leadership was not open. A church open to sinners- all sinners- but led by Godly leadership is the ideal we should be working towards in our times. For we can hardly say that some sinners but not others are allowed.</p>


text:
<p><em><a href='B:630 1:8'>Tit 1:8</a></em> - see on <em><a href='B:520 12:13'>Rom 12:13</a></em>.</p><p><em>But given to hospitality, a lover of good, self controlled, just, holy, disciplined-&nbsp;</em>Literally, a lover of&nbsp;<em>xenos</em>, the very opposite to a xenophobe. This was a significant characteristic for a Christian to have, when most people were extremely insular and parochial, feeling negatively towards all from outside their immediate experience or geography. The same basic mentality is in us all, but in Christ we are not to be like that but the opposite, as recipients of the Lord's outgoing love toward us.</p>


text:
<p><em><a href='B:630 1:9'>Tit 1:9</a></em>&nbsp;<em>Holding to the faithful word which is according to the doctrine-&nbsp;</em>"Holding" is elsewhere used about holding on to the Lord Jesus (<em><a href='B:470 6:24'>Mat 6:24</a></em>; <em><a href='B:490 16:13'>Luk 16:13</a></em>), so the&nbsp;<em>logos&nbsp;</em>of faith could refer to the Lord Jesus, who is the substance of "the teaching / doctrine". The use of&nbsp;<em>didache&nbsp;</em>prompts the thought that there was perhaps a body of teaching which was used in missionary work, and the appointed elders would be teachers who were faithful to that. The early Christian document known as the&nbsp;<em>Didache</em>&nbsp;may possibly be in view, but probably the body of teaching has intentionally not been preserved for us.</p><p><em><a href='B:470 6:24'>Mat 6:24</a></em> = <em><a href='B:630 1:9'>Tit 1:9</a></em>. Holding to God as your master rather than mammon is achieved through holding on to His word. Paul spoke of&nbsp;<em>holding fast&nbsp;</em>the faithful word (<em><a href='B:630 1:9'>Tit 1:9</a></em>) with allusion to&nbsp;<em>holding to&nbsp;</em>our Master (<em><a href='B:470 6:24'>Mat 6:24</a></em>). But- and this is an important caveat- don't deceive yourself that time spent in expounding Scripture is&nbsp;<em>necessarily</em>&nbsp;Bible study as&nbsp;<em>God</em>&nbsp;wants it- although it may make an impressive impact on a group of assembled Christians. True Bible study and understanding was what lead the Lord to the death of the cross. To&nbsp;<em>truly</em>&nbsp;love God with all our heart and understanding, not just for the intellectual fascination of it, is more than a burnt sacrifice.</p><p><em>That he may be able to minister comfort using the sound doctrine-&nbsp;</em>Sound or faithful teaching is to be used as a "comfort" and not as an end in itself. The Bible is not a puzzle to be solved, with those who successfully make their way through some intellectual jungle of interpretation being rewarded at the end of it, for their mental tenacity and good fortune in meeting up with good teachers. God is not passive, He more actively seeks human salvation and the useful triumph of His Son's work in human lives.</p><p><em>And also refute those who oppose it</em>- "Refute" means to convict, and the word is often used with the hope of eliciting repentance and reformation. We have the picture of the new churches under pressure from those teaching non-Christian ideas; but Paul doesn't say they should be driven out of the congregation. Rather his concern is with not allowing them to teach their ideas, and to convict them in the hope of their repentance. If individuals holding false ideas are to be excluded from the church, then we surely would expect to read about it here in the pastoral letters. But we never do. The concern always is with maintaining true teaching from the podium, as it were. Defenders of a closed table may respond that this is an argument from silence; but the silence is repeated, noticeable and deafening.</p>


text:
<p><em><a href='B:630 1:10'>Tit 1:10</a></em>&nbsp;<em>For there are many unruly men, vain talkers and deceivers</em>- The idea is of men who were not subordinate to anything or anyone. Paul seeks to inculcate a structure in these new churches, of subordination to authorized elders, and to the&nbsp;<em>didache</em>&nbsp;or body of teaching which had been the foundation of the churches.</p><p><em>Especially they of the circumcision</em>- Titus himself was a Gentile (<em><a href='B:550 2:3'>Gal 2:3</a></em>) and the early converts in Crete were likely Gentiles. But there was a conscious campaign of destabilization of the early churches by the Jews. The same pattern is seen throughout Paul's arguments to Timothy about the situation in Ephesus. Gentile converts were being destabilized by Jewish teachers who were getting access to the platform; just as happened in the Galatian churches. The burden of the pastoral letters is to eliminate false teaching and replace it with sound teaching. Exclusion from the breaking of bread is never once mentioned as a tool to be used to this end.</p>


text:
<p><em><a href='B:630 1:11'>Tit 1:11</a></em>&nbsp;<em>Whose mouths must be stopped</em>- They must be excluded from the teaching structure; there is no mention of driving them out of the church or limiting their access to the Lord's table.</p><p><em>Men who overthrow whole houses</em>- The churches of Crete as elsewhere in the first century were comprised of house groups, which were vulnerable to subversion by individual teachers.</p><p><em>Teaching things which they should not, all for money's sake</em>- What exactly was the connection between their teaching and money? Were they demanding payment for their teaching services? That sounds unlikely to have been successful. Perhaps they were pedalling a version of the prosperity gospel. Or perhaps they were playing on the fact that Judaism was a registered religion within the Roman empire, and religious Jews were free from army service and paying some taxes. To affiliate with the synagogue was attractive; and we note that the false teachers were Jewish (:10,14). See on :15&nbsp;<em>To the pure</em>.</p><p>The early corruption of Christianity was due to false teachers who like Balaam "loved the wages of unrighteousness" (<em><a href='B:680 2:15'>2Pe 2:15</a></em>); they taught false doctrine for the sake of money (<em><a href='B:630 1:11'>Tit 1:11</a></em>). Time and again the NT warns against elders who would be motivated by the love of money rather than the Lord Jesus and His people (<em><a href='B:610 3:3'>1Ti 3:3</a></em>; <em><a href='B:610 3:8'>1Ti 3:8</a></em>; <em><a href='B:630 1:7'>Tit 1:7</a></em>; <em><a href='B:670 5:2'>1Pe 5:2</a></em>). The Greek translated "filthy lucre" in the AV is hard to understand; it doesn't just mean 'money'. It suggests profit that is somehow filthy, morally disgusting. This is what money turns into, in God's eyes, when men so love it.</p>


text:
<p><em><a href='B:630 1:12'>Tit 1:12</a></em> - see on <em><a href='B:500 1:46'>Joh 1:46</a></em>.</p><p><em>One of their prophets said-</em>&nbsp;It is often claimed that what follows is a quotation from the Cretan teacher Epimenides. He is not called a false prophet, although he was. God is not so keen to as it were cover His own back, footnoting all the time to the effect that 'this is not true'. Hence the usage of the language of demons in the Gospels when such things do not exist. But Epimenides was born around BC 660- many centuries before. The "their" in view clearly connects with the preceding context, which is about&nbsp;<em>Jewish</em>&nbsp;false teachers, who may well have repeated what Epimenides was supposed to have said many centuries ago.</p><p><em>Cretans are always liars, evil beasts, idle gluttons-</em>&nbsp;To lie like a Cretan was a well-known saying in the first century. The laid back island lifestyle would have made Crete an unlikely area for the Gospel. But as noted on :5, the Gospel spread there like wildfire. So we have a picture similar to what we find today- secular people were eager to respond to the Gospel, tired of the empty life of flesh pleasing, but on conversion still carried with them the baggage of that previous culture.</p><p>The Cretans were typical port dwellers, making a living from entertaining passing sailors and their passengers, disposed to laziness from the good life, easy money and pleasant climate. Their idleness had led them to obsession with vanity in listening to vain arguments about words and turning to Judaism (:10). We see in parts of the church today an obsessive over-interpretation of Scripture, sectarianism, neo Judaism- and partly this is likewise a result of not harnessing the good life as it should be, to the Lord’s service. See on <em><a href='B:600 3:11'>2Th 3:11</a></em>. It’s noteworthy that division over ‘doctrine’ and demands to exclude others who fail to agree on some complex matter of theology nearly always come from the prosperous churches of the West, and not from the poor unto whom the Gospel is preached and willingly accepted.</p>


text:
<p><em><a href='B:630 1:13'>Tit 1:13</a></em>&nbsp;<em>This testimony is true</em>- But not every Cretan was like that. Yet Paul doesn't worry to cover his back, he accepts that this is the general spirit on the island, and it had affected the believers- and they needed to be rebuked for it. We can deduce from this that many of the converts were local Cretan Gentiles. At first blush it may seem strange that such people, still very secular and worldly in their outlook, could be attracted to Judaism and Jewish fables (:14). But this is the huge attraction of legalism; it enables a fleshly mind and lifestyle to be respectably maintained under the guise of deep religiosity.</p><p><em>For which cause reprove them sharply, that they may be sound in the faith</em>- Soundness in the faith doesn't refer to purity of correct doctrinal understanding. Rather does it refer to the practical issues of not lying, not indulging the flesh in gluttony etc.</p>


text:
<p><em><a href='B:630 1:14'>Tit 1:14</a></em>&nbsp;<em>Not giving heed to Jewish fables-&nbsp;</em>To the false doctrines of Judaism which were being pedalled&nbsp;<em>within the ecclesia</em>. Yet the spirit of our day generally is to be more and more tolerant of doctrinal deviants, rather than 'giving heed', 'watching' against them. There is a telling play on words here. The Greek for "giving heed" is normally used concerned taking heed, being ware, of false teachers (<em><a href='B:470 7:15'>Mat 7:15</a></em>; <em><a href='B:470 16:6'>Mat 16:6</a></em>; <em><a href='B:510 20:28'>Act 20:28</a></em>; <em><a href='B:610 1:4'>1Ti 1:4</a></em>; <em><a href='B:630 1:14'>Tit 1:14</a></em>). Paul's implication is: 'Instead of giving heed to the&nbsp;<em>danger</em>&nbsp;of these people within the ecclesia, you gave heed to them in the sense of listening to them'.</p><p><em>And the commandments of mere men who aim to turn away others from the truth-&nbsp;</em>This is further evidence that there was a consciously organized Jewish plot to infiltrate the early ecclesias and break down the faith of the Gentile Christians. Despite this, never once does Paul advocate dealing with the problem by closing the doors of the church or fencing off the Lord's table. Instead his method is repeatedly to ensure that the teaching ministry is sound. If access to the Lord's table is indeed based on qualification, we would for sure have expected Paul to talk about this in these pastoral letters, and in addressing the problem of known infiltration of the church. Note that it was Jewish fables which were being used to turn believers away from the truth- which is in Jesus. Not everything Jewish must be automatically accepted and glorified by Christians- there is a tendency that way in some quarters. It was Jewish fables and ideas which actually led to Gentile Christians in Crete losing their faith.</p>


text:
<p><em><a href='B:630 1:15'>Tit 1:15</a></em> - see on <em><a href='B:490 11:41'>Luk 11:41</a></em>.</p><p><em>To the pure, all things are pure-&nbsp;</em>The reference is surely to the Jewish food laws. The parallel in Timothy would be the comment that all food is to be accepted now (<em><a href='B:610 4:4-5'>1Ti 4:4-5</a></em>), which in turn alludes to the statement to Peter that all foods are to be seen as pure (<em><a href='B:510 10:15'>Act 10:15</a></em>). All foods have been declared clean in Christ (<em><a href='B:480 7:19'>Mar 7:19</a></em>). Indeed, food is not of itself morally pure or impure (<em><a href='B:520 14:20'>Rom 14:20</a></em>). Paul's argument is that things are not of themselves impure- in contrast to the Judaizing arguments referenced in the preceding verse. What makes the usage of those things pure or impure is the attitude of heart which we bring to them. The legalists had tried to bring every issue of human life to the point of being pure or impure. It was a matter of atoning for one’s endless impurities by ritual- rather than a heart matter. Seeing Crete was an island, this was only possible by paying for sacrifices to be made at the Jerusalem temple. This may explain the strong financial element to the false teaching noted on :11.</p><p><em>But to the defiled and unbelieving, nothing is pure; both their minds and their consciences are defiled-&nbsp;</em>This element were within the church, but effectively unbelieving in Christ. Everything was potentially impure- because the Judaists thought that their laws covered every possibly part of human experience. It may seem strange, at first blush, that the easy going, morally lax islanders of Crete would be attracted by this kind of thinking. But actually, this kind of purchased legalism is very attractive to worldly Christians with a niggling conscience. They can buy in to the whole idea of a superior spirituality and understanding, and as it were purchase legal righteousness which makes no demand upon their heart or private behaviour. And the niggling conscience is apparently appeased, to the point that it is actually "defiled" and ceases therefore to function.</p>


text:
<p><em><a href='B:630 1:16'>Tit 1:16</a></em>&nbsp;<em>They profess that they know God-&nbsp;</em>There are so many parallels with the letters to Timothy. The equivalent of this is the reference to those who have "a form of Godliness" but deny its power (see on <em><a href='B:620 3:5'>2Ti 3:5</a></em>). The 'profession' of knowing God may refer to some confession of faith, perhaps of a standard "form of Godliness", made at baptism.</p><p><em><a href='B:630 1:16'>Tit 1:16</a></em> AVmg. speaks of those who “profess that they know God” but are “void of judgment”<em>:&nbsp;</em>The same word is used in <em><a href='B:520 1:32'>Rom 1:32</a></em> about those who know the judgment of God; they know it will come. But they have a mind “void of an awareness of judgment” (<em><a href='B:520 1:28'>Rom 1:28</a></em> AVmg:). We can know, know it all. But live with a mind and heart void of it:&nbsp; We can know Him, but have no real personal sense of judgment to come. These are sobering thoughts. There is a theoretical knowledge of God, and the knowing of God in ongoing fruitful relationship. Thus those who do not understand will ultimately be condemned by God (<em><a href='B:730 1:16-18'>Rev 1:16-18</a></em> cp. <em><a href='B:730 14:10'>Rev 14:10</a></em>).</p><p><em>But by their works they deny him</em>- The same word is used in <em><a href='B:620 3:5'>2Ti 3:5</a></em>; some had "a form of Godliness"&nbsp;<em>denied</em>&nbsp;the power thereof. The power of that form of Godliness issued in good works. But the legalism of these Gentile law-keepers was such that they disallowed themselves from doing good works, and their legalistic obedience actually made them "<em>dis</em>obedient".</p><p><em>They are detestable, disobedient</em>- See above. Paul the carefully obedient Pharisee, spotless as to legal righteousness, described himself at that time as being amongst the disobedient (<em><a href='B:630 3:3'>Tit 3:3</a></em>). The essential law is not about acts of commission; it is a heart issue, obedience to the spirit of Christ.</p><h4><em>Unfit for any good work</em>- Just as everything was impure to them (:15), so their mentality resulted in an inability to do anything good. Because the good works the Lord seeks are those which are done from a motive of gratitude for His total grace. "Unfit" translates a Greek word commonly used for 'rejection'. It's as if the Lord seeks people to do His good works in this world; but he rejects these types. Their apparent emphasis on works rather than faith left them unable to perform good works. For the heart motive is all important, and legalistic obedience stops this.</h4>


text:
<p><em><a href='B:630 2:1'>Tit 2:1</a></em>&nbsp;<em>But you</em>- Despite the presence of other, false, teachers, Titus was to focus on teaching which promoted spiritual health or 'soundness'.</p><p><em>Must teach what accords with sound doctrine-&nbsp;</em>His teaching was to accord with sound teaching; presumably referring to the basic teachings which comprised the Gospel message. The argument suggests that “sound doctrine” is a body of material against which subsequent teaching can be compared:Being unsound in the Faith is another way of saying that in works a man is denying Christ; to be "sound in the faith" is to tell the truth and not be lazy nor gluttonous (<em><a href='B:630 1:13'>Tit 1:13</a></em>; <em><a href='B:630 1:16'>Tit 1:16</a></em>). Good behaviour "adorns the doctrine of God", i:e. the basic doctrines of the Gospel (<em><a href='B:630 2:10'>Tit 2:10</a></em>); the practical commandments of <em><a href='B:630 2:2-10'>Tit 2:2-10</a></em> are "the things which befit the sound doctrine" (<em><a href='B:630 2:1'>Tit 2:1</a></em> RV) which Titus was to teach. It's almost as if Paul is telling Titus to bring out the practical implications of the doctrines which he was teaching. “Doctrine" refers to a code of behaviour, not just a set of correct propositions concerning God and His plan with men. Thus we don't read about "<em>pure</em>&nbsp;doctrine" anywhere in the AV; but rather "<em>sound</em>&nbsp;doctrine": living, active doctrine. The things which become sound doctrine are soberness, etc. (<em><a href='B:630 2:1-4'>Tit 2:1-4</a></em>).</p>


text:
<p><em><a href='B:630 2:2'>Tit 2:2</a></em>&nbsp;<em>That older men-&nbsp;</em>This may refer to old in age, or to elders. The way the commands proceed to younger men (:6) may suggest it is older people who are in view.</p><p><em>Be sober-minded, dignified</em>- This and other characteristics which Paul is appealing for were not inculcated by obedience to Jewish food laws and rituals which form the context of these exhortations (<em><a href='B:630 1:15'>Tit 1:15</a></em>). A number of these characteristics are mentioned in :12 as being inculcated instead by living under grace. Realizing that we are saved in spite of ourselves actually provokes in us a desire to be spiritual in response to that grace. For we cannot be passive to knowing that by grace, I shall indeed live eternally.</p><p><em>Self-controlled, sound in faith, in love, in patience</em>- This appeal is made to old men elders?, old women and young men (:5,6). It was obviously a very needed exhortation in the context. And yet the ecclesias in Crete were prone to be attracted by hard core Judaism, according to our notes on chapter 1. This is proof for all time that legalistic obedience and keeping Jewish food laws (see on <em><a href='B:630 1:15'>Tit 1:15</a></em>) is not the same as self-control. Indeed it would seem that by attempting legalistic obedience, these Gentile converts were justifying a lack of self-control in their lives in other areas. <em><a href='B:580 2:23'>Col 2:23</a></em> makes precisely the same point- that obedience to Jewish rituals is of "no value" in the battle against self-gratification. By contrast, living under grace is what teaches us to overcome the flesh (:12).</p>


text:
<p><em><a href='B:630 2:3'>Tit 2:3</a></em>&nbsp;<em>That older women likewise be&nbsp;reverent in demeanour-&nbsp;</em>Vincent: 'as those who are engaged in sacred service'- an allusion to priestly service. The idea is that the rank and file also live out the spirit of priesthood. The Greek means 'on sacred duties'. This could mean that these older women were elders in some kind of spiritual office in the church. But the allusion may be to priesthood, which was the domain of males under the old covenant. But now the entire church were to see themselves as a "holy priesthood", including older women, who were otherwise excluded from religious duties in most religions including Judaism. True Christianity opens up opportunities for service to those whom society would generally consider as unqualified to serve or be useful. Elderly women were particularly in that category in the first century, and there are many such groups within societies today. But the Lord has use for everyone because He has given each convert unique talents and callings to service- and not just to the visible leadership of a church.</p><p><em>Not slanderers-&nbsp;</em>The same word usually translated "devil". This is proof enough that the word&nbsp;<em>diabolos</em>&nbsp;simply means a slanderer and does not necessarily refer to any cosmic being. But the 'devil' is often used as a personification for the Jewish opposition to the Christian movement in the first century. These women had perhaps been influenced by Jewish thinking, just as in <em><a href='B:610 4:7'>1Ti 4:7</a></em> we noted that the older sisters in Ephesus were teaching Jewish fables.</p><p><em>Nor enslaved to much wine-</em>&nbsp;The incidence of alcoholism amongst elderly females is not something which receives much attention today, and we can be sure that this was a radical area to address in first century Crete. The older women were liable to just be overlooked in society and in any pastoral program. But Paul sets a great example in showing that each and every believer, in whatever situation they are in, must be valued and cared for. And he puts the finger on a weakness which many would've just shrugged off as irrelevant to the main thrust of church life and just a personal matter. But if they were teachers, it was not right that they were also alcoholics.</p><p><em>Teachers of that which is good</em>- These women had a teaching ministry- something unheard of in most contemporary religions. This is one reason for thinking that the 'older women' and 'older men' here could refer to elders rather than necessarily those older in age. We see here the immense value of the human person. In an age when old women were considered irrelevant to the functioning of any religious group, Christianity had a unique place for them. They are not criticized for teaching; as we saw in commenting upon 1 Timothy, the female teachers are rebuked for the content of their teaching rather than the fact they were teaching at all. The pastoral letters repeatedly focus upon the need for correct teaching, rather than suggesting that troublesome individuals be excluded from the church or the breaking of bread. The lack of such commands is significant. It is a silence that is deafening. These churches were threatened by serious false teaching and immorality; but Paul's inspired answer is to control the platform, the teaching ministry, rather than throwing people right out of the church or the symbols of the Lord's patient, saving love.<br/>&nbsp;</p>


text:
<p><em><a href='B:630 2:4'>Tit 2:4</a></em>&nbsp;<em>So that they may train the young women</em>- This could suggest that there was a specific women's ministry intended, after the pattern of Miriam teaching the women of Israel.</p><p><em>To love their husbands, to love their children-&nbsp;</em>In an age of arranged marriage rather than love marriage, this was a required exhortation. And it shows that 'love' as God intends is an act of the will. It is not something which comes and then can leave. It can be practiced in response to a command like this. The 'love' they were to show them was not, therefore, the natural love of a women towards her children; but the conscious act of Christian love. They were living in an age, as we are, where people were "without natural affection" (<em><a href='B:520 1:31'>Rom 1:31</a></em>; <em><a href='B:620 3:3'>2Ti 3:3</a></em>). There was to be a resurrection of love, and a break with the spirit of the age in regard to feelings and family commitment. It could be that there was a specific reference here to not practicing abortion or infanticide, which were common.</p>


text:
<p><em><a href='B:630 2:5'>Tit 2:5</a></em>&nbsp;<em>To be self-controlled, pure, working at home</em>- The Greek in all these verbs suggests a moral, sexual tendency towards immorality which was to be guarded against. Again we note that the attraction of legalistic Judaism had not influenced them for good. Rather were they perhaps feeling justified in immorality because of a few acts of legal obedience.</p><p><em>Kind and submissive to their own husbands</em>- This is written in the context of church life where both husband and wife were believers. For wives in <em><a href='B:560 5:22'>Eph 5:22</a></em> and <em><a href='B:580 3:18'>Col 3:18</a></em> were to submit themselves to their own husbands as unto the Lord Jesus. The context of Titus is that there were many false teachers around, demanding submission to them. But the women were to not submit themselves to them, but to their husbands who were hopefully leading the family in sound teaching. Likewise believing slaves were to be submissive to their believing masters, who also were intended to be teaching them rightly (:9). The force of "their&nbsp;<em>own</em>" suggests to me that there were competing claims for submission; and the context is of false teachers seeking submission to themselves. This I suggest is the first context for the 'submission' which is in view here and in :9.</p><p><em>That the preaching of the word of God may not be mocked</em>- The pastoral letters continually reflect a concern that there was a watching world outside the churches, eager to slander and mock the Christian movement. And no reason must be given for this to be legitimate. He assumes that all believing men and women would be preachers of the word, yet if the wives were disorderly in their behaviour they would bring mockery upon the message preached. See on <em><a href='B:610 6:1'>1Ti 6:1</a></em>.</p>


text:
<p><em><a href='B:630 2:6'>Tit 2:6</a></em>&nbsp;<em>The younger men likewise exhort to be self-controlled</em>- See on <em><a href='B:630 2:2'>Tit 2:2</a></em>&nbsp;<em>self-controlled</em>. But the Greek is literally 'sober minded', and the "likewise::." suggests this may be a continuation of the criticism of the older women for being alcoholics (:3). The soberness in any case is a required characteristic of all believers because of the immense gravity of the issues with which we constantly deal with- eternal life and eternal death, living in the shadow of the Lord's crucifixion death for us. These things can only issue in a sober, serious mindset.</p>


text:
<p><em><a href='B:630 2:7'>Tit 2:7</a></em>&nbsp;<em>In all things show yourself as an example of good works-&nbsp;</em>This suggests a conscious self exhibition, of the kind Paul makes in <em><a href='B:610 1:13-15'>1Ti 1:13-15</a></em>. This is not posing or posturing; it is a realistic acceptance of the fact that actions speak louder than words. In a largely illiterate congregation, the real teaching of the Christian life was by example, and not by appeal to words on scrolls or ancient manuscripts which were inaccessible to the majority.</p><p><em>In your teaching show integrity-&nbsp;</em>Lack of integrity in teaching is found in telling people what we perceive they want to hear, rather than what they need to hear from God.</p><p><em>Dignity</em>- The spirit of first century Crete was what we have today- a love of entertainment, light hearted joking and enjoyment. This is not to feature in teaching. We are dealing with ultimately serious issues, of eternity. And if we have grasped them, our teaching will likewise be with an appropriate dignity and soberness. The continual appeals for soberness NEV "self-control" were obviously needed in Crete and they are in our age no less.</p>


text:
<p><em><a href='B:630 2:8'>Tit 2:8</a></em>&nbsp;<em>Sound speech that cannot be condemned; so that an opponent may be put to shame, having nothing evil to say about us-&nbsp;</em>Again we have the impression of the Christian churches being surrounded by critics, who had infiltrated them, and who were ever seeking to slander the Christian movement. The context requires that there were within the churches such 'opponents', eagerly grabbing hold of the words and behaviour of Christian leaders in order to speak evil of the Way of God in Christ. We recall how the Jewish opposition "spake evil of the Way" in <em><a href='B:510 19:9'>Act 19:9</a></em>. The opposition were going to do this no matter how careful Titus was. Therefore the "put to shame" may refer to how they would ultimately be silenced at the day of judgment, where it will supremely be manifest that the true Christian "cannot be condemned". Speaking of the sudden destruction of the wicked at the future judgment, David reflected: "So they shall make their own tongues to fall upon themselves" (<em><a href='B:230 64:8'>Psa 64:8</a></em>). Unsound speech will be condemned, or perhaps will lead to our condemnation.</p>


text:
<p><em><a href='B:630 2:9'>Tit 2:9</a></em>&nbsp;<em>Encourage servants to be submissive to their masters</em>- See on :5&nbsp;<em>submissive</em>. The implication would be that their masters were also believers; see on :9.</p><p><em>And to be pleasing to them in all things</em>- The other 8 occurrences of the Greek word are all about being well pleasing to the Lord. This confirms my suggestion that the masters were believers "in Christ", and they were to view their masters as the Lord; all service done to them was done to Christ. This was an incredibly liberating concept for those locked into slavery, just as it is to those locked in to the slavery of working on minimum wage or other forms of modern slavery.</p><p><em>Not argumentative-&nbsp;</em>The slave owned nothing, not even his or her own body. There was a chronic search for meaning and self value, a desire to preserve identity, define boundaries and keep self-respect, and secret ownership over at least some things, however small. These needs reflected themselves&nbsp;in arguing back with masters over requests made, and in petty theft of objects (:10). All these psychological needs were met in Christ, and according to contemporary references to Christianity, it was very popular amongst the slave population for precisely these reasons. The Lord likewise knows exactly our needs, emotionally and psychologically. And if we will accept it, there is the ultimate answer in Christ.</p>


text:
<p><em><a href='B:630 2:10'>Tit 2:10</a></em>&nbsp;<em>Not petty thieves</em>- See on :9&nbsp;<em>Not argumentative.</em>&nbsp;The believers who were in slavery were told no to 'purloin', not to steal little bits of property and money in the hope that one day they would save enough to buy their freedom. And yet we in our century with our mortgages and pension schemes are in just the same desperate, petty, small minded position</p><p><em>But showing integrity in everything; that they in all things may make&nbsp;attractive the doctrine of God our Saviour-&nbsp;</em>The psychological breakout from the awful mental trap of slavery::. this was a huge advertisement for the teaching of the Gospel, and of the practical success of God's plan of salvation in Christ.</p>


text:
<p><em><a href='B:630 2:11'>Tit 2:11</a></em>&nbsp;<em>For the grace of God has appeared, bringing salvation to all men-&nbsp;</em>“The grace of God… bringing salvation to all men…” is an allusion to the great commission to&nbsp;<em>preach</em>&nbsp;salvation to all men. But here, grace is said to do this. The conclusion seems unavoidable: grace and the preacher are inextricably linked. The experience of grace is the essential motive behind all witness, and the witness itself is about God's saving grace. That salvation is by grace enables us to look forward with eagerness rather than uncertainty to the second coming, and our lives are thereby changed. "The grace of God… teaches us that, denying ungodliness and worldly lusts… looking for that blessed hope, and the glorious appearing of the great God and our saviour Jesus Christ" (<em><a href='B:630 2:11-13'>Tit 2:11-13</a></em>). The word 'appearing' refers both to the appearing of grace now, and the appearing of the Lord at the second coming (:13). The ultimate outworking of grace will be at the Lord's return, when we shall be raised from the dead and this mortal shall put on immortality.</p><p>The Greek for “all men” suggests that God’s grace that brings salvation to all has appeared; but we have to take that salvation to others and they must respond to it. We therefore can conclude that potentially all men could be saved, but they will not be because the preachers haven’t taken the message of God’s grace to them and they haven’t all responded to it. See on <em><a href='B:630 1:3'>Tit 1:3</a></em>. In the context, Paul has just addressed various categories- old men, old women, elderly female alcoholic Christians, young men and slaves. God's grace has appeared to "all men" in the sense of all kinds of people; and His desire to save teaches all people, of whatever type and station, the transformation of their lives which is appropriate in their situation.</p>


text:
<p><em><a href='B:630 2:12'>Tit 2:12</a></em>&nbsp;<em>It trains us</em>- "Teachingus". Just as God’s grace is likened to a king in Romans, reigning over us, here it is likened to a teacher. From the time of our spiritual birth at baptism, we are trained up by grace. The contrast is with how Paul was trained up from a child in the things of the Law (<em><a href='B:510 22:3'>Act 22:3</a></em>); Titus was up against converts who were prone to influence by legalistic Judaism, as noted on chapter 1. If we grasp the wonder of salvation by grace, that we are saved by status, counted as righteous right now, we can’t be passive to it; we have to respond by living a spiritual life. Knowing we are saved by grace can alone enable us to look forward eagerly to Christ’s return (:13). The initial aim of the letter is to guide Titus as to how to teach and who to appoint as teachers. But he is reminded that the most powerful teacher is the experience of grace. The Gentile converts on Crete were tempted by Judaistic legal obedience; but as noted on chapter 1, this wasn't achieving spiritual characteristics in them. It is grace which teaches them.</p><p><em>To renounce ungodliness and worldly&nbsp;passions-&nbsp;</em>"Worldly" is only used elsewhere about the Jewish world (<em><a href='B:650 9:1'>Heb 9:1</a></em>). The lusts or passions of the Jewish world were those provoked by living under law, believing that obedience to commandment and avoidance of sin is the way to salvation. Paul's autobiographical section in Romans 7 describes this in his own experience; obsession with law bred lust and sinful desire. Living under grace is the way to 'deny' those lusts; believing that we are saved by grace, already in the status of 'saved', totally independent of our obedience or disobedience. Our response to that will be so powerful that we reject or overcome the passions of the flesh.</p><p><em>And to live self-controlled, upright, and Godly lives in this present age</em>- These are all internal, mental characteristics brought forth by God’s “grace”, or gift. That gift is the work of the Holy Spirit within our spirit.</p>


text:
<p><em><a href='B:630 2:13'>Tit 2:13</a></em>&nbsp;<em>As we look for the blessed hope-&nbsp;</em>Grace and faith in the forgiveness of sins teaches us to look for the blessed hope and the appearing of Jesus. The Greek&nbsp;<em>elpis&nbsp;</em>doesn’t mean a 'hope for the best' kind of hope but rather refers to a solid certainty. If we aren't sure of salvation at His return, we can hardly look forward to it. A firm grasp of salvation- definite salvation- by a real grace alone means we can look to that day with confidence and expectation. See on <em><a href='B:580 1:5'>Col 1:5</a></em>. The 'blessed' hope is literally 'the happy hope'; and we "look for" this, or as the Greek suggests, we admit it, we accept it. God's grace therefore gives us the joy of certain salvation and joyful anticipation of the return of the Lord Jesus. The good news of the Gospel really is of joy and peace and security. But too often the only real message seems to be 'Learn to read the Bible effectively, understood a package of true doctrines, then you will be responsible to judgment, and hopefully, you may be accepted for eternity'. This is a non-Gospel. It is hardly good news, which brings joy and peace along with it.</p><p><em>The manifesting&nbsp;of the glory of the great God, and of our Saviour Jesus Christ</em>- The same Greek word used in :11 for 'the appearing' of God's grace. The point is that when grace appeared in our lives, we were assured of salvation at the Lord's return- in the sense that we should be able to say that if the Lord comes now, or we die now, then we shall surely be saved. If God’s glory is to be eternally revealed, we are to live that same glory within our own minds now; in this sense we “have eternal life”, the kind of life we shall eternally live begins now.</p>


text:
<p><em><a href='B:630 2:14'>Tit 2:14</a></em>&nbsp;<em>Who gave himself for us-&nbsp;</em>The phrase 'to give self for' is used several times in the NT; it doesn't necessarily have to refer to the crucifixion, although that is surely largely in view.</p><h4><em>That he might redeem us from all iniquity-&nbsp;</em>"Redeem" or 'ransom' suggests that we are bought out of slavery to our master- "iniquity". As Romans 6 puts it, we are no longer slaves of sin once we accept the Lord's death in baptism. We are totally forgiven of all sin once "in Christ"; by grace and not by our works.</h4><p><em>And purify to himself a people for his own possession-&nbsp;</em>There is another aspect attaching to the fact that the Lord obtained our freedom from our sins. Because we are forgiven, not because of our works of repentance but simply by grace are placed in a status of 'saved', we cannot be passive. We respond to this by allowing ourselves to be 'purified' by His Spirit, and zealously responding in good works. This purification, whereby He possesses / dwells within us, is by the Spirit. The argument is so similar to that in Romans. "Purify" translates a Greek word often used about ritual, legal purification. The reference is to the fact that Jewish false teachers had been pressurizing these Gentile converts with their various theories of purification (<em><a href='B:630 1:15'>Tit 1:15</a></em>). The Lord is now at work to purify&nbsp;<em>us</em>, rather than us having to perform rituals to purify ourselves. We are to respond to His actions by purifying ourselves from all filthiness of the flesh and spirit (<em><a href='B:540 7:1'>2Co 7:1</a></em>). But the Biblical emphasis is upon&nbsp;<em>His</em>cleansing / purifying action, which we respond to. The gift of the Spirit is described as God purifying our hearts in response to our having believed the Gospel (<em><a href='B:510 15:9'>Act 15:9</a></em>). The Holy Spirit is a holy mind / disposition, a working within us, rather than any external ability to perform miracles. The sacrifice of Christ means that our conscience, our mind, is "purged from dead works to serve the living God" (<em><a href='B:650 9:14'>Heb 9:14</a></em>). Believing we are totally redeemed from sin means that we wish to respond in good works of service. And we are empowered to do so by the conscience being purified. The language of <em><a href='B:650 9:14'>Heb 9:14</a></em> is very similar to what we have here in Titus. There are many parallels between Titus and the letters to Timothy; in them we read of the pure / purified heart and conscience of the believer (<em><a href='B:610 1:5'>1Ti 1:5</a></em>; <em><a href='B:610 3:9'>1Ti 3:9</a></em>; <em><a href='B:620 1:3'>2Ti 1:3</a></em>; <em><a href='B:620 2:22'>2Ti 2:22</a></em>). This purifying of the heart is a reference to the Lord's work through His spirit, in the hearts of all those who have accepted His redemption of them by grace. All this is in pointed contrast to the way the Jewish false teachers in Crete were offering sinful Gentiles a conscience about sin which was defiled rather than purified (<em><a href='B:630 1:15-16'>Tit 1:15-16</a></em>).</p><p><em>Zealous of good works-&nbsp;</em>As noted above, these good works arise from believing that we have been redeemed from sin by grace and not works. The wonder of that is so great that we can no way be passive to it.</p>


text:
<p><em><a href='B:630 2:15'>Tit 2:15</a></em>&nbsp;<em>These things speak and exhort and reprove with all authority-&nbsp;</em>The authority was the Spirit-guided word of Paul in the letter to Titus. The "things" refer to the wonderful message of salvation by grace, and transformation in response to it. These things were what should be taught from the platform, and not Judaistic legalism. And they were to be a comfort to the hearers the idea of 'exhort'.</p><p><em>Let no one despise your teaching-&nbsp;</em>See on <em><a href='B:610 4:12'>1Ti 4:12</a></em>&nbsp;<em>Let no man despise your youth</em>. People did despise the teaching; but we allow others to despise us. It is our choice whether we allow them to despise us. The Judaists would have mocked the message of salvation from sin by grace; they were arguing for purification by ritualistic obedience rather than by the Lord's work in our hearts by the Spirit. But Titus was to be unashamed of the message.</p>


text:
<p><em><a href='B:630 3:1'>Tit 3:1</a></em>&nbsp;<em>Put them in mind to be in subjection to rulers, to authorities- to be obedient, to be eagerly ready to do every good work-&nbsp;</em>These terms could refer to authority figures within the church i:e. elders. But they more naturally refer to local magistrates etc. The picture presented of the Cretan congregations is very negative. There were problems with alcoholism, slander, aggression, laziness, in trouble with the law and not obeying court judgments. They were keen to obey Mosaic Law, but not the civil law around them. They needed to be exhorted not to be "disobedient, deceived, serving various lusts and pleasures, living in malice and envy, hateful, hating one another" (:3). And yet never is there any talk about restricting the breaking of bread to these folks or casting them out of the church. Rather the focus is on having the right teaching mechanisms to try to improve these folks.</p>


text:
<p><em><a href='B:630 3:2'>Tit 3:2</a></em>&nbsp;<em>To speak evil of no one, not to be contentious, but to be gentle, showing all meekness toward all men-&nbsp;</em>One theme of Titus is that God’s amazing grace and the certainty of salvation should be perceived so strongly by us that we will not argue about words and have strife with others (:9,10; <em><a href='B:630 2:12'>Tit 2:12</a></em>). Those who trigger divisions amongst brethren over strife about words and meanings are reflecting their own insecurity concerning their personal salvation by grace alone. The Greek is literally 'not quarrelling', using the same word as we will meet in <em><a href='B:630 3:9'>Tit 3:9</a></em> for "quarrels about the law". As observed on chapter 1, the Cretan converts were generally worldly and still very influenced by alcohol and the laid back, lazy life. But they were tempted to get involved with endless strivings about Jewish legal interpretation::. And that makes psychological sense. They thought their uncommitted Christian life could be made right by a few acts of legalistic obedience, and getting involved in argument about abstract matters of interpretation. And the same has been seen so often in conservative Protestant circles.</p><p>Titus was to teach the Cretan brethren that because they had been washed and regenerated in baptism, therefore they were not to speak evil of others, because it was&nbsp;<em>in the past</em>&nbsp;that they used to be like that (<em><a href='B:630 3:2-6'>Tit 3:2-6</a></em>). But they still&nbsp;<em>were</em>&nbsp;acting like that, even after baptism They are called upon to remember the implications of their baptism, and live out the status they thus attained before God.</p>


text:
<p><em><a href='B:630 3:3'>Tit 3:3</a></em>&nbsp;<em>For we also once were foolish, disobedient, deceived, serving various lusts and pleasures, living in malice and envy, hateful, hating one another</em>- Paul says that this catena of poor behaviour was&nbsp;<em>him</em>&nbsp;before his conversion. Yet he was legally obedient to the Law. But it didn't elicit a spiritual person within him. So he holds up his own conversion as an example to those on Crete who were tempted to turn to the Law as a means of spirituality. Legalistic obedience just would not elicit spirituality, and Paul was the parade example of that. He wished them all to follow his pattern (:4), just as he wrote to Timothy of his being a Christ-appointed model of conversion (<em><a href='B:610 1:13-15'>1Ti 1:13-15</a></em>).</p>


text:
<p><em><a href='B:630 3:4'>Tit 3:4</a></em>&nbsp;<em>But when there appeared the kindness of God our Saviour and His love toward man</em>- See on :3&nbsp;<em>For we also::.</em>&nbsp;. Paul refers to the Lord's appearance to him on the Damascus road, and sees this as programmatic for each believer.</p>


text:
<p><em><a href='B:630 3:5'>Tit 3:5</a></em>&nbsp;<em>Not by works done in righteousness, which we did ourselves, but according to His mercy He saved us-&nbsp;</em>This is a warning against the tendency towards Judaism in the Cretan congregations which we noted in chapter 1. The idea was that by doing works, there was a chance of future salvation. Paul's point is that we have been saved, we are in the 'saved' status, in that every believer should be able to say that if the Lord returns now, or we die now, then by grace we shall surely be saved. Hence the significance of the past tense: "He saved us". God forgives men on the basis of their&nbsp;<em>faith</em>&nbsp;in the blood of Christ, and association with it by baptism; "<em>not</em>&nbsp;by works of righteousness, which we have done" (<em><a href='B:630 3:4-8'>Tit 3:4-8</a></em>). God's basis of salvation is&nbsp;<em>not</em>&nbsp;works. We must be careful not to insist on 'forsaking' sins in physical terms to the extent that we too preach justification by works. Just one sin deserves death. No amount of forsaking that sin can change that sentence. God's way of escape is for us to be in Christ, so that He looks upon us&nbsp;<em>as if</em>&nbsp;we are Christ, imputing Christ's perfect character to us. Therefore forsaking sin is not in itself the basis of salvation; rather is it faith in Christ. Of course, true faith shows itself in works. But none of us has the degree of faith which we ought to have, and therefore none of us does the amount or type of works which we should. To insist that someone shows their faith by specific works, e:g. certain changes in their marital status, is to insist that there is a direct, definable relationship between faith and the precise type of works which that faith leads to. Yet we are not so strict with ourselves. The faith and works of each of us are far from complete. Exactly because we are not saved by works but by God’s mercy,&nbsp;<em>therefore</em>&nbsp;Paul wished to “affirm constantly, that they which have believed in God might be careful to maintain good works” (<em><a href='B:630 3:5'>Tit 3:5</a></em>; <em><a href='B:630 3:8'>Tit 3:8</a></em>). In this sense, as Paul says in Romans, grace reigns as a King. It has power over every department of human life and thinking.</p><p>The grace of God guarantees our salvation. Yet we find it so hard to believe- that I, with all my doubts and fears, will really be there. Israel were warned that they were being given the land (cp. salvation) "not for thy righteousness, or for the uprightness of thy heart::. for thou art a stiffnecked people" (<em><a href='B:50 9:5-6'>Deu 9:5-6</a></em>). These words are picked up in <em><a href='B:630 3:5'>Tit 3:5</a></em> and applied to the new Israel: "Not by works of righteousness which we have done, but according to his mercy he saved us, by the washing (baptism) of regeneration, and renewing of the Holy Spirit"- by His grace alone:&nbsp;<br/>The spiritual life renews (<em><a href='B:630 3:5'>Tit 3:5</a></em>), giving us that new<em>ness&nbsp;</em>of life, that ongoing baptism and resurrection experience, which <em><a href='B:520 6:4'>Rom 6:4</a></em> promises. This way of life, as it develops, creates its own momentum for further change.</p><p><em>Through the washing of regeneration and renewing of the Holy Spirit-&nbsp;</em>"Washing" is literally 'the laver', suggesting that through baptism we come closer into the sanctuary to offer sacrifice. It is a clear reference to how baptism saves us; not, as Peter says, by the simple ritual in itself, but because it unleashes within us the regenerating power of the Holy Spirit. When Paul says that after baptism, we walk in "newness of life", he has the same thought in view (<em><a href='B:520 6:4'>Rom 6:4</a></em>). But here Paul explains the mechanism of how that works. The making new, the regeneration, is through the Holy Spirit. The only other usage of "renewing" is in <em><a href='B:520 12:2'>Rom 12:2</a></em>, where we read of our being "transformed by the renewing of your mind". The idea is that this renewing is being done to us; it is not an appeal to renew our own minds by our own steel willed efforts, but rather to allow the renewing process to operate. Our own steel will isn’t enough to renew our minds; we are to allow the process enabled at baptism, the laver of regeneration, to have its work in us. This renewing is an ongoing, daily process (<em><a href='B:540 4:16'>2Co 4:16</a></em>); the renewing is unto the knowledge of the image of Christ (<em><a href='B:580 3:10'>Col 3:10</a></em> Gk:). The purpose is to actually create the mind of Christ in us, to make us after His image; for this is what we are counted as being, and Christ through the work of the Spirit within our spirit / mind is seeking to make us like Him in reality. Romans 8 expounds this in more detail. The “regeneration”, or re-birthing, spoken of here has obvious connection with <em><a href='B:500 3:3-5'>Joh 3:3-5</a></em>, which speaks of water baptism giving rise to a spiritual rebirth; and here Paul is filling out the details. This renewing by the Spirit comes about “through Jesus Christ” (:6), perhaps meaning ‘on account of our baptism into Jesus Christ’.</p><p>Baptism is a washing away of sins (cf. <em><a href='B:510 22:16'>Act 22:16</a></em>). The descriptions of the believers as being washed from their sins in the blood of Christ therefore refers to their doing this by means of baptism (<em><a href='B:730 1:5'>Rev 1:5</a></em>; <em><a href='B:730 7:14'>Rev 7:14</a></em>; <em><a href='B:630 3:5'>Tit 3:5</a></em> NIV speak of this as “the washing of rebirth”, referring to our being “born of water” at baptism <em><a href='B:500 3:5'>Joh 3:5</a></em>). "According to his mercy he saved us, by the washing of regeneration, and renewing of the Holy Spirit" (<em><a href='B:630 3:5'>Tit 3:5</a></em>) connects with Christ washing the church with the water of the word (<em><a href='B:560 5:26'>Eph 5:26</a></em>). Baptism is therefore done by Him, in a sense; His washing of us then speaks of His ongoing psychological renewal of us afterwards.</p>


text:
<p><em><a href='B:630 3:6'>Tit 3:6</a></em>&nbsp;<em>Which He poured out upon us richly, through Jesus Christ our Saviour</em>- This term is used for the shedding of the Lord's blood (<em><a href='B:470 26:28'>Mat 26:28</a></em> etc:) as well as for the outpouring of the Spirit. The Spirit was given as a result of the Lord's death (<em><a href='B:500 7:39'>Joh 7:39</a></em>; symbolized by the Lord's breathing His last breath in the direction of His people, and water gushing from His smitten side). It's not only that His sacrifice enabled our salvation, and that salvation in practical terms involves our transformation by the Spirit in this life. He there on the cross is to be the inspiration for a truly spiritual, Spirit filled life. The Spirit was poured out on Pentecost (<em><a href='B:510 2:17-18'>Act 2:17-18</a></em>; <em><a href='B:510 2:33'>Act 2:33</a></em>); but that gift was the purifying of our hearts (<em><a href='B:510 15:9'>Act 15:9</a></em>; see on <em><a href='B:630 2:14'>Tit 2:14</a></em>). The Holy Spirit gift results in the love of God being shed into our hearts / minds (<em><a href='B:520 5:5'>Rom 5:5</a></em>). We must pause to consider how the converts on Crete were a rough lot, and apparently were still the same. Paul is saying that the Spirit has been poured out richly into their minds. Why then were they not transformed? Because the Spirit does not force spirituality; we are enabled to be spiritual, we have now this huge potential for transformation. And here we are all being urged to make far fuller use of it.</p>


text:
<p><em><a href='B:630 3:7'>Tit 3:7</a></em>&nbsp;<em>This was so that being justified by His grace, we might be made heirs according to the hope of eternal life</em>- The gift of the transforming Spirit was so that we might receive eternal life. Our salvation involves change now; that is why when the Lord's death enabled our salvation, the Spirit was given and made available for all who would believe. So being&nbsp;<em>made</em>&nbsp;heirs speaks of the Spirit&nbsp;<em>making</em>&nbsp;us appropriate to be heirs- by grace, for of our own strength we shall never conform our minds and lives as is appropriate. We are "made heirs" by baptism into the Lord Jesus, the seed of Abraham who is the singular "heir"; but the whole process doesn't end there. We are "made heirs", made in practice who we are by status, by the ongoing operation of the Spirit after our baptisms. Hence the NT emphasis that it is baptism which results in the gift of the Spirit.</p>


text:
<p><em><a href='B:630 3:8'>Tit 3:8</a></em>&nbsp;<em>This teaching is trustworthy</em>- AV “A faithful saying”, one of the collection of "faithful sayings" Paul often refers to, which perhaps formed a corpus of pastoral material for the illiterate church to commit to memory, and meditate upon.</p><p><em>And I want you to insist on these things</em>- The teaching about the Spirit in the preceding verses is not just a nice theological extra. This is utterly fundamental to Christian life in practice; the 'insistence' was because of the desire to justify themselves by legalistic obedience to Jewish laws. We too must insist on the ministry of the Spirit and acceptance thereof. This is not just a nice idea, to be casually meddled with on the level of exposition or interpretation. This is the essence of Spiritual life and is the path towards our salvation. No wonder it was part of a "faithful saying" to be firmly committed to memory and meditated upon.</p><p><em>So that those who have believed in God may be careful to devote themselves to good works</em>- The whole message of salvation by grace and not works is what actually provokes good works in practice; in thankful response to the salvation&nbsp;<em>without</em>&nbsp;works which we have received. The wonder of it is such that none who believe it can be passive to it. Paul told Titus to affirm the faithful sayings “confidently,&nbsp;<em>to the end</em>&nbsp;that they which have believed… may maintain good works” (<em><a href='B:630 3:8'>Tit 3:8</a></em> RV). The congregations’ spirituality was related to the confidence of their pastor’s presentation. Those “good works”, as ours, have been “afore prepared” in the Father’s plan for us to perform (<em><a href='B:560 2:10'>Eph 2:10</a></em>); but we have to be inspired to live up to the potential which He has prepared for us. <em><a href='B:40 14:20'>Num 14:20</a></em> records how the Father forgave Israel according to Moses’ word. And in just as real a sense, He has placed the reconciliation of this world in the hands of our ministry. The belief that we will be saved is the only real anchor in life’s uncertain storm. “When the kindness of God our saviour, and his love toward man, appeared, not by works done in righteousness which we did ourselves, but according to his mercy he saved us… that, being justified by his grace, we might be made heirs according to the hope of eternal life… and concerning these things I will that thou affirm confidently, to the end that they which have believed God may be careful to maintain good works” (<em><a href='B:630 3:4-8'>Tit 3:4-8</a></em>). The confident, regular reassurance of other believers was to be part of the ecclesial diet with which the Cretan brethren and sisters were constantly fed. And this assurance was to be the foundation of ecclesial growth as members individually developed the mind of Christ.</p><p><em>These things are excellent and profitable for people</em>- The key issue in teaching is being helpful to others; and not simply talking about what we want to talk about.</p>


text:
<p><em><a href='B:630 3:9'>Tit 3:9</a></em>&nbsp;<em>But avoid foolish controversies, genealogies, dissensions and quarrels about the law</em>- The controversies and genealogies were therefore related to Jewish arguments. Compared to the wonder of transformation by the Spirit spoken of in the preceding verses, arguments about interpretation are to be seen as distractions which are to be avoided. The 'avoiding' in practice meant not allowing this kind of thing to be taught in the early churches.</p><p><em>For they are unprofitable and worthless</em>- Compared to the teaching about the Spirit, leading to good works; which are "profitable" and "excellent" (:8).</p>


text:
<p><em><a href='B:630 3:10'>Tit 3:10</a></em>&nbsp;<em>A divisive person, after a first and second warning, reject</em>- The context is of divisions caused by teaching about the Jewish law, and any provocation of argument about interpretation which distracted from the path of Spirituality outlined in :5-7. The rejection was not from the church but from the pool of teachers. A teacher was not to provoke endless questions, doubts and arguments about interpretation; but to positively inculcate spirituality and following of the Spirit.</p>


text:
<p><em><a href='B:630 3:11'>Tit 3:11</a></em>&nbsp;<em>Knowing that such a one is perverted and sins</em>- "Perverted" is better "subverted"; taken over and used as an agent of the Jewish program of infiltrating and subverting the early churches, by distracting them from the essence of Christianity by arguments about interpretations of Jewish law.</p><p><em>Being self-condemned-&nbsp;</em>If we examine / judge / condemn ourselves now in our self-examination, God will not have to do this to us at the day of judgment. If we cast away our own bodies now, the Lord will not need to cast us away in rejection (<em><a href='B:470 5:30'>Mat 5:30</a></em>). There is a powerful logic here. If we pronounce ourselves uncondemned, we condemn ourselves (<em><a href='B:630 3:11'>Tit 3:11</a></em>); if we condemn ourselves now, we will be uncondemned ultimately. See on <em><a href='B:530 11:29'>1Co 11:29</a></em>.</p>


text:
<p><em><a href='B:630 3:12'>Tit 3:12</a></em>&nbsp;<em>When I shall send Artemas to you, or Tychicus, give diligence to come to me at Nicopolis, for there I have decided to winter</em>- Paul wanted the personal presence of Titus, but he was sending others to replace him in Crete during his absence. And when the replacements arrived, then Titus was to leave. We recall Paul's later begging for Timothy to personally come to him. Paul needed his brethren, very deeply. He was no self-motivated maverick.</p>


text:
<p><em><a href='B:630 3:13'>Tit 3:13</a></em>&nbsp;<em>Do your best to speed Zenas the lawyer and Apollos on their way; see that they lack nothing</em>- A Jewish lawyer who had converted to Christ? Perhaps such a person was needed to address the Judaistic influence on Crete. But maybe he was indeed a secular lawyer who had been converted.</p>


text:
<h4><em><a href='B:630 3:14'>Tit 3:14</a></em>&nbsp;<em>Let our people learn to devote themselves to good works, to help those in urgent need, and not to be unfruitful-&nbsp;</em>The call for good works is frequent here and in the letters to Timothy; but the works, as explained, were to flow from the experience of grace, and not as acts of isolated obedience which it was hoped might give a better chance of salvation.</h4>


text:
<p><em><a href='B:630 3:15'>Tit 3:15</a></em>&nbsp;<em>All that are with me greet you.</em>&nbsp;<em>Greet those that love us in the faith. Grace be with you all</em>- There was a difference between those who loved Paul, and the "all". Yet for all of them, including those who didn't accept Paul's authority, he wished the experience of God's gift / grace of the Spirit. If some do not accept us personally, we are still to follow Paul's example and treat them as brethren and wish them God's grace.</p>


text:
<p><em><a href='B:640 1:1'>Phm 1:1</a></em>&nbsp;<em>&nbsp;Paul, a prisoner of Christ</em>- Paul clearly resented his imprisonment, but he sees his captors as representing Christ; just as he asks slaves to consider their masters as Christ and live 'as unto Him' through secular experience. And Paul was no hypocrite; he saw his imprisonment as being served as unto Christ.</p><p><em>And Timothy our brother</em>- So Timothy was with Paul in Rome, possibly in prison with him. At the end of 2 Timothy, Paul begs Timothy to come to him, apparently before he dies. It could be argued that Paul was in fact released; for perhaps Timothy came to him, and now he writes to Philemon as if he expects to shortly be released and would come and visit him and settle any financial loss incurred by Onesimus (:19,22). Yet Paul does write in 2 Timothy 4 as if is at the end of his life, and the situation in prison has radically changed from the period at the end of Acts when he lived in his own rented accommodation within the prison. So perhaps during that period, Timothy came to him; and then on the second imprisonment, he asked for Timothy to come again to Rome and be with him. Seeing Paul had left Timothy with the difficult charge of running the rather wild church at Ephesus, this is itself a picture of how Paul took much encouragement from Timothy, a brother far weaker than himself. And this sets us an important principle.</p><p><em>To Philemon our beloved and fellow-worker&nbsp;-&nbsp;</em>Paul shows an increasing fondness for the&nbsp;<em>syn</em>&nbsp;prefix in his letters, if we arrange them chronologically. He came to perceive, in his spiritual maturity, the need for our brethren, even if we disagree with them and have to rebuke their weaknesses.</p>


text:
<p><em><a href='B:640 1:2'>Phm 1:2</a></em>&nbsp;<em>And to Apphia our sister, and to Archippus our fellow-soldier, and to the church in your house</em>- Why mention these two? Probably Apphia was Philemon's wife and Archippus his son. Or maybe they were elders in the house church which Philemon ran. "Fellow soldier" might reflect how Paul, writing surrounded by soldiers guarding him, considered&nbsp;<em>himself</em>&nbsp;to be the soldier of Jesus.</p>


text:
<p><em><a href='B:640 1:3'>Phm 1:3</a></em>&nbsp;<em>Grace to you and peace&nbsp;from God our Father and the Lord Jesus Christ-&nbsp;</em>This was no mere formal greeting. Onesimus had run away from Philemon for a reason; and Onesimus feared that Philemon would show him no grace on his return. These greetings and conclusions of Paul in his letters were a real prayerful wish for grace and peace to be theirs. He wanted Philemon to know God's grace, and to have the peace which came from it. Fretting about the evil of his runaway slave and the financial loss caused (:18,19) was not the way of peace.</p>


text:
<p><em><a href='B:640 1:4'>Phm 1:4</a></em>&nbsp;<em>I thank my God always, making&nbsp;mention of you always in my prayers</em>- This is clearly alluding to the <em><a href='B:290 62:6-7'>Isa 62:6-7</a></em> passage, about always making mention of Jerusalem in prayer. But for Paul, the true city of God was now the scattered group of Christian believers around the Roman empire of the first century. Jewish minds would’ve picked up Paul’s purposeful allusion to the ‘always’ prayers for Jerusalem; and would’ve marvelled that he saw the great holy city as now the bunch of guys whom he’d baptized around the place, and that instead of a city, it was those very real men and women who filled his thoughts, prayers and yearnings. Paul saw himself indeed as the watchman upon Zion’s walls- but watching over the people of God, not a physical city.</p>


text:
<p><em><a href='B:640 1:5'>Phm 1:5</a></em>&nbsp;<em>Hearing of the love and faith which you have toward the Lord Jesus and toward all the saints-&nbsp;</em>Because Philemon believes the Lord Jesus, he must believe what His brethren say. And so it is with us. In some parts of our community there is constant doubt of our brethren and suspicions as to their motives and words; and yet this, as with&nbsp;<em>all</em>&nbsp;attitudes we adopt to our brethren, is the mind we are showing toward the Lord Jesus Himself. &nbsp;See on <em><a href='B:500 8:42'>Joh 8:42</a></em>. Paul would have heard about all this faith and love towards all believers from Onesimus. But Onesimus feared that in his case, Philemon would not show him much love. And presumably there was a reason why Onesimus ran away from Philemon- probably connected with abuse of him. This is a lovely picture, of a man recognizing that another brother who treats him badly does in fact have many good points, and treats others differently to how the brother treats him. And Paul thanked God for the good points in Philemon, even though he considered him deficient in grace (see on :3). Dealing with believers who lack grace is a real challenge; and Paul's positive approach to Philemon, thanking God for his good points, is a great example to us.</p>


text:
<p><em><a href='B:640 1:6'>Phm 1:6</a></em>&nbsp;<em>I pray that our fellowshipping of your faith may result in our coming to acknowledge every good thing which is in you in Christ-&nbsp;</em>The crucial importance of personal, Christ-like example empowering our witness is brought out here in the AV: “The communication sharing of thy faith may become effectual Gk. ‘energized’ by the acknowledgment i:e. recognition, by others of every good thing which is in you in Christ”. There’s a lot compacted into these words, strung together as they are in a rather awkward sentence. Our sharing of the faith is energized, it takes on power and compulsion as a witness, when others can acknowledge that we are “in Christ” because they see His characteristics reflected in us. This is why effective witness can only be made by those “in Christ”, those who show His personality written in theirs. This will ‘energize’ their sharing of the facts of the Gospel with others. As I have pointed out at such length in&nbsp;<em>The Power Of Basics</em>, each doctrine of the Gospel is designed to elicit practical changes in human life. Where those changes are apparent, the preaching of a doctrinal Gospel becomes empowered and energized. Proffering mere doctrinal propositions to this world and nothing else, will never be successful. It will lack power, energy and the compulsion required for conversion.</p><p>What was good in Philemon was counted to him because he was "in Christ". We must perceive that others too are counted as righteous because they are in Christ, and we will likewise seek to count them as having imputed righteousness even as we feel and know God has so counted us. For frankly, Philemon was lacking in grace, and the good things about him are being almost exaggerated- because he is being seen as "in Christ". The power to share our faith "fellowshipping of your faith" is rooted in realizing that we have been counted righteous through our being in Christ. As God reckons us righteous, so we must reckon each other (<em><a href='B:520 3:28'>Rom 3:28</a></em>; <em><a href='B:520 4:3'>Rom 4:3</a></em>; <em><a href='B:520 4:5'>Rom 4:5</a></em>; <em><a href='B:520 4:24'>Rom 4:24</a></em> RV). This is an immense challenge, but it comes directly from the doctrine of imputed righteousness. Our being justified / counted righteous by God's grace is the very basis and essence of our salvation. And yet, as ever, we can't be passive to this wonder. We too are to seek to count others as righteous, seeing them for who they are as 'in Christ'. Every time we are sinned against, or perceive the weakness and spiritual incompletion in our brother or sister who is in Christ::. we have a wonderful opportunity to count them as righteous, in the same way as we are counted righteous through being in Christ. The Hebrew word<em>&nbsp;tsadaq</em>, to count righteous, to justify, is used about our justification of others in <em><a href='B:340 12:3'>Dan 12:3</a></em> - those who count many as righteous will shine as the stars for ever AV "turn many to righteousness" rather misleadingly gives the idea of converting others by preaching, but that's not the idea of the Hebrew.</p>


text:
<p><em><a href='B:640 1:7'>Phm 1:7</a></em>&nbsp;<em>Already I had much joy and comfort in your love-&nbsp;</em>Paul gives an excellent pattern to us in how he dealt with Philemon, whom, it would appear, had not treated neither Paul nor Onesimus in a Christ-like way. Paul genuinely rejoices in the good deeds of Philemon in other contexts: “We have great joy… in thy love, because the bowels of the saints are refreshed by thee, brother”. But he goes on to ask Philemon to do this to him: “Brother, let me have joy of you… refresh my heart” (<em><a href='B:640 1:7'>Phm 1:7</a></em>; <em><a href='B:640 1:20'>Phm 1:20</a></em>). The two verses are clearly linked to each other- the words “joy”, “brother”, “refresh”, “bowels” etc. recur. Paul appears to be saying: ‘I fully recognize, brother, that you’ve done many good things, given other brethren joy, refreshed their hearts. But, you’ve not done that to your slave, brother Onesimus, neither to me. But I acknowledge the good, Christ-like things in you that I see, in other contexts (:6). But please, expand that love to include me; please, treat me in the same good way you’ve treated other brethren; treat me too as a brother in Christ’. Now this sets a wonderful example to us. To acknowledge some good things even in our bitterest enemy in the ecclesia. Because they are in Christ. To realize that how they are treating us is not actually how they treat all brethren. And to plead with them as does Paul, “for love’s sake”, to treat us in the graceful way they treat their other brethren.</p><p><em>Because the hearts of the saints have been refreshed through you</em>- See on :20&nbsp;<em>Refresh my heart.</em></p>


text:
<p><em><a href='B:640 1:8'>Phm 1:8</a></em>&nbsp;<em>Thus although I have all boldness in Christ to command you to do what is required</em>- Because Philemon was "in Christ" he had to act as Christ; he actually&nbsp;<em>had to</em>&nbsp;receive his slave back as a brother and not punish him as many slave owners would. This was a command, an imperative arising from being "in Christ". Paul could be bold about this- without doubt, Philemon should accept Onesimus back. Paul likewise opens his heart to the Corinthians, when he asks them if they want him to come to them with a rod, or with the spirit of meekness (<em><a href='B:530 4:21'>1Co 4:21</a></em>). Paul is remarkably open hearted in his letters. He shares openly his internal questioning- whether to take a tough line, or to beg and implore in gentleness. Both would have been legitimate. And the "rod" or 'I command you, Philemon' would have been the approach he as a former legalist would have been more comfortable with. But he had now learned of Christ::. to be different, and to take the gentler and more sensitive path.</p>


text:
<p><em><a href='B:640 1:9'>Phm 1:9</a></em>&nbsp;<em>Yet I prefer to appeal to you for love's sake-</em>&nbsp;<em>I, Paul, an old man and now a prisoner also for Christ Jesus</em>- It could be argued that this is a human way of appeal, and Paul would have been better sticking to spiritual principle rather than emotional appeal. But he says that he does at times put things "in human terms" (<em><a href='B:520 6:19'>Rom 6:19</a></em>; <em><a href='B:550 3:15'>Gal 3:15</a></em>); he shows a remarkable humanity and sensitivity to the human situations of the folks and situations he addresses.</p>


text:
<p><em><a href='B:640 1:10'>Phm 1:10</a></em>&nbsp;<em>I appeal to you for my child Onesimus-&nbsp;</em>The fact that the Lord intercedes for us means that we should be open to others interceding with&nbsp;<em>us</em>&nbsp;on behalf of another. Paul explains what I mean. In one of his countless allusions to the Gospels, he speaks of how he ‘beseeches’ or 'appeals' Philemon to be generous and gracious to his runaway slave Onesimus. Paul uses the word&nbsp;<em>parakleo</em>- well known for its repeated use in the Gospels to describe how the Lord Jesus is our&nbsp;<em>parakletos</em>, our comforter, interceder, beseecher of the Father for us. Surely he means us to get the connection. As the Lord Jesus beseeches / intercedes the Father for us, Philemon included, so we, and Philemon, should be open to others beseeching&nbsp;<em>us</em>- and respond with a like grace and lavish response. And there’s another allusion to the Gospels in the very next verse of the letter to Philemon.</p><p><em>Whose father I became in my imprisonment-&nbsp;</em>Paul had presumably converted or baptized Onesimus in prison. And yet he uses the same language of 'my child' regarding Timothy, whom he did not baptize, but spiritually influenced to a formative extent. Perhaps Onesimus had been baptized and was a brother in Philemon's house church. But he had run away and ended up either in Rome, or in prison there. And Paul's outreach even in chains had reached this runaway slave, just as it reached the Praetorian guard (<em><a href='B:570 1:13'>Phi 1:13</a></em>). Those who feel shut in and unable to do much preaching can take great encouragement from how Paul managed to witness.</p>


text:
<p><em><a href='B:640 1:11'>Phm 1:11</a></em> - see on <em><a href='B:580 1:6'>Col 1:6</a></em>.</p><p><em>He was once unprofitable to you-&nbsp;</em>The unprofitable servant of <em><a href='B:470 25:30'>Mat 25:30</a></em> is all of us, the Lord taught. And so when Paul appeals to Philemon to be gracious to his unprofitable servant Onesimus (<em><a href='B:640 1:11'>Phm 1:11</a></em>), he’s alluding back to that parable. And making the point that Philemon is himself an unprofitable servant, graciously received by his Lord; and so he should be likewise gracious to&nbsp;<em>his</em>&nbsp;unprofitable servant.</p><p><em>But now is profitable to you and to me</em>- By receiving Onesimus with grace, there would be “benefit” and “profit” for Philemon (<em><a href='B:640 1:11'>Phm 1:11</a></em>; <em><a href='B:640 1:14'>Phm 1:14</a></em> Gk:). Humanly speaking, there was only loss. For Onesimus had defrauded Philemon (<em><a href='B:640 1:18'>Phm 1:18</a></em> Gk:), and Paul was implying that Onesimus send him back to Rome to help him, with Philemon’s ‘agreement’ AV “mind” (<em><a href='B:640 1:13-14'>Phm 1:13-14</a></em> GK:). Losing&nbsp;a slave was a material, financial loss. But by showing grace in this case, the material loss would become a spiritual profit for Philemon in the last day.</p>


text:
<p><em><a href='B:640 1:12'>Phm 1:12</a></em>&nbsp;<em>He is as my very heart</em>- Paul's spirit or heart was in Onesimus; they thought the same way. In this sense the spirit of Christ was in Noah and as it were preached to people in <em><a href='B:670 3:18'>1Pe 3:18</a></em>, although Christ Himself was not there in Noah's time; the spirit of Christ was in the prophets although He didn't exist then (<em><a href='B:670 1:11'>1Pe 1:11</a></em>); Paul's spirit was present at the church gatherings in Corinth even though he was absent (<em><a href='B:530 5:4'>1Co 5:4</a></em>). So in Onesimus, insofar as he had the spirit of Christ and Paul did too, Paul's spirit / mind / presence was standing before Philemon. This is "the unity of the Spirit":&nbsp;</p><p><em>And it is he whom I have sent back to you</em>- That might seem obvious, but the idea is 'My very heart is in his very own person'.</p>


text:
<p><em><a href='B:640 1:13'>Phm 1:13</a></em>&nbsp;<em>I would have been glad to keep him with me, in</em>&nbsp;<em>order that he might serve me on your behalf during my imprisonment for the gospel-&nbsp;</em>If Onesimus returned to Rome and served Paul there, he would be ministering to Paul as if Philemon was doing this- “on your behalf". So as Paul was represented by Onesimus (:12,17), so likewise Onesimus would represent Philemon. This is the John 17 -style unity which there is in Christ. It would seem that if Onesimus could be so useful to Paul in Rome, he was not therefore in prison; therefore Paul's outreach from within prison had reached to a runaway slave outside prison. And of course Onesimus was free to travel back from Rome to Philemon. Maybe Paul's teaching about grace in the letter to the church at Rome had been heard by Onesimus, and so he had come to ask Paul about working it all out in practice.</p>


text:
<p><em><a href='B:640 1:14'>Phm 1:14</a></em>&nbsp;<em>But I preferred to do nothing without your consent, so that your</em>&nbsp;<em>goodness</em>- Gk. 'your profit'. See on :12&nbsp;<em>But now is profitable</em>. The picture we get of Philemon is that he was an active and good brother in many ways. He had an ecclesia that met in his house, probably, by implication, comprised of his own family / “house” whom he had converted. The “beloved Aphia” refers to a female&nbsp;<em>agapete</em>- probably his wife. He was well known for a truly generous spirit to the brethren, and for a deep faith (:5-7). And yet he his whole standing with the Lord, Paul implies, was going to be revealed, and stood now under question, over the issue of his attitude to his runaway slave who had now accepted Christ. If he wouldn’t accept him, then all this good upright living was in vain. Paul was giving him a test. He could’ve just kept Onesimus with him in Rome. But he sent him all the way back home to Philemon, to get his ‘agreement’ (<em><a href='B:640 1:14'>Phm 1:14</a></em>, AV “mind”) that Philemon accepts Onesimus as a brother, and sends him back to Rome to serve Paul. He could’ve “retained” Onesimus; but instead, he seeks a “benefit” spiritually for Philemon by bringing the issue to a pointed head (:13,14). And so it can be with us, that providence brings one specific case or person into our lives to test whether or not we have really accepted grace in the very core of our hearts. And on this, all else ultimately depends. And these things ‘God works oftentimes with man’. We find ourselves living out the situations of both Onesimus and Philemon. The crucial challenge of grace comes to us time and again in ecclesial life, and we too present it to others. Upon our response to it, our salvation-by-grace depends.</p><p><em>Might not be by compulsion but of your own free will-&nbsp;</em>Paul thought of ways to make Philemon bear spiritual fruit; so he leaves the choice over to his free will. Likewise he says that he had asked for and taken support from the believers in Philippi "Not because I desire a gift, but I desire fruit that may abound to your account" (<em><a href='B:570 4:17'>Phi 4:17</a></em>). We likewise should sensitively consider our brethren and try to set up situations whereby they will produce spiritual fruit which will be credited to them. This is the way of spiritual maturity. We must not just do what&nbsp;<em>we</em>&nbsp;wish in the Lord's service, but think of what others need to do, for their own fruitfulness. For we seek the Lord's glory and for Him to be pleasured by them as well as by ourselves. Too often we can embark on a project for the Lord because it is what&nbsp;<em>we</em>&nbsp;want to do. But the bigger picture of the Lord's glorification must be ever in view.</p>


text:
<p><em><a href='B:640 1:15'>Phm 1:15</a></em>&nbsp;<em>For this perhaps is why he was parted from you for a while, that you might have him back forever-</em>&nbsp;The "forever" sounds like a reference to the life eternal together in the Kingdom. The whole situation, of Onesimus apparently committing fraud, running away, probably from abuse by Philemon; his meeting with Paul in Rome and conversion, or at least, deeper conversion; Paul's desire to send him back to Philemon::. all this was so that they might live eternally together forever:&nbsp;<em>Aionos</em>, "forever", is usually used of the life eternal and not for the remainder of this life. Perhaps Philemon's eternity depended upon his forgiveness of and reconciliation with Onesimus. Paul speaks of how Philemon would “receive” Onesimus “for ever”- and yet he is implying Onesimus should be sent back to minister to him in Rome. Surely what Paul has in mind is that if someone is truly our brother, then we will eternally “receive” them as such in the Kingdom ages- and therefore we ought to be doing that right now. The baptism of Onesimus was a hard call for Philemon. He had to believe that that difficult man who had defrauded him was now his brother, even though he hadn’t baptized him. Many an ecclesial upset has been caused by this kind of thing.</p>


text:
<p><em><a href='B:640 1:16'>Phm 1:16</a></em>&nbsp;<em>No longer as a slave but more than a slave, a beloved brother-&nbsp;</em>This is just the term Paul has used about both Philemon and Archippa, presumably his wife. Paul's patient love for Philemon was to be reflected in Philemon's love for Onesimus.</p><p><em>Especially to me but how much more to you, both in the flesh and in the Lord</em>- "In the flesh" perhaps refers to how after reconciliation, the parties are closer to each other than before.</p>


text:
<h4><em><a href='B:640 1:17'>Phm 1:17</a></em>&nbsp;<em>So if you consider me your partner-&nbsp;</em>Paul asks Philemon to prepare a room in his home because he was planning on visiting after his release from prison (:22). Paul is really saying that Philemon is to accept Onesimus as much as he would accept him; and if he didn't, then he was effectively separating himself from partnership with Paul.</h4><p><em>Take him into your home-&nbsp;</em>'Receive him'. The point is made twice (<em><a href='B:640 1:12'>Phm 1:12</a></em>; <em><a href='B:640 1:17'>Phm 1:17</a></em>). Paul had written to the Romans years before that they should receive one another, as God for Christ’s sake has received us (<em><a href='B:520 15:7'>Rom 15:7</a></em> s:w:). It seems that the case of Onesimus gave Paul an opportunity to practically exemplify what he had meant- now that he was in Rome. Time and again, the theory of the Romans letter has to be lived out by Paul once in Rome himself. Paul says that if Philemon received Onesimus, then he received Paul. Paul was one with his new brother Onesimus (:12).</p><p><em>As you would receive me-&nbsp;</em>Paul parallels loving the Lord Jesus with loving “all saints” (<em><a href='B:640 1:5'>Phm 1:5</a></em>). To receive Onesimus was to receive Paul (<em><a href='B:640 1:12'>Phm 1:12</a></em>); and “if thou count me therefore a partner Gk:&nbsp;<em>Koinonos</em>- ‘one in fellowship’, receive him as myself” (<em><a href='B:640 1:17'>Phm 1:17</a></em> AV). Paul's mind or spirit was in Onesimus (:12). Paul is saying that if we receive any brother, then, we receive him. He clearly has in mind the Lord’s teaching, that if we receive Him, then we are to receive His brethren. So if we receive any brother, we not only receive the Lord Jesus, but we receive all other brethren in Christ; for each brother represents the entire body of Christ. This shows the utter fallacy of division within the one body. It is an utter nonsense to accept one brother, but not the other brethren, e:g:, of his ecclesia. According to the logic of <em><a href='B:640 1:17'>Phm 1:17</a></em>, if we don’t accept a true brother, then we are not treating our other brethren as being in fellowship. For Paul says that if Philemon considered&nbsp;<em>him</em>&nbsp;to be in fellowship, then Philemon ought to accept Onesimus. Likewise, he reasons that he saw in Onesimus the face of Philemon; for Onesimus ministered unto Paul “in thy Philemon’s stead” (<em><a href='B:640 1:13'>Phm 1:13</a></em>). The implications of this are far reaching. For by refusing fellowship with our brethren, we are effectively declaring ourselves outside of the body of Christ. And hence Paul’s sober warnings in 1 Corinthians 11, to discern / recognize the Lord’s body; for if we refuse to break bread with our brethren, then, he says, we are eating and drinking damnation to ourselves, because we refuse to accept our part in the Lord’s body.</p>


text:
<p><em><a href='B:640 1:18'>Phm 1:18</a></em>&nbsp;<em>But if he has wronged you at all or owes you something-&nbsp;</em>Philemon clearly thought that Onesimus had wronged him or stolen something from him. Or since he had bought Onesimus, he maybe meanly considered that all the time Onesimus was away in Rome, he was losing money because he had to take on another slave to replace him.</p><p><em>Put that on my bill-&nbsp;</em>Literally, 'on me'. Again Paul is directly identifying himself with Onesimus. Attitudes to a brother in Christ are effectively our attitudes to others in Christ. This is why there can be no respect of persons at all in Christ.</p>


text:
<p><em><a href='B:640 1:19'>Phm 1:19</a></em>&nbsp;<em>I, Paul, write this with my own hand:</em>&nbsp;<em>I will repay any debt-&nbsp;</em>Paul was writing from his hired house within the Roman prison, in the period at the end of Acts 28. He seems to have access to money. But by 2 Timothy 4 he is in prison again and can't afford even a cloak, and needs writing equipment. He knew how to abound and be abased when it came to money and wealth.</p><p><em>Even though you owe me your own self-&nbsp;</em>Continuing the theme of ‘profit’, Paul says that Onesimus ‘owed’ him his very self because Paul had converted him; therefore any material debt that Onesimus ‘owed’ Philemon should be forgiven with pleasure (<em><a href='B:640 1:18-19'>Phm 1:18-19</a></em>). The unpayable debt that we have should lead us to be forgiving of whatever others owe us. Note in passing how Philemon ‘owed’ his very eternal life to Paul. This is the power and responsibility of witnessing to others. The saviour is the Lord, and yet the preacher manifests that salvation to others to such an extent that effectively we owe our salvation additionally to the person who converted us. See on :22. Philemon owed his salvation to Paul’s preaching, and was therefore eternally obligated to him. We too can be a tree of life to those with whom we live; we can win their souls for the Kingdom (<em><a href='B:240 11:30'>Pro 11:30</a></em>). The Thessalonians would be accepted in the final glory of judgment day simply “because our testimony among you was believed” (<em><a href='B:600 1:10'>2Th 1:10</a></em>). Eve, taken out of the wounded side of the first man, was a type of the ecclesia; and her name means ‘source of life’, in anticipation of how the church would bring life to the world.</p><p>The idea of two men in debt, one Onesimus more than the other Philemon recalls the Lord's parable of Matthew 18 about two men like this; and also to another parable of two indebted men who were both frankly forgiven, and the one forgiven most loved his master the most (<em><a href='B:490 7:42-43'>Luk 7:42-43</a></em>). There are several allusions to the parables in the letter to Philemon. The man with the bigger debt was being unreasonable to the other servant who was indeed in his debt, but not so seriously as he was. The debt of Philemon was partly to Paul for saving him, but it could be argued that Onesimus had a similar debt. The rest of his huge accrual of debt was therefore from something else which Onesimus had not done. So it would seem that Philemon, pastor of his own house church, renowned for good deeds::. had some pretty dark secrets, and perhaps it was the practice of them which had led Onesmius to steal money for a journey and then run away from him. The "frank forgiveness" of the Lord to the bigger debtor is picked up in :22&nbsp;<em>I shall be restored to you.</em></p>


text:
<p><em><a href='B:640 1:20'>Phm 1:20</a></em>&nbsp;<em>Yes, brother, let me profit from you in the Lord. Refresh my heart in Christ</em>- Paul recognized that Philemon “refreshed the hearts of the saints”, and he rejoiced that this was the case. Yet there was one saint whose bowels Philemon had not yet refreshed- and that was Paul himself. For Paul uses this very phrase in asking Philemon to rejoice&nbsp;<em>his</em>&nbsp;bowels by receiving Onesimus (:7,20). Here we see grace to the extreme. Paul could rejoice that a brother was genuinely loving and encouraging to other brethren, even though that brother had not been so to him personally. It’s so easy in personal disputes to write a brother off as totally no good because he was unkind or inappropriate or downright wrong in his treatment of us personally; we so easily forget that in many&nbsp;<em>other</em>&nbsp;walks of his life, he is a wonderful servant of the Lord. Yet Paul modelled the very grace which he asked Philemon to show to Onesimus.</p>


text:
<p><em><a href='B:640 1:21'>Phm 1:21</a></em>&nbsp;<em>I write to you having confidence in your obedience-&nbsp;</em>Paul believed his prayers would be answered and wrote, felt and acted accordingly. He goes straight on to ask for a room to be prepared for him on his release from prison (:22), so confident was he that the prayers for his release would be answered.</p><p><em>Knowing you will do what I ask</em>- Gk. '<em>more than</em>&nbsp;I ask'. In the same way as God had done for us exceeding abundantly&nbsp;<em>above&nbsp;</em>&nbsp; all we could ask or think (<em><a href='B:560 3:20'>Eph 3:20</a></em>), so Philemon was to do&nbsp;<em>more&nbsp;</em>s:w. than the grace that Paul was suggesting (<em><a href='B:640 1:21'>Phm 1:21</a></em>; <em><a href='B:640 1:16'>Phm 1:16</a></em> s:w:). It’s not just a case of forgiving each other because we were forgiven; it’s a question of lavishing the grace upon each other which the Lord has upon us. And notice the context of all this. Paul says that as Philemon’s elder, he could just “enjoin” him to do that which was required of those in Christ. But he prefers not to work through a command from an elder, demanding obedience. Instead, he appeals to Philemon’s own experience of personal grace, and sees in&nbsp;<em>that</em>&nbsp;an imperative, a command to be ‘obeyed’ (<em><a href='B:640 1:8'>Phm 1:8</a></em>; <em><a href='B:640 1:21'>Phm 1:21</a></em>). God’s generosity to us in answering us “above all we ask of think” should be reflected in our doing things for others over and above what they have requested.</p>


text:
<p><em><a href='B:640 1:22'>Phm 1:22</a></em> See on <em><a href='B:510 20:25'>Act 20:25</a></em>&nbsp;<em>I know</em>.</p><p><em>But meanwhile also prepare for me a lodging</em>- This sounds as if Paul was hoping to come to Philemon along with Onesimus- hence the word "Also", with the emphasis on "for me" also. This plan highlighted Paul's argument- that if Philemon would fellowship Onesimus, then he was fellowshipping Paul. And if he wanted to only fellowship Paul and not Onesimus, then this was effectively not fellowshipping Paul.</p><p><em>For I hope that through your prayers-&nbsp;</em>On :19&nbsp;<em>Even though&nbsp;</em>we saw that a third party can be responsible for the fortunes of another brother. Here too, Paul trusted that through the prayers of Philemon he would be released; and he was so confident in the answer to that prayer that he asked him even to prepare a room for him ahead of time</p><p><em>I shall be restored to you-&nbsp;</em>Or AV "given unto you". This rather awkward phrase is another allusion to the parable of the two debtors. It is translated "forgiven" in <em><a href='B:490 7:42-43'>Luk 7:42-43</a></em>. Perhaps Paul's point is that he too is a big sinner, and through their prayers he would be released from the debts arising. He doesn't want Philemon to feel that Paul is as it were getting at him unkindly by suggesting he is like the bigger debtor; he is now saying that he himself is also in debt to the Lord and even more so.</p>


text:
<p><em><a href='B:640 1:23'>Phm 1:23</a></em>&nbsp;<em>Epaphras, my fellow-prisoner in Christ Jesus, greets you</em>- Paul has twice referred to himself as a prisoner in Christ. He is practicing what he has preached elsewhere- that e:g. slaves should consider their service to their masters as done unto Christ. He saw himself not as a prisoner of Caesar but of Christ. This is likely the same as the Epaphroditus of <em><a href='B:570 2:25'>Phi 2:25</a></em>; <em><a href='B:570 4:18'>Phi 4:18</a></em>. It could be argued that Paul may be using "prisoner in Christ" in a spiritual sense (<em><a href='B:520 16:7'>Rom 16:7</a></em>; <em><a href='B:540 10:5'>2Co 10:5</a></em>), which would not require Epaphras to actually be in prison with him. Rather, his sense of being a prisoner of Christ in a spiritual sense was so great that he felt one with Paul who was literally in prison, and Paul is noting that.</p>


text:
<p><em><a href='B:640 1:24'>Phm 1:24</a></em>&nbsp;<em>As do Mark, Aristarchus, Demas and Luke, my fellow-workers-&nbsp;</em>From within prison, Paul had been able to 'convert' Onesimus and also some in the Praetorian guard. But this would have required the assistance of others, and it seems Paul had a faithful group of helpers who came to live in Rome and assist him in his witness. He calls them here his co-workers. He in prison, apparently stranded, was still able to “work”. We wonder what role the church at Rome played in all this; for none of them stood with him at his final trial (<em><a href='B:620 4:16'>2Ti 4:16</a></em>). Paul had been so eager to get to Rome to witness, and had written to the church there ahead of his coming there; and it seems when he got there, they didn't really support him much.</p>


text:
<p><em><a href='B:640 1:25'>Phm 1:25</a></em>&nbsp;<em>The grace of our Lord Jesus Christ be with your spirit-&nbsp;</em>See on :3. Philemon needed to have the grace of Jesus in his spirit / mind in order to make the right decisions about Onesimus, and Paul wishes this for him. The&nbsp;<em>charis</em>&nbsp;or gift of our Lord Jesus is&nbsp;<em>His&nbsp;</em>spirit or mind / disposition. And Paul wished that the Lord's Spirit would be with and in the spirit of Philemon; for this is the essence of Christianity, that Christ should dwell in our hearts / minds.</p>


text:
&nbsp;<p>that there are so many connections between Stephen's speech and Hebrews. The Jerusalem church, to whom Hebrews was primarily addressed, would have known Stephen well. Hebrews is full of allusions to Stephen's speech, and my suggestion is that it was not Stephen writing to his own church before his death, but rather Paul expanding upon Stephen's speech. As the bitterly angry Saul, keenly listening to Stephen and grasping his every allusion, he would have felt the goads of Scripture sticking into his conscience. He remembered every word, and after his conversion, he took Stephen's thoughts further. Hebrews, I suggest, is his development of Stephen's words and ideas. The historical characters mentioned by Stephen are also mentioned by Paul in Hebrews 11. Paul draws his sermon in Hebrews towards a conclusion by speaking of how we as Christians have come into association with "the city of the living God, the heavenly Jerusalem, and to innumerable hosts of angels, to the general assembly and church of the firstborns, who are enrolled in heaven; and to God the judge of all, and to the spirits of just men made perfect" (<em><a href='B:650 12:22-23'>Heb 12:22-23</a></em>). It seems to me certain that Paul had Stephen in mind at this point, a clearly 'just man', who had asked the Lord Jesus in Heaven to receive his spirit, as one of "the spirits of just men made perfect", and whose name as a martyr was for sure "enrolled in Heaven". The anonymity of the letter would be appropriate, as Paul was seen as a heretic and&nbsp;<em>persona non grata</em>&nbsp;among many of the Jewish Christians who were turning back to Judaism.</p><p><em><a href='B:650 1:1'>Heb 1:1</a></em>&nbsp;<em>God, who at various times and in various ways- Polymeros::. polytropos&nbsp;</em>is framed in such a way as to aid memorization, and would be typical of a spoken address; see on <em><a href='B:650 13:22'>Heb 13:22</a></em> and <em><a href='B:590 2:1'>1Th 2:1</a></em>.</p><p><em>Spoke in time past to the fathers by the prophets</em>- The Lord was “the word made flesh"; having spoken to us through the words of the prophets, God now speaks to us in His Son (<em><a href='B:650 1:1-2'>Heb 1:1-2</a></em> RV). His revelation in that sense hasn’t finished; it is ongoing. Right now, the Lord Jesus speaks with a voice like many waters and a sword of flame- according to John’s vision of the Lord’s post-resurrection glory.<br/>In the first century, you usually began a letter with a preface, saying who you were and to whom you were writing. The letter to the Hebrews has a preface which speaks simply of the greatness of Christ (<em><a href='B:650 1:1-3'>Heb 1:1-3</a></em>), tackling the devaluing of the Lord Jesus and the role of Messiah generally which was being done by the Judaizers. The higher critics speak of how the preface has been lost or got detached. But no, the form of <em><a href='B:650 1:1-3'>Heb 1:1-3</a></em> is indeed that of a preface. The point is that the greatness of Christ, of which the letter speaks, is so great as to push both the author and audience into irrelevancy and obscurity. It’s significant that the New Testament writers speak so frequently of Jesus as simply “the Lord”. This would’ve been strange to first century ears. Kings and pagan gods always had their personal name added to the title ‘the Lord’- e:g. ‘the Lord Sarapis’. To just speak of “the Lord” was unheard of. The way the New Testament speaks like this indicates the utter primacy of the Lord Jesus in the minds of believers, and the familiarity they had with speaking about Him in such exalted terms.</p>


text:
<p>:&nbsp;<em>&nbsp;</em>Thus in a creation context, we read that all things were created&nbsp;<em>dia</em>, for the sake of, God’s pleasure (<em><a href='B:730 4:11'>Rev 4:11</a></em>). Significantly, when <em><a href='B:680 3:5'>2Pe 3:5</a></em> speaks of how the world was created “<em>by</em>” the word of God, the word&nbsp;<em>dia</em>&nbsp;isn’t used- instead&nbsp;<em>hoti</em>, signifying ‘causation through’. This isn’t the word used in <em><a href='B:650 1:2'>Heb 1:2</a></em> about the creation of the&nbsp;<em>aion</em>&nbsp;on account of,&nbsp;<em>dia</em>, the Son. Eve was created&nbsp;<em>dia</em>&nbsp;Adam- she wasn’t created&nbsp;<em>by</em>&nbsp;Adam, but&nbsp;<em>for the sake of</em>&nbsp;Adam (<em><a href='B:530 11:9'>1Co 11:9</a></em>). <em><a href='B:530 8:6'>1Co 8:6</a></em> draws a helpful distinction between&nbsp;<em>ek</em>&nbsp;out of whom and&nbsp;<em>dia</em>- all things are&nbsp;<em>ek</em>&nbsp;God, but&nbsp;<em>dia</em>, on account of, Christ (<em><a href='B:530 8:6'>1Co 8:6</a></em>). The context of <em><a href='B:650 1:2'>Heb 1:2</a></em> features many examples of where&nbsp;<em>dia</em>&nbsp;clearly means ‘for the sake of’ rather than ‘by’. Just a little later we read in <em><a href='B:650 1:14'>Heb 1:14</a></em> of how the Angels are “ministering spirits” who minister&nbsp;<em>dia</em>, for the sake of, the believers. Because of&nbsp;<em>dia</em>&nbsp;Christ’s righteousness, God exalted Him (<em><a href='B:650 1:9'>Heb 1:9</a></em>). The Mosaic law was “disannulled”&nbsp;<em>dia</em>&nbsp;“the weakness and unprofitableness thereof” (<em><a href='B:650 7:18'>Heb 7:18</a></em>). The weakness of the law didn’t disannul the law; the law was disannulled by God&nbsp;<em>for the sake of</em>&nbsp;the fact it was so weak. Levi paid tithes&nbsp;<em>dia</em>&nbsp;Abraham (<em><a href='B:650 7:9'>Heb 7:9</a></em>), not&nbsp;<em>by</em>&nbsp;Abraham, but&nbsp;<em>for the sake of</em>&nbsp;the fact he was a descendant of Abraham. Jesus was not an Angel&nbsp;<em>dia</em>&nbsp;the suffering of death (<em><a href='B:650 2:9'>Heb 2:9</a></em>). Clearly here the word means ‘for the sake of’ rather than ‘by’. Jesus was born a man&nbsp;<em>for the reason that</em>&nbsp;He could die. He was not an Angel who was then made ‘not an Angel’&nbsp;<em>by</em>&nbsp;the fact of death. That makes no sense.</p><h4>Note that&nbsp;<em>aion&nbsp;</em>AV "worlds" is a plural- if this verse means 'Jesus created the earth', then, did He create multiple, plural 'earths'? That the word means 'the ages' or ‘an age’ is again clear from seeing how else&nbsp;<em>'aion</em>' is used. In almost every case where the word&nbsp;<em>aion</em>&nbsp;occurs in the New Testament, it doesn’t mean ‘the physical planet earth’, but rather an age or situation on the earth, rather than the physical planet. In <em><a href='B:560 2:7'>Eph 2:7</a></em> we read of “the ages to come”- and it is the word&nbsp;<em>aion</em>&nbsp;again. The church will glorify Jesus “throughout all generations”, and this is paralleled with the phrase ‘the&nbsp;<em>aion</em>&nbsp;of the&nbsp;<em>aions</em>’ <em><a href='B:560 3:21'>Eph 3:21</a></em> - AV “world without end”; the same parallel occurs in <em><a href='B:580 1:26'>Col 1:26</a></em>, “hid from&nbsp;<em>aions</em>&nbsp;and from generations”. Clearly&nbsp;<em>aion&nbsp;</em>refers to periods of time rather than a physical planet. Just a few verses after <em><a href='B:650 1:2'>Heb 1:2</a></em>, we read that the son will reign ‘for the&nbsp;<em>aions</em>&nbsp;and the&nbsp;<em>aions</em>’, or in English “for ever and ever” (<em><a href='B:650 1:8'>Heb 1:8</a></em>). Surely the combined message is that the previous ages /&nbsp;<em>aions</em>existed only for the sake of Christ, and He will rule over all future&nbsp;<em>aions</em>. There is the&nbsp;<em>aion</em>&nbsp;to come AV “the world to come”, <em><a href='B:650 6:5'>Heb 6:5</a></em>, and Christ will be a priest “for ever” Gk. ‘for the&nbsp;<em>aion</em>’, <em><a href='B:650 5:6'>Heb 5:6</a></em>. The&nbsp;<em>aion</em>&nbsp;to come is the eternity of God’s Kingdom. It will be, in somewhat hyperbolic language, an eternity of eternities. Later in Hebrews we read that Jesus made His sacrifice for sin “in the end of the world /&nbsp;<em>aion</em>” (<em><a href='B:650 9:26'>Heb 9:26</a></em>). If an&nbsp;<em>aion</em>&nbsp;ended at the death of Jesus, then clearly the word doesn’t refer to the physical planet- but rather to the age which then ended. The Hebrew writer clinches this view of&nbsp;<em>aion</em>&nbsp;in <em><a href='B:650 11:3'>Heb 11:3</a></em>, where he prefaces his outline of Bible history from Abel to the restoration from Babylon by saying that the ages /&nbsp;<em>aion&nbsp;</em>are framed by the word of God. Response by faith to God’s word, seeing the invisible with the eye of faith, occurred amongst the faithful in every&nbsp;<em>aion</em>. The&nbsp;<em>aion</em>&nbsp;AV “worlds” were framed by the word of God. Consider other uses of the word&nbsp;<em>aion&nbsp;</em>where clearly it refers to the ages and not to a literal planet (<em><a href='B:480 4:19'>Mar 4:19</a></em>; <em><a href='B:490 1:70'>Luk 1:70</a></em>; <em><a href='B:490 16:8'>Luk 16:8</a></em>; <em><a href='B:520 12:2'>Rom 12:2</a></em>; <em><a href='B:530 2:6'>1Co 2:6</a></em>; <em><a href='B:530 2:8'>1Co 2:8</a></em>; <em><a href='B:530 3:19'>1Co 3:19</a></em>; <em><a href='B:550 1:4'>Gal 1:4</a></em>; <em><a href='B:560 6:12'>Eph 6:12</a></em>; <em><a href='B:620 4:10'>2Ti 4:10</a></em>).</h4><p>The whole of history, with all its ages, and all that is to come, exists solely for the sake of Christ. He is the One who gives meaning to history. Further, if this verse means 'Jesus created the earth', then OK, question: Genesis and many other passages say&nbsp;<em>God</em>&nbsp;created. If this says Jesus was the actual creator, then is Jesus directly equal to God? Also, if <em><a href='B:650 1:2'>Heb 1:2</a></em> is saying that&nbsp;<em>Jesus</em>&nbsp;is the creator of earth, the One through whom God did the job, then,&nbsp;<em>why</em>&nbsp;do we have to wait until Hebrews to know that? There's no indication in Genesis or even in the whole Old Testament nor in the teaching of Jesus that Jesus was the creator of earth on God's behalf. That's my problem with the pre-existence idea- it's nowhere in the Old Testament. So would believers have been held in ignorance of this fact for 4000 years? If so, then, is it so important to covenant relationship with God? I am sure David, Abraham etc. believed that&nbsp;<em>God</em>&nbsp;and&nbsp;<em>not&nbsp;</em>Messiah created the earth. If they'd have been asked: 'Did&nbsp;<em>Messiah</em>&nbsp;create the earth, or God? Does Messiah now exist?', they'd have answered 'No' both times. Surely?</p><p>It is argued by trinitarians that&nbsp;<em>dia</em>&nbsp;+ the genitive, as we have in <em><a href='B:650 1:2'>Heb 1:2</a></em>, means that the ages were made by the instrumentality of Christ. But&nbsp;<em>dia</em>&nbsp;+ genitive doesn't only mean 'by whose instrumentality'. Moulton,&nbsp;<em>The Analytical Greek Lexicon Revised ,</em>&nbsp;p. 90 explains the uses of&nbsp;<em>dia</em>&nbsp;with genitive:<br/>"1. With a genitive, through<br/>a. Used of place or medium through<br/>b. Used of time, during in the course of; through<br/>c. Used of immediate agency, causation, instrumentality, by means of,&nbsp;<br/>by; of means or manner, through, by, with<br/>d. Used of state or condition, in a state of".</p><p>Meaning (b) appears relevant to <em><a href='B:650 1:2'>Heb 1:2</a></em> because it is&nbsp;<em>dia&nbsp;</em>Christ that the&nbsp;<em>aions</em>&nbsp;(a time reference) were created. This would require us to read in an ellipsis: "Through the (period of the ministry of) the Son, God framed the ages". Or, "Through(out) the Son, God framed the ages", i:e. all God's purpose throughout the ages was framed with Christ in mind. <em><a href='B:510 3:18'>Act 3:18</a></em> uses&nbsp;<em>dia</em>&nbsp;+ genitive to explain how God had spoken of Christ "by" or throughout the period of all His "holy prophets".</p>


text:
<p><em><a href='B:650 1:3'>Heb 1:3</a></em>&nbsp;<em>Who being the brightness of His glory and the exact image of His person, upholds all things by the word of his power-&nbsp;</em>Nearly all the titles of Christ used in the letter to the Hebrews are taken from Philo or the Jewish book of Wisdom. The writer to the Hebrews is seeking to apply them in their correct and true sense to the Lord Jesus. This explains why some titles are used which can easily be misunderstood by those not appreciating this background. For example, Philo speaks of “the impress of God’s seal”, and Hebrews applies this to the Lord Jesus. The phrase has been misinterpreted by Trinitarians as meaning that Jesus is therefore God; but this wasn’t at all the idea behind the title in Philo’s writings, and neither was it when the letter to the Hebrews took up the phrase and applied it to Jesus. This sort of thing goes on far more often than we might think in the Bible- existing theological ideas are re-cast and re-presented in their correct light, especially with reference to the Lord Jesus. Arthur Gibson notes that “there is an important second level within religious language: it is a reflection upon, a criticism of, a correction of, or a more general formulation of, expressions which previously occur”.</p><p>3 Enoch also known as&nbsp;<em>The Hebrew Book Of Enoch</em>&nbsp;spoke much of an Angel called Metatron, "the prince of the presence", "the lesser Yahweh", who appeared as Yahweh to Moses in <em><a href='B:20 23:21'>Exo 23:21</a></em>, sat on "the throne of glory" etc (3 Enoch 10-14). Early Jewish Christianity appears to have mistakenly reapplied these ideas to Jesus, resulting in the idea the first of all Jesus was an Angel, and then coming to full term in the doctrine of the Trinity. J. Danielou devotes the whole fourth chapter of his survey of the development of Christian doctrine to the study of how Jewish views of Angels actually led on to the Trinity. Paul's style was not to baldly state that everything believed in by the Jews was wrong; he recognized that the very nature of apostasy is in the mixing of the true and the false. He speaks of how Jesus truly has been exalted and sits at God's right hand (<em><a href='B:520 8:34'>Rom 8:34</a></em>) and has been given God's Name, as the Angel was in Exodus (<em><a href='B:570 2:9-11'>Phi 2:9-11</a></em>); but his whole point is that whilst that may indeed be common ground with the Jewish ideas, the truth is that Jesus is&nbsp;<em>not</em>&nbsp;an Angel. He came into physical existence through Mary ("made / born of a woman", <em><a href='B:550 4:4'>Gal 4:4</a></em>), and as the begotten Son of God has been exalted above than any Angel. The language of <em><a href='B:650 1:3-6'>Heb 1:3-6</a></em> clearly alludes to the Metatron myth and deconstructs it in very clear terms. For Jesus is described as "being the effulgence of his glory, and the very image / pattern of his substance, and upholding all things by the word of his power, when he had made purification of sins, sat down on the right hand of the Majesty on high; having become by so much better than the angels, as he hath inherited a more excellent name than they. For unto which of the angels said he at any time, Thou art my Son, This day have I begotten thee? and again, I will be to him a Father, And he shall be to me a Son? And when he again bringeth in the firstborn into the world he saith, And let all the angels of God worship him".</p><p><em>When he had accomplished the purification of sins-&nbsp;</em>In a sense, all sins were purged by the Lord's death. Sin, the 'devil' of <em><a href='B:650 2:14'>Heb 2:14</a></em>, was destroyed; He "made an end of sins" (<em><a href='B:340 9:24'>Dan 9:24</a></em>). We can easily forget the wonder of this; Peter uses the same word about those who had forgotten their purging s:w. from their old sins (<em><a href='B:680 1:9'>2Pe 1:9</a></em>). They lacked the spiritual vision to look back to the cross and perceive that now, human sin is no longer a barrier between God and ourselves. The Lord's blood is therefore of such power as to purify even our conscience from the guilt of past sins (<em><a href='B:650 9:14'>Heb 9:14</a></em>; <em><a href='B:630 2:14'>Tit 2:14</a></em>). But this was all achieved at a specific historical point- when the Lord died on the cross.</p><p><em>He then sat down on the right hand-&nbsp;</em>In his time of dying, Stephen saw the Lord Jesus&nbsp;<em>standing</em>&nbsp;at the right hand of God (<em><a href='B:510 7:55'>Act 7:55</a></em>). But about 13 times in the New Testament, the point is made that the Lord&nbsp;<em>sits</em>&nbsp;there, unlike the Mosaic priests who stood (<em><a href='B:650 10:12'>Heb 10:12</a></em>). The Lord Jesus was passionately feeling for Stephen; and He just as emotionally and passionately feels for us in our struggles. This alone should lift us out of the mire of mediocrity. Prayer will have meaning and power. It won’t just be the repetitious conscience-salver it can descend into. Many of those 13 NT references to the Lord being seated at the right hand of God are in Hebrews; and this again encourages us to see Hebrews as Paul's deeper reflections upon Stephen's speech. This would especially be the case if the Jews in the council actually saw something of what Stephen saw.</p><p><em>Of the Majesty in Heaven</em>- It is a majestic, glorious theme of the Bible that God is revealed as a real being. It is also a fundamental tenet of Christianity that Jesus is the Son of God. If God is not a real being, then it is impossible for Him to have a Son who was the “image of His&nbsp;<em>person</em>” (<em><a href='B:650 1:3'>Heb 1:3</a></em>). The Greek word actually means His “substance” (RV). Further, it becomes difficult to develop a personal, living relationship with ‘God’, if ‘God’ is just a concept in our mind. It is tragic that the majority of religions have this unreal, intangible conception of God.</p>


text:
<p><em><a href='B:650 1:4'>Heb 1:4</a></em>&nbsp;<em>He thus became so much better than the angels, as he has inherited a more excellent name than they</em>- Judaism was obsessed with Angels, reflecting the pagan notion that there were various 'spirits' controlling various aspects of life. This idea likewise entered the Catholic and Orthodox churches. But the point is laboured here that the Lord Jesus as begotten Son of God is far better than Angels. The more excellent Name would appear from :5 to be connected to His Sonship. Angels are also "sons of God" but not in the ultimate sense in which the Lord Jesus was the only begotten Son. Angels too can bear and manifest the Yahweh Name just as we can, but the Lord inherited that Name in a "more excellent" sense than them; for He had achieved the characteristics of that Name within His own personality. This all adds even more wonder to the fact that by being "in Christ", all that is true of Him becomes true of us; and we are co-heirs with Him, inheriting as He did (<em><a href='B:520 8:17'>Rom 8:17</a></em>), fully sharing in all His glorification.</p>


text:
<p><em><a href='B:650 1:5'>Heb 1:5</a></em>&nbsp;<em>For to which of the angels said He at any time: You are my Son, this day have I begotten you? And again: I will be to him a Father and he shall be to me a Son?</em>- <em><a href='B:230 2:7'>Psa 2:7</a></em> is applied to the Lord's resurrection in <em><a href='B:510 13:33'>Act 13:33</a></em>; <em><a href='B:520 1:4'>Rom 1:4</a></em>. But the rest of Psalms 2 is quoted about various points of the Lord's work; at His birth, death, resurrection, return and at the time of the final rebellion against Him. And the original application appears to be to David and then to Hezekiah. Clearly it is not always so that if a verse is quoted in one context in the New Testament, then the surrounding context of the original quotation must refer to the same time. And it is likewise clear that the same scripture can have multiple fulfilments; Psalms 2 is a classic cse of that. The insistence upon context as the guiding light of interpretation is often misplaced; because the mind behind the word of God does not work according to the Greek influenced linear thinking of the European mind, with its emphasis upon logical corrolary and linear progression and development of thought and context.</p><p>James Dunn quotes Tertullian, Justin, Epiphanius and Clement as all believing that the Lord Jesus was an Angel: "So too Jewish Christians of the second and third centuries specifically affirmed that Christ was an angel or archangel::. Justin's identification of the angel of Yahweh with the supposedly pre-existent Christ". It was this Jewish obsession with Angels, and the desire to make Jesus understandable as an Angel, which led to the idea that He personally pre-existed and was not quite human. And hence the specific and repeated emphasis of the New Testament that the Lord was&nbsp;<em>not</em>&nbsp;an Angel but&nbsp;<em>because&nbsp;</em>He was a man and&nbsp;<em>not</em>&nbsp;an Angel He has been exalted far&nbsp;<em>above</em>&nbsp;Angels (<em><a href='B:570 2:9-11'>Phi 2:9-11</a></em>; <em><a href='B:580 1:16'>Col 1:16</a></em>; <em><a href='B:580 2:8-10'>Col 2:8-10</a></em>; Hebrews 1; <em><a href='B:670 1:12'>1Pe 1:12</a></em>; <em><a href='B:670 3:22'>1Pe 3:22</a></em>; <em><a href='B:730 5:11-14'>Rev 5:11-14</a></em>). It's the same with the idea of Melchizedek, whom the Qumran community and writings understood as an Archangel. The commentary upon Melchizedek in Hebrews stresses that he was a&nbsp;<em>man</em>&nbsp;("consider how great this&nbsp;<em>man</em>&nbsp;was::.", <em><a href='B:650 7:4'>Heb 7:4</a></em>)- therefore&nbsp;<em>not</em>&nbsp;an Angel. He was a&nbsp;<em>foreshadowing</em>&nbsp;of Christ, and not Christ Himself. It would appear that the commentary upon Melchizedek in Hebrews is actually full of indirect references to the Qumran claims about Melchizedek being an Angel and somehow being the Messiah. Sadly, too many trinitarians today have made the same mistake as the Jews- arguing that Melchizedek was somehow Jesus personally. The Jews of Qumran were quite obsessed with Angels- they also suggested that Gabriel was somehow the pre-existent Messiah. Bearing that in mind, it would appear that the descriptions of the Angel Gabriel announcing the conception and birth of Jesus are almost purposefully designed to show that Gabriel and Jesus are&nbsp;<em>not</em>&nbsp;the same but are two quite different persons (<em><a href='B:470 1:20'>Mat 1:20</a></em>; <em><a href='B:470 1:24'>Mat 1:24</a></em>; <em><a href='B:470 2:13'>Mat 2:13</a></em>; <em><a href='B:470 2:19'>Mat 2:19</a></em>; <em><a href='B:490 1:11'>Luk 1:11</a></em>; <em><a href='B:490 1:19'>Luk 1:19</a></em>; <em><a href='B:490 1:26-38'>Luk 1:26-38</a></em>; <em><a href='B:490 2:9'>Luk 2:9</a></em>).</p><p>Hebrews 1 can be a passage which appears to provide perhaps the strongest support for both the ‘Jesus is God’ and ‘Jesus is not God’ schools. Meditating upon this one morning, I suddenly grasped what was going on. The writer is in fact purposefully juxtaposing the language of Christ’s humanity and subjection to the Father, with statements and quotations which apply the language of God to Jesus. But the emphasis is so repeatedly upon the fact that God did this to Jesus. God gave Jesus all this glory. Consider the evidence: It is God who begat Jesus (<em><a href='B:650 1:5'>Heb 1:5</a></em>), God who told the Angels to worship Jesus (<em><a href='B:650 1:6'>Heb 1:6</a></em>), it was “God, even your God” who anointed Jesus, i:e. made Him Christ, the anointed one (<em><a href='B:650 1:9'>Heb 1:9</a></em>); it was God who made Jesus sit at His right hand, and makes the enemies of His Son come into subjection (<em><a href='B:650 1:13'>Heb 1:13</a></em>); it was God who made / created Jesus, God who crowned Jesus, God who set Jesus over creation (<em><a href='B:650 2:7'>Heb 2:7</a></em>), God who put all in subjection under Jesus (<em><a href='B:650 2:8'>Heb 2:8</a></em>). And yet interspersed between all this emphasis- for that’s what it is- upon the superiority of the Father over the Son… we find Jesus addressed as “God” (<em><a href='B:650 1:8'>Heb 1:8</a></em>), and having Old Testament passages about God applied to Him (<em><a href='B:650 1:5-6'>Heb 1:5-6</a></em>). The juxtaposition is purposeful. It is to bring out how the highly exalted position of Jesus was in fact granted to Him by ‘his God’, the Father, who remains the single source and giver of all exaltation, and who, to use the Lord’s very own words, “is greater than Christ” (<em><a href='B:500 14:28'>Joh 14:28</a></em>).</p>


text:
<p><em><a href='B:650 1:6'>Heb 1:6</a></em>&nbsp;<em>And again, when He brings the firstborn into the world He says: And let all the angels of God worship him</em>- "Brings" is strictly 'brings again' and refers to the resurrection, as noted on :5. The quotation is not from the Masoretic Text but from the Septuagint of <em><a href='B:50 32:43'>Deu 32:43</a></em> and perhaps <em><a href='B:230 97:7'>Psa 97:7</a></em>. This indicates that the inspired writer considered that material in the LXX which is not in the Hebrew text is inspired by God and worthy of quotation as such. The context of both those passages is hardly that of the Lord's resurrection; but as noted on :5, the New Testament writers tend to quote without attention to context. <em><a href='B:50 32:43'>Deu 32:43</a></em> LXX is also quoted by Paul in <em><a href='B:520 15:10'>Rom 15:10</a></em>. Another example of this kind of thing would be how in Romans 3 there is a quotation from <em><a href='B:230 14:1-7'>Psa 14:1-7</a></em> LXX; but sixof the quoted verses are not in the Hebrew text.</p><p>We might well wonder why Paul is quoting verses only found in the LXX in order to prove that the Lord Jesus is greater than Angels; and why he insists on quoting only from the LXX. It's as if he is making some kind of point about the Septuagint. I suggested on <em><a href='B:650 1:1'>Heb 1:1</a></em> that Paul was appealing to the Jerusalem Christians, in terms which recalled the witness of their famous martyr Stephen. What brought about Stephen's demise was his apparent backing of the Greek speaking Jews in the Jerusalem church. This might explain why Paul is appealing specifically to them by quoting so insistently from the Septuagint and even from passages which are only to be found there and not in the Hebrew text.</p>


text:
<p><em><a href='B:650 1:7'>Heb 1:7</a></em>&nbsp;<em>And of the angels He says: Who makes His angels winds, and His servants a flame a fire</em>- The quotation from <em><a href='B:230 103:4'>Psa 103:4</a></em> LXX only demonstrates the Lord's supremacy over Angels by stating that God makes the Angels into winds / spirits and flames- we recall the Angel seen by Samson's parents ascending in a flame of fire- whereas He has made His Son to be a king with a sceptre. The Lord Jesus is able to rule and decide issues on His own volition and agenda, rather than simply be sent as Angels are sent to obey the Father's agenda.</p>


text:
<p><em><a href='B:650 1:8'>Heb 1:8</a></em>&nbsp;<em>But of the Son He said: Your throne, O Mighty One, is for ever and ever, and the sceptre of your kingdom is a sceptre of uprightness</em>- See on :7. The Angels are sent out with temporary power to perform specific tasks they are given to perform; whereas the Lord Jesus is an eternal Kingdom, with a seceptre, i:e. ruling and issuing orders Himself rather than taking them. <em><a href='B:230 45:6-7'>Psa 45:6-7</a></em> quoted here is clearly about Solomon in its initial application, so it is fruitless to argue that "Mighty One" refers only to God Himself. For it can be applied to human kings.</p>


text:
<p><em><a href='B:650 1:9'>Heb 1:9</a></em>&nbsp;<em>You have loved righteousness and hated iniquity; therefore God, your God, has anointed you with the oil of gladness above your fellows-&nbsp;</em>We should not see sin as something to be regretfully avoided and denied; the Lord's example was of hating sin. And that hatred of sin arose out of the depth of His love for righteousness. Being loved and exalted above his brethren is a Joseph allusion. The idea of "your God" anointing Messiah with joy above His "fellows" is all impossible to make sense of within the standard Trinitarian paradigm. The connection between anointing and joy is that there were traditionally expressions of joy and praise when a man was anointed or chosen for some special task such as rulership. David in writing this surely had his heart on the way that he had been anointed above his brethren. And yet "fellows" is being interpreted as referring to the Angels; the Lord Jesus was anointed above them.</p>


text:
<p><em><a href='B:650 1:10'>Heb 1:10</a></em>&nbsp;<em>And: You, Lord, in the beginning did lay the foundation of the earth, and the heavens are the works of Your hands</em>- <em><a href='B:650 1:10'>Heb 1:10</a></em> appears to quote words about God (from <em><a href='B:230 102:25'>Psa 102:25</a></em>) and apply them to Jesus. To take a Psalm or Bible passage and apply it to someone on earth, even a normal human, was quite common in first century literature (Oscar Cullmann,&nbsp;<em>The Christology Of The New Testament</em>&nbsp;(London: SCM, 1971) p. 234). It's rather like we may quote a well known phrase from Shakespeare or a currently popular movie, and apply it to someone. It doesn't mean that that person is to be equated with Romeo, Juliet, Othello, Hamlet, Macbeth etc. By quoting the words about them, we're saying there are similarities between the two people or situations; we're not claiming they're identical. And seeing that the Son of God was functioning for His Father, it's not surprising that words about God will be quoted about the Lord Jesus.</p><h4>In the same way as the Angels are so closely associated with their charges that they are identified with them, so the Angels are described as the things in the natural world which they have created. The quotation of <em><a href='B:230 102:26'>Psa 102:26</a></em> in <em><a href='B:650 1:10'>Heb 1:10</a></em> can appear to pose major problems for belief in the humanity of Christ and that the world will never be destroyed. The context in Hebrews is again Christ's superiority over the Angels; however, the context in Psalms 102 is of Christ on the cross thinking of the eternity of God, how that "of old", "in the beginning" (clearly alluding&nbsp; back to the beginning of the natural creation in Genesis 1), God created the Heavens and earth by His Angel-hands. But "they shall perish::. wax old like a garment::. as a vesture shalt thou change them" (<em><a href='B:230 102:26'>Psa 102:26</a></em>). This language is similar to that used elsewhere about the ending of the Angel-oriented Mosaic Law (e. g. <em><a href='B:650 8:13'>Heb 8:13</a></em>). Thus the literal Heavens and earth will not perish, but the Angelic system that created them will do. Thus both the natural creation and the Mosaic system are identified exactly with the Angels that created them.</h4>


text:
<p><em><a href='B:650 1:11'>Heb 1:11</a></em>&nbsp;<em>They shall perish, but You continue; and they all shall wear out as does a garment</em>- As noted on :10, the purpose of the quotation is to demonstrate the Lord's superiority over Angels. One approach is to understand the Hebraic way of stating that 'even X shall happen to prove the greatness of Y'; e:g. heaven could pass away X but the Lord's words would not Y (<em><a href='B:470 24:35'>Mat 24:35</a></em>). This is not to say that X shall literally happen; it is stated as a hyperbole, to demonstrate the greatness of Y. And that may be the case here too. God's eternity is contrasted with the relative passing of the Heavens, which were made by Angels. "They shall perish" may not therefore mean they shall literally perish.</p><p>The context of Psalms 102 is however pertinent. The "set time had come" suggests that the Psalmist is writing maybe in captivity in Babylon as the predicted 70 years of Judah’s captivity there came to a close, and he looks forward to the promised restoration and rebuilding of Jerusalem. He enthuses in :16 that "Yahweh has built up Zion"- although He had not then done so (:13). The earlier part of the Psalm laments this. But the Psalmist believed in God’s prophecies of doing so, and considered them as good as already fulfilled. Faith is all about adopting God’s perspective, seeing future promises as if they have already been fulfilled, thereby enabling us to live the Kingdom life now in its essence. Then in <em><a href='B:230 102:25'>Psa 102:25</a></em> we read of how "Of old, You laid the foundation of the earth, the heavens are the work of Your hands". The language of laying foundations is nearly always used about the laying of the foundations of the new, rebuilt temple at the time of return from exile (<em><a href='B:150 3:10-12'>Ezr 3:10-12</a></em>; <em><a href='B:150 5:16'>Ezr 5:16</a></em>; <em><a href='B:290 44:28'>Isa 44:28</a></em>; <em><a href='B:440 2:18'>Hag 2:18</a></em>; <em><a href='B:450 4:9'>Zec 4:9</a></em>; <em><a href='B:450 8:9'>Zec 8:9</a></em>); and this is the context of this Psalm (see on :13 and :16). The ‘heavens and earth’ refer to Israel (<em><a href='B:290 1:2'>Isa 1:2</a></em>) and the temple. Although they had ‘perished’ in the Babylonian invasion and destruction of the first temple, God remained and would, the Psalmist believed, install a new temple system (as outlined in Ezekiel 40-48). However, this never quite happened as God intended due to Judah’s weakness, and so these prophecies were reapplied to how the entire Jewish system based around the temple and Law of Moses would ‘perish’ and God’s new temple system based around the exalted Lord Jesus would come into existence (<em><a href='B:650 1:10'>Heb 1:10</a></em> and context).</p>


text:
<p><em><a href='B:650 1:12'>Heb 1:12</a></em>&nbsp;<em>And like a cloak You shall roll them up as a garment, and they shall be changed; but You are the same and Your years are without end</em>- See on :10 and :11. The Jewish system would be rolled up (see on :11), as a scroll that is not going to be read any more; the Law would end. But Messiah would remain eternally. It was the Lord Jesus by His sacrifice which changed the Jewish system. The same word is used of the Lord's 'changing' the customs delivered by Moses (<em><a href='B:510 6:14'>Act 6:14</a></em>).</p>


text:
<p><em><a href='B:650 1:13'>Heb 1:13</a></em>&nbsp;<em>But of which of the angels has He said at any time: Sit on my right hand until I make your enemies a footstool for your feet?</em>- Again the contrast is between the Lord being given a throne to sit on, from whence He can direct and control; and the Angels who are servants, sent forth to fulfil the will of Him that sits upon the throne (:14). See on :3&nbsp;<em>He then sat down on the right hand:&nbsp;</em>The footstool refers to that which the King reigns over; we the enemies who were reconciled become the Lord's footstool, and we are 'made' like this by the Father's will and desire to glorify His Son in this unique way.</p>


text:
<p><em><a href='B:650 1:14'>Heb 1:14</a></em>&nbsp;<em>Are they not all ministering spirits, sent forth to do service for the sake of those that shall inherit salvation?</em>- "All" Angels are obedient servants; this of itself rules out any argument for some Angels being sinful. Their 'sending forth' from the Heavenly throne room has a literal aspect to it- see on <em><a href='B:290 37:36'>Isa 37:36</a></em>; <em><a href='B:20 7:4'>Exo 7:4</a></em>. But in this context the argument is that the Lord Jesus is the enthroned King, whereas Angels are servants sent forth to serve us; and thus the Lord's supremacy over Angels is established. Indeed it could be argued that the position presented is that the Lord Jesus has been enthroned by the Father, and He sends forth the Angels to do His service for the sake of our salvation. The Lord Jesus is therefore the Lord of Angels.</p>


text:
<p><em><a href='B:650 2:1'>Heb 2:1</a></em>&nbsp;<em>Therefore we ought to give the more earnest attention to the things that we heard, lest we drift away from them</em>- The&nbsp;<em>more</em>&nbsp;earnest attention continues the theme of chapter 1, that the things of the Lord Jesus are of greater moment than those spoken by Moses and declared by Angels (:2). "That we heard" suggests they would have heard rather than read the Gospel message. All they had was their memories of the word spoken; we therefore can the more understand the significance of the New Testament being written down. Hence the appeal to give attention to those things. Those things were about their personal salvation (:3). The more we believe that we really have been redeemed, the more evident it becomes that these things demand our whole and total devotion. If we “neglect so great salvation”, we will have ‘drifted away’ (RV) from the solid assurances which are in the Gospel we first heard. Clearly, it&nbsp;<em>is&nbsp;</em>a temptation to drift away from those assurances, even if we ‘hold’ to the doctrinal propositions of the Gospel in theory. The wonderful reality of it all for us can so easily drift away. But; we will be there</p>


text:
<p><em><a href='B:650 2:2'>Heb 2:2</a></em>&nbsp;<em>For since the message declared by angels proved to be reliable and every transgression or disobedience received a just retribution</em>- "Transgression" is more 'inattention'. Although the judgments of the Mosaic law were not put into effect by the priesthood, the intention was that every act of violation, conscious or otherwise, had retribution. And God to this day is a sensitive responder to the works and thoughts of His people (s:w. <em><a href='B:650 11:6'>Heb 11:6</a></em>). We should realize that under the new covenant, behaviour is even the more significant, and every act of life and thought is therefore the more culpable in light of the fact that God's Son shed His blood for our salvation.</p>


text:
<p><em><a href='B:650 2:3'>Heb 2:3</a></em> - see on <em><a href='B:510 1:1'>Act 1:1</a></em>.</p><p><em>How shall we escape-&nbsp;</em>The rejected will have a desire to escape but having no place to run (<em><a href='B:650 2:3'>Heb 2:3</a></em>, quoting <em><a href='B:290 20:6'>Isa 20:6</a></em> concerning the inability of men to escape from the approach of the invincible Assyrian army). <em><a href='B:730 20:11'>Rev 20:11</a></em> likewise speaks of the rejected 'heavens and earth' fleeing from the Lamb's throne and finding no place to go. Before the whirlwind of God's judgment, the false shepherds of Israel "shall have no way to flee, nor the principal of the flock to escape" (<em><a href='B:300 25:35'>Jer 25:35</a></em>). The rejected will see that the Lord is coming against them with an army much stronger than theirs, and they have missed the chance to make peace (<em><a href='B:490 14:31'>Luk 14:31</a></em>). They will be like the Egyptians suffering God's judgments in the Red Sea, wanting to flee but having no realistic place to run to. Uzziah hasting to go out from the presence of the Lord after he was judged for his sin was a foretaste of this (<em><a href='B:140 26:20'>2Ch 26:20</a></em>). But the "escape" in view may specifically refer to escape from the tribulation to come upon Jerusalem in the last days (<em><a href='B:490 21:36'>Luk 21:36</a></em> s:w:), and this had special relevance if indeed as suggested on <em><a href='B:650 1:1'>Heb 1:1</a></em> Hebrews is addressed primarily to the Jerusalem church.</p><p><em>If we neglect so great a salvation?</em>- "So great a salvation" is the LXX for "A great deliverance" (<em><a href='B:10 45:7'>Gen 45:7</a></em>), brought about by the suffering of Joseph-Jesus at the hands of his brethren. “Such&nbsp;<em>great</em>&nbsp;salvation" (<em><a href='B:650 2:3'>Heb 2:3</a></em>) might imply that a lesser salvation could have been achieved by Christ, but He achieved the greatest possible. "He is able also&nbsp;<em>to save them to the uttermost</em>&nbsp;that come unto God by him" (<em><a href='B:650 7:25'>Heb 7:25</a></em>) may be saying the same thing. Indeed, the&nbsp;<em>excellence</em>&nbsp;of our salvation in Christ is a major NT theme. It was typified by the way Esther interceded for Israel; she could have simply asked for her own life to be spared, but she asked for that of all Israel. And further, she has the courage (and we sense her reticence, how difficult it was for her) to ask the King yet another favour- that the Jews be allowed&nbsp; to slay their enemies for one more day, and also to hang Haman's sons (<em><a href='B:150 9:12'>Ezr 9:12</a></em>). She was achieving the maximum possible redemption for Israel rather than the minimum. Paul again seems to comment on this theme when he speaks of how Christ became obedient, "<em>even</em>&nbsp;to the death of the cross" (<em><a href='B:570 2:8'>Phi 2:8</a></em>), as if perhaps some kind of salvation could have been achieved without the death&nbsp;<em>of the cross</em>. Perhaps there was no theological necessity for Christ to die&nbsp;<em>such</em>&nbsp;a painful death; if so, doubtless this was in His mind in His agony in the garden. “If&nbsp;<em>it</em>&nbsp;be possible, let this cup pass from me" (<em><a href='B:470 26:39'>Mat 26:39</a></em>) may not simply mean 'If it's possible, may I not have to die'. The Lord could have meant: 'If&nbsp;<em>it</em>- some unrecorded possible alternative to the cross- is&nbsp;<em>really</em>&nbsp;possible, then let&nbsp;<em>this</em>&nbsp;cup pass'- as if to say 'If option A is possible, then let the cup of option B pass from me'. But He overrode this with a desire to be submissive to the Father's preferred will- which was for us to have a part in the greatest, most surpassing salvation, which required the death of the cross.</p><p><em>Which having at the first been spoken through the Lord, was confirmed to us by those that heard</em>- This is the standard proof for a non-Pauline authorship of Hebrews. But see on <em><a href='B:650 1:1'>Heb 1:1</a></em>. The "us" and "we" in Hebrews refers to the wider readership and don't have to demand that the author includes himself in the reference. There are other examples of this e:g. "Let us eat and drink for tomorrow we die" (<em><a href='B:530 15:32'>1Co 15:32</a></em>). "We" should no longer be tossed around by false teachings (<em><a href='B:560 4:14'>Eph 4:14</a></em>) surely precludes Paul personally. In Hebrews, the "we" who need to take more earnest heed to the Gospel is surely the readership rather than the author (<em><a href='B:650 2:1'>Heb 2:1</a></em>). The personal notes at the end of chapter 13 are hard to interpret as written by anyone other than Paul. Even if the "we" must include Paul, "Those that heard" would refer to the disciples, whom Paul was not among. They "confirmed" the Lord's own message. It could be argued that Paul is saying that he had heard the message directly from the Lord on the Damascus road, as he emphasizes in Galatians; and what he heard was corroborated by the witness of the disciples. Read this way, the argument would be that the "us" referred to someone who had heard the message spoken through the Lord Jesus directly, and had the content of it confirmed to him by the disciples. And that "us" could only be Paul personally. In this case, this verse confirms rather than questions Paul's authorship.</p>


text:
<p><em><a href='B:650 2:4'>Heb 2:4</a></em>&nbsp;<em>God also bearing witness with them, both by signs and wonders and by various powers and by gifts of the Holy Spirit, according to His own will</em>- The purpose of the miraculous gifts of the Spirit was to confirm the spoken word of the disciples, the eye witnesses and first hearers of the Lord Jesus (<em><a href='B:650 2:3'>Heb 2:3</a></em>). This clear purpose of these gifts is proof of itself that they were not for all time; once the Lord's message and the inspired interpretation of it had been codified in the New Testament, there was no need for these miraculous gifts to confirm the authority and veracity of the preachers.</p>


text:
<p><em><a href='B:650 2:5'>Heb 2:5</a></em>&nbsp;<em>For not to angels did He subject the world to come, of which we speak</em>- Paul now returns to his theme of the Lord's superiority over Angels. The great salvation made possible by the Lord's death means a place in God's Kingdom, when the world shall be subject unto us- and not to Angels. Whatever their future role, Paul implies that our status in the future Kingdom will be far greater than that of the Angels currently. "Did He" rather than "will He" reflects suggests that the whole plan of our salvation has already been effected in God's purpose and will. The subjection of the world to us was what Paul spoke about- in preaching the Gospel of the Kingdom of God coming on earth.</p>


text:
<p><em><a href='B:650 2:6'>Heb 2:6</a></em>&nbsp;<em>But one has somewhere testified-&nbsp;</em>As noted on <em><a href='B:650 13:22'>Heb 13:22</a></em>, this is the kind of language appropriate to a transcript of a talk or lecture<em>.</em></p><p><em>What is man, that You are mindful of him? Or the Son of Man, that You visit him?</em>- The parallel between mankind generally and "the Son of Man", Messiah, clearly places this "Son of man" as one of mankind, and not God. But it is this total humanity of the Lord Jesus which is the basis of His exaltation above Angels, as the argument goes on to demonstrate. This is also answering the tendency within parts of Judaism to think that the Messiah would be some kind of Angel or pre-existent spirit which visited earth. Note that God is mindful of man because He visits him- which He does through His Angels (visiting is Angelic language). Thus God is mindful (literally mind-full) of us because of the Angels "visiting" us with trials and observation "every moment" (<em><a href='B:220 7:18'>Job 7:18</a></em>):&nbsp;His mind was full of us in that He 'visited' humanity in His Son. Note that the Son did not visit earth; God visited not the earth but mankind, in that He manifested Himself in His Son who was born of our human nature. And who were we, a tiny planet in an infinitely expanding cosmos, and just a few of us two legged beings on its surface, that God Almighty should plan our salvation and high exaltation through the nature and sacrifice of His only begotten Son::.</p><p><em><a href='B:650 2:6-9'>Heb 2:6-9</a></em> is an example of the inspired writer using expected reader response and expectations in order to make a point. Having spoken of how the world to come will be given to redeemed human beings and not to Angels, the writer goes on to quote from the Psalms to prove that point. We begin reading the quotation assuming it's talking about humanity generally; but as it goes on, we realize it's talking about the pre-eminent Son of Man, i:e. the Lord Jesus. Notice how in :9 He is called "Jesus", with no 'Lord' or 'Christ' added on. The point of it all is to make us perceive how totally identified is Jesus with humanity as a whole; a passage which speaks in its context of humanity generally is allowed to quite naturally flow on in meaning to apply to the Lord Jesus personally. It's a majestic, powerful way of making the point- that the Lord Jesus was truly one of us.</p>


text:
<p><em><a href='B:650 2:7'>Heb 2:7</a></em>&nbsp;<em>You made him a little lower than the angels, You crowned him with glory and honour and did set him over the works of Your hands-&nbsp;</em>The context of <em><a href='B:230 8:5'>Psa 8:5</a></em> is of David's exaltation after killing Goliath. David sees in his victory the possibility for the exaltation generally not only of Israel but of all humanity. The individual in view is interpreted specifically as Jesus (:9). And it is likewise true that His exaltation is the possibility for the exaltation of all Israel and all humanity, insofar as we are "in Him" and identified with Him in baptism. The making of man or the Lord Jesus for a short time lower than the Angels is no evidence of His pre-existence or Divine incarnation in Him; for the words in their original context apply to the man David and to "man" generally. The idea is that man, and the Lord Jesus, is made for a little while / period lower than the Angels, and Paul takes this as implying that both the Lord Jesus and ourselves shall be exalted higher than the Angels, seeing we are only for a short period made lower than them.</p>


text:
<p><em><a href='B:650 2:8'>Heb 2:8</a></em>&nbsp;<em>You did put all things in subjection under his feet. For in that He subjected all things to him, He left nothing that is not subject to him. But now we do not see all things subjected to him</em>- The "him" is mankind generally and also specifically the Lord Jesus. <em><a href='B:530 15:27-28'>1Co 15:27-28</a></em>; <em><a href='B:560 1:22'>Eph 1:22</a></em>; <em><a href='B:560 5:24'>Eph 5:24</a></em> use the same language to describe our subjection under the Lord's feet, becoming thereby His footstool. But the Gospel must yet advance, and those obedient to it must yet subject more parts of their lives to His kingship. Through His Spirit, we are progressively subjected to Him (<em><a href='B:570 3:21'>Phi 3:21</a></em>). And finally, all things on earth shall literally be subject unto the Lord Jesus; and that includes Angels. For His superiority over Angels is the context of this passage. The same word is used of how Angels have been made subject unto Him (<em><a href='B:670 3:22'>1Pe 3:22</a></em>).</p>


text:
<p><em><a href='B:650 2:9'>Heb 2:9</a></em> - see on <em><a href='B:520 3:19'>Rom 3:19</a></em>; <em><a href='B:570 2:8'>Phi 2:8</a></em>.</p><p><em>But we behold him who has been made a little lower than the angels- Jesus- crowned with glory and honour because of his suffering of death, whereby, by the grace of God, he tasted death for every person</em>- The focus is now moved from mankind generally to the Lord Jesus, the pre-eminent "son of man". He has been exalted to glory and honour, perhaps by implication a glory greater than of the Angels because of His suffering of death. The implication might be that Angels cannot die (<em><a href='B:490 20:35-36'>Luk 20:35-36</a></em>) but the Lord did, and was thereby exalted above them. The Lord's exaltation is ours, and repeatedly we read in Hebrews 2 of the Lord's total connection with humanity in order to save and exalt us. That connection was not with Angels but with humans; for the Lord was not an Angel, seeing His mission was identification with men and thereby to achieve their salvation. His death was supremely a tasting of death for every man. Seeing Angels cannot die, the Lord's death was a clear enough statement He was no Angel but human, dying for His people. Death is the ultimate human fear and problem; and the Lord tasted every man's death, every man's ultimate fear and struggle. This was by God's grace because what is man, that He should be so mindful of us as to give His only begotten Son to identify with us and save a few of us.</p><p>By God’s grace, the Lord tasted death&nbsp;<em>for&nbsp;</em>(Gk:&nbsp;<em>huper</em>)<em>&nbsp;every man</em>, as our representative: “in tasting death he should stand for all" (<em><a href='B:650 2:9'>Heb 2:9</a></em> NEB). In His death He experienced the essence of the life-struggle and death of every man. The fact the Lord did this&nbsp;<em>for us</em>&nbsp;means that we respond&nbsp;<em>for Him</em>. “To you it is given&nbsp;<em>in the behalf of</em>(Gk:&nbsp;<em>huper</em>) Christ, not only to believe on Him in theory, but to suffer&nbsp;<em>for his sake</em>&nbsp;(Gk:&nbsp;<em>huper</em>)" (<em><a href='B:570 1:29'>Phi 1:29</a></em>). He suffered&nbsp;<em>for us</em>&nbsp;as our representative, and we suffer&nbsp;<em>for Him</em>&nbsp;in response. This was and is the two-way imperative of the fact the Lord was our representative. He died&nbsp;<em>for all</em>&nbsp;that we should die to self and live&nbsp;<em>for Him</em>&nbsp;(<em><a href='B:540 5:14-15'>2Co 5:14-15</a></em>). “His own self bare our sins as our representative in his own body note the link “<em>our</em>&nbsp;sins" and “his&nbsp;<em>own</em>&nbsp;body" that we being dead to sin, should live unto righteousness" (<em><a href='B:670 2:24-25'>1Pe 2:24-25</a></em>). We died with Him, there on His cross; and so His resurrection life is now ours. He is totally active for us now; His life now is&nbsp;<em>for us</em>, and as we live His life, we should be 100%&nbsp;<em>for Him</em>&nbsp;in our living. He gave His life&nbsp;<em>for</em>&nbsp;us, and we must lay down our lives&nbsp;<em>for</em>&nbsp;Him (<em><a href='B:690 3:16'>1Jn 3:16</a></em>).</p><h4><em><a href='B:650 2:9'>Heb 2:9</a></em> seems to describe the Lord&nbsp;<em>in His time of dying,</em>&nbsp;in the suffering not just the experience of, but the suffering associated with death, as “crowned with glory and honour". There He was crowned not with thorns but glory and honour, from God's perspective. The physical sufferings of the cross were an especial cause of spiritual temptation to the Lord; just as physical pain, illness, weakness etc. are specific causes of our temptations to sin. <em><a href='B:650 2:9'>Heb 2:9</a></em> defines the Lord's 'sufferings' as specifically "the suffering of death", the sufferings associated with His time of dying. <em><a href='B:650 2:18'>Heb 2:18</a></em> RVmg. then goes on to say: "For having been himself tempted in that wherein he suffered". The sufferings of death were therefore an especial source of temptation for Him. Truly did He learn obedience to the Father specifically through the process of His death (<em><a href='B:650 5:8'>Heb 5:8</a></em>). Let's seek to remember this when we or those close to us face physical weakness, illness and pain of whatever sort. The Greek words&nbsp;<em>charis</em>&nbsp;grace and&nbsp;<em>choris</em>&nbsp;apart differ by one very small squiggle. This is why there’s an alternative reading of <em><a href='B:650 2:9'>Heb 2:9</a></em>: “So that apart from God&nbsp;<em>choris theou</em>&nbsp;he Jesus tasted death for us”. This would then be a clear reference to the way that the Lord Jesus felt apart from God at His very end. Not that He was, but if He felt like that, then this was in practice the experience which He had. Thus even when we feel apart from God- the Lord Jesus knows even that feeling.</h4>


text:
<p><em><a href='B:650 2:10'>Heb 2:10</a></em>&nbsp;<em>For it became Him for whom are all things and through whom are all things, in bringing many sons to glory, to make the author of their salvation-&nbsp;</em>The God for whom are all things wishes to bring many sons to glory- not just one, the Lord Jesus. He who could do all things, whose are all things, worked out His purpose of having many glorious sons through giving them an author of salvation who was perfected through sufferings. That salvation has to be authored for each son makes it personal, and the relationship between the author and the authored the more intimate. The false idea of each person having an inherent "immortal soul" totally destroys the wonder of eternal salvation being personally authored for each of us. The same word for "author" is used in this sense in <em><a href='B:650 12:2'>Heb 12:2</a></em>, where Jesus is the author and finisher of our faith. By His grace He began faith in people, and the grace / gift of His Spirit finishes our faith in salvation. Through that path the Lord Jesus is the author of our salvation.</p><p><em>Perfect through sufferings</em>- The Lord Jesus alone could say, with full meaning, “I am”. Who He appeared to be, was who He essentially was. He alone achieved a completely integrated, real self. He was what Paul called the “perfect man”, the completed, integrated person (<em><a href='B:560 4:13'>Eph 4:13</a></em>). But He had to work on this. Hebrews always speaks of Him as “perfected”, as a verb (<em><a href='B:650 2:10'>Heb 2:10</a></em>; <em><a href='B:650 5:9'>Heb 5:9</a></em>; <em><a href='B:650 7:28'>Heb 7:28</a></em>)- never with the adjective ‘perfect’. Apart from being a major problem for Trinitarian views, this simple fact sets Him up as&nbsp;<em>our</em>&nbsp;pattern, whom the Father seeks like wise ‘to perfect’. Yet the path the Lord had to take to achieve this was hard indeed. His final point of perfection was reached at the moment of His death; the sufferings of death elicited within Him that final point of completion / perfection. Which was why He died at just that point. And this adds infinite meaning to the sufferings of death which are our common experience.</p>


text:
<p><em><a href='B:650 2:11'>Heb 2:11</a></em> - see on <em><a href='B:650 11:26'>Heb 11:26</a></em>.</p><p><em>For both he that sanctifies and they that are sanctified are all of the same nature-&nbsp;</em>This is yet more evidence that the Lord was not an Angel. He had the nature of those whom He sanctified in order to achieve that sanctification. This inspired principle is profound and underpins the representative nature of the Lord's work and sacrifice. The sanctifier must be of the same nature as the sanctified. This raises a serious question about the validity of the Mosaic sacrifices; they were only acceptable by reason of the truly representative Messianic sacrifice to which they pointed forward. And as Paul will later point out, it was therefore not possible for the blood of animals to take away human sin; the sanctification had to be achieved by a sanctifier of the same nature. But "of the same nature" is literally "out of one". The argument could equally be that they were of the same Father, which is why He is not ashamed to call us brothers, for we are of the same one Father. In this case, Paul read the virgin birth as no fundamental barrier to the Lord's identification with us, for we and Jesus are all "of the same one", i:e. God.</p><p><em>For this cause he is not ashamed to call them brothers</em>- The very fact Christ calls us His brothers (as in <em><a href='B:470 12:50'>Mat 12:50</a></em>) is seen as proof of Christ's humanity, that it was men and not Angels who were His brothers. The Lord shall be ashamed of His association with some at the last day, and of us He will not be ashamed in that day (s:w. <em><a href='B:480 8:38'>Mar 8:38</a></em>). But His unashamed association with us begins now in this life. Because God's Son is unashamed now of having us as His brothers, therefore the Father is not ashamed to be known as our God (<em><a href='B:650 11:16'>Heb 11:16</a></em> s:w:).</p>


text:
<p><em><a href='B:650 2:12'>Heb 2:12</a></em> - see on <em><a href='B:470 28:10'>Mat 28:10</a></em>.</p><p><em>Saying: I will declare Your name to my brothers, in the midst of the congregation will I sing Your praise</em>- The Psalm quoted predicts the Lord's crucifixion. His prayer thoughts to the Father then included His awareness that the&nbsp;<em>ekklesia</em>, the church or "congregation", were His brothers. For He realized that it was through His sacrifice that a new family was being created. The declaration or preaching of the Father's Name to us was supremely through the Lord's death on the cross. The cross was the supreme declaration of the Name (<em><a href='B:500 17:26'>Joh 17:26</a></em>); the first letters of the Hebrew title over the cross spelt 'YHWH'. And that declaration of the Name in the naked, bleeding, betrayed and crucified Christ was to us. And the Lord looked forward, perhaps in literal terms, to singing praise to the Father in the midst of His brothers. This all hardly sounds as if the Lord Jesus was "God the Son". He positioned Himself in the midst of His brethren, singing God's praise- even after His exaltation.</p>


text:
<p><em><a href='B:650 2:13'>Heb 2:13</a></em>&nbsp;<em>And again: I will put my trust in Him-&nbsp;</em>The fact the Lord Jesus needed to trust the Father is cited as an example of His humanity, and therefore proof of His not being an Angel- for Angels do not need to exhibit trust or faith in God. The quotation from <em><a href='B:290 8:17'>Isa 8:17</a></em> goes on to state that God is hidden from the majority of Israel- relevant to the Hebrew Christians who were wondering how so many in Israel could be wrong, and who were returning to the majority, the broad way of Judaism. The original context speaks of the isolation of Isaiah and his family within Israel; "I", even if Israel&nbsp;<em>en masse</em>&nbsp;do not, "will put my trust in Him"; the majority in Israel had stumbled (<em><a href='B:290 8:15'>Isa 8:15</a></em>), a figure Paul elsewhere uses about Israel's stumbling on the rock of Jesus as Messiah. And it was all because they had not truly understood God's law (<em><a href='B:290 8:20'>Isa 8:20</a></em>) which spoke so fully of Jesus as Christ.</p><p><em>And again: Behold, I and the children whom God has given me</em>- Isaiah is a confirmed type of Christ, and his school of prophets typical of the saints:&nbsp;"I (Isaiah) and the children (prophets - <em><a href='B:290 8:16'>Isa 8:16</a></em>) whom the Lord hath given me" (<em><a href='B:290 8:18'>Isa 8:18</a></em>) is quoted here as referring to Christ and His brethren. Other instances of Isaiah being a type of Christ can be found by comparing <em><a href='B:290 6:10'>Isa 6:10</a></em> with <em><a href='B:500 12:39-41'>Joh 12:39-41</a></em> and by appreciating that "The spirit of the Lord God is upon me::. to preach good tidings::. to comfort all that mourn" (e:g. Hezekiah) is primarily concerning Isaiah's message of hope to Israel during the Assyrian invasions, although it is quoted concerning Jesus (<em><a href='B:290 61:1-2'>Isa 61:1-2</a></em> cp. <em><a href='B:490 4:18'>Luk 4:18</a></em>). <em><a href='B:290 8:16-18'>Isa 8:16-18</a></em> could be taken as Isaiah saying that he had decided not to teach his school of prophets any longer, but rather to just personally focus upon his own relationship with God: "Bind up the testimony, seal the law among my disciples. And I will wait upon the LORD, that hideth his face from the house of Jacob, and I will look for him". The next verse is however quoted in <em><a href='B:650 2:13'>Heb 2:13</a></em> about the Lord Jesus and His brethren being of the same nature: "Behold, I and the children whom the LORD hath given me are for signs and for wonders in Israel from the LORD of hosts". The Hebrew writer therefore understood this statement to reflect an intense unity between Isaiah and his "children", be they his literal children Immanuel and Mahershalalhashbaz or his spiritual children. It seems to me that Immanuel could've been some kind of Messiah figure- but for whatever reason, he didn't live up to it and the prophecy was therefore given a greater application to the Lord Jesus. Likewise, the "children" Isaiah refers to in <em><a href='B:290 8:18'>Isa 8:18</a></em> became the faithful children in Christ under the new covenant, according to how <em><a href='B:650 2:13'>Heb 2:13</a></em> quotes it.</p>


text:
<p><em><a href='B:650 2:14'>Heb 2:14</a></em> - see on <em><a href='B:550 1:4'>Gal 1:4</a></em>; <em><a href='B:730 20:5'>Rev 20:5</a></em>.</p><p><em>Since then the children are sharers in flesh and blood, he also himself in like manner partook of the same nature; so that through his death he might bring to nothing him that had the power of death, that is, the Devil</em>- The language of sharing and partaking does not mean that the Lord only shared part of our nature; for we the children are sharers or partakers in flesh and blood, and we are fully human. He likewise participated or shard fully in our condition. Not an an actor, playing out a theological necessity that was scripted in the heavenly text, but in full total reality.</p><p>“Him that had the power of death, that is the Devil” (<em><a href='B:650 2:14'>Heb 2:14</a></em>) may refer to the fact that “the sting (power) of death is sin; and the strength of sin is the (Jewish) Law” (<em><a href='B:530 15:56'>1Co 15:56</a></em>; see also <em><a href='B:520 4:15'>Rom 4:15</a></em>; <em><a href='B:520 5:13'>Rom 5:13</a></em>; <em><a href='B:520 7:8'>Rom 7:8</a></em>, where ‘the Law’ that gives power to sin is clearly the Jewish law). Bearing in mind that the ‘Devil’ often refers to sin and the flesh, it seems significant that ‘the flesh’ and ‘sin’ are often associated with the Mosaic Law. The whole passage in <em><a href='B:650 2:14'>Heb 2:14</a></em> can be read with reference to the Jewish Law being ‘taken out of the way’ by the death of Jesus A:V. “destroy him that hath the power of death”. The Devil kept men in bondage, just as the Law did (<em><a href='B:550 4:9'>Gal 4:9</a></em>; <em><a href='B:550 5:1'>Gal 5:1</a></em>; <em><a href='B:510 15:10'>Act 15:10</a></em>; <em><a href='B:520 7:6-11'>Rom 7:6-11</a></em>). The Law was an ‘accuser’ (<em><a href='B:520 2:19-20'>Rom 2:19-20</a></em>; <em><a href='B:520 7:7'>Rom 7:7</a></em>) just as the Devil is. <em><a href='B:650 2:14'>Heb 2:14</a></em> states that the Devil was destroyed by Christ’s death. The Greek for ‘destroy’ is translated ‘abolish’ in <em><a href='B:560 2:15'>Eph 2:15</a></em>: “Having abolished Darby: ‘annulled’ in His flesh the enmity, even the law of commandments contained in ordinances”. This would equate the Devil with the enmity, or fleshly mind (<em><a href='B:520 8:7'>Rom 8:7</a></em>) generated by the Mosaic Law; remember that Hebrews was written mainly to Jewish believers. The Law itself was perfect, in itself it was not the minister of sin, but the effect it had on man was to stimulate the ‘Devil’ within man because of our disobedience. “The strength of sin is the Law” (<em><a href='B:530 15:56'>1Co 15:56</a></em>). “Sin taking occasion by the commandment, deceived me, and by it slew me (<em><a href='B:520 7:8'>Rom 7:8</a></em>; <em><a href='B:520 7:11'>Rom 7:11</a></em>). Hence “the wages of sin (stimulated by the Law) is death” (<em><a href='B:520 6:23'>Rom 6:23</a></em>). It is quite possible that the “sin” in Romans 6, which we should not keep serving, may have some reference to the Mosaic Law. It is probable that the Judaizers were by far the biggest source of false teaching in the early church. The assumption that Paul is battling Gnosticism is an anachronism, because the Gnostic heresies developed some time later. It would be true to say that incipient Gnostic ideas were presented by the Judaizers in the form of saying that sin was not to be taken too seriously because the Law provided set formulae for getting round it. The Law produced an outward showing in the “flesh”, not least in the sign of circumcision (<em><a href='B:520 2:28'>Rom 2:28</a></em>).</p><p>This passage places extraordinary emphasis upon the fact that the Lord Jesus had human nature: “He&nbsp;<em>also himself likewise</em>” partook of it (<em><a href='B:650 2:14'>Heb 2:14</a></em>). This phrase uses three words all with the same meaning, just to drive the point home. He partook “of the&nbsp;<em>same</em>” nature; the record could have said ‘he partook of&nbsp;<em>it</em>&nbsp;too’, but it stresses, “he partook of the&nbsp;<em>same</em>”. The passages hammers home the same truth multiple times: "Himself::. likewise::. in like manner::. partook::. the same". The Lord's humanity was of huge moment to Paul. It is the basis for our salvation. The Lord partook in our nature, and we are made partakers in Him unto salvation (<em><a href='B:650 2:14'>Heb 2:14</a></em> cp. <em><a href='B:650 3:14'>Heb 3:14</a></em>; <em><a href='B:650 12:10'>Heb 12:10</a></em>; <em><a href='B:540 1:7'>2Co 1:7</a></em>; <em><a href='B:670 4:13'>1Pe 4:13</a></em>). As He partook in our nature, so we partake in Him and symbolize it by partaking at His table (s:w. <em><a href='B:530 10:17'>1Co 10:17</a></em>; <em><a href='B:530 10:21'>1Co 10:21</a></em>; <em><a href='B:530 10:30'>1Co 10:30</a></em>). His humanity, when preached and understood, is a powerful invitation to partake in Him by baptism and a life lived in Him. A Divine "God the Son" has no such appeal:&nbsp;</p>


text:
<p><em><a href='B:650 2:15'>Heb 2:15</a></em> - see on <em><a href='B:650 5:7'>Heb 5:7</a></em>.</p><p><em>And might deliver all those who through fear of death were all their lifetime subject to bondage</em>- The reference is to Israel's deliverance from Egyptian bondage. The "devil" who was slain in :14 could then allude to Pharaoh. But Israel were delivered from a greater bondage- to the law and the inevitable fear of death which it inculcated in sinful man (see on :14). It is the fear of death, the subconscious awareness in every human being that they have sinned and must die, which is here defined as the psychological bind which keeps people in bondage. The message of freedom from sin and death which is in Christ is only attractive to those who are honest enough to get in touch with themselves and realize that this is indeed the psychological tie that binds them. We can only experience the joy of release from bondage if we perceive we were in bondage; and such joy can only come from a firm persuasion that if the Lord were to return right now, we really will be saved. For anything less than that is not good news, just a fearful sense of responsibility to judgment to come, against which we vainly hope our knowledge of some true theology will somehow triumph.</p><p>The fear of death grips our society more than we like to admit. The Swiss psychologist Paul Tournier observed the huge “number of people who dream that they are locked in, that everywhere they come up against iron-bound and padlocked doors, that they absolutely must escape, and yet there is no way out”. This is the state of the nation, this is how we naturally are, this is the audience to which we preach. And we preach a freedom from that fear. Because the Lord Jesus was of our human nature- and here perhaps more than anywhere else we see the crucial practical importance of doctrine- we are freed from the ranks of all those who through fear of death live their lives in bondage. For He died for us, as our representative. How true are those inspired words. “To release them who through fear /&nbsp;<em>phobos</em>&nbsp;of death were all their living-time subject to slavery” (Gk:). Nearly all the great psychologists concluded that the mystery of death obsesses humanity; and in the last analysis, all anxiety is reduced to anxiety about death. You can see it for yourself, in how death, or real, deep discussion of it, is a taboo subject; how people will make jokes about it in reflection of their fear of seriously discussing it. People, even doctors, don’t quite know what to say to the dying. There can be floods of stories and chit-chat… all carefully avoiding any possible allusion to death. This fear of death, in which the unredeemed billions of humanity have been in bondage, explains the fear of old age, the unwillingness to accept our age for what it is, our bodies for how and what they are, or are becoming. I’m not saying of course that the emotion of fear or anxiety is totally removed from our lives by faith. The Lord Jesus in Gethsemane is proof enough that these emotions are an integral part of being human, and it’s no sin to have them. I’m talking of fear in it’s destructive sense, the fear of death which is rooted in a lack of hope. There's a passage in&nbsp;<em>Hamlet</em>&nbsp;which speaks of not so much fearing death as "the dread of something after death" (some of the sentiments in Job 18 are similar). And modern psychoanalytical studies have confirmed this. A large part of the fear of death is the fear of what follows. For those in Christ, whilst like their Lord they may naturally fear the process of death, their future is secured; they know that death is unconsciousness and will end ultimately in a bodily resurrection at the Lord's return, after which they will share in His eternal life. For them, "the fear of death" in its ultimate form has been removed (<em><a href='B:650 2:14-18'>Heb 2:14-18</a></em>).</p><p>This passage in Hebrews 2 says that the Lord can deliver us from such bondage because he is our representative, our brother, of our nature, not ashamed of His connection with us (<em><a href='B:650 2:11'>Heb 2:11</a></em>). Reasoning back from this, we can see that Moses' ability to redeem Israel from Egypt, his appropriacy for the task, was because he had openly declared that he was one of them. Yet the wonder of that was lost on them. And if we are not careful, the wonder of the fact that the Lord had our nature, that He was our representative and is&nbsp;<em>therefore</em>&nbsp;mighty to save, can be lost on us too. The thrill of these first principles should ever remain with us:&nbsp;</p><p>All the Judges in some way prefigured the Lord; for they were "saviours" raised up to deliver God's weak and failing people in pure grace, when according to God's own word, they should have received the due punishment of rejection (<em><a href='B:160 9:27-28'>Neh 9:27-28</a></em>). He who delivered "them who through fear of death were all their lifetime subject to bondage" (<em><a href='B:650 2:15'>Heb 2:15</a></em>) was typified by all those earlier deliverers of God's people from bondage (cp. <em><a href='B:470 1:21'>Mat 1:21</a></em>). The "great salvation" of <em><a href='B:650 2:3'>Heb 2:3</a></em> which the Lord achieved was foreshadowed by the great deliverance wrought by Samson (<em><a href='B:70 15:18'>Jdg 15:18</a></em>).</p>


text:
<p><em><a href='B:650 2:16'>Heb 2:16</a></em>&nbsp;<em>For truly not to angels does he take hold in association; but he took hold of the seed of Abraham</em>- The tense of "take hold" suggests the Lord is doing this now. He does not take hold of Angels to associated with them, but of humans; because He had been intended through His nature to take hold of the seed of&nbsp; Abraham. The Lord Jesus is therefore an active Lord, calling men and women, taking hold of them by His calling. But the word translated "take hold" is used in the Gospels of the Lord taking hold of men literally (Peter on the water in his loss of faith, <em><a href='B:470 14:31'>Mat 14:31</a></em>; the blind man of <em><a href='B:480 8:23'>Mar 8:23</a></em>; the little child of <em><a href='B:490 9:47'>Luk 9:47</a></em> with his immature faith and understanding; the paralyzed man of <em><a href='B:490 14:4'>Luk 14:4</a></em>). In all these incidents we see acted parables of how the Lord takes hold of people in all manner of situations; and He does so on account of having fully shared our nature. The seed of Abraham referred to a singular seed, not a plural (<em><a href='B:550 3:16'>Gal 3:16</a></em>)- the Lord Jesus personally. But He takes hold of men and women and His humanity is a beckoning to them to become 'in Him' by baptism, so that they too are part of the seed (<em><a href='B:550 3:27-29'>Gal 3:27-29</a></em>).</p><h4>Angels cannot die: “Death::. does not lay hold of angels” (<em><a href='B:650 2:16'>Heb 2:16</a></em> Diaglott margin). If Angels could sin, then those who are found worthy of reward at Christ’s return will also still be able to sin. And seeing that sin brings death (<em><a href='B:520 6:23'>Rom 6:23</a></em>), they will therefore not have eternal life; if we have a possibility of sinning, we have the capability of dying. Thus to say Angels can sin makes God’s promise of eternal life meaningless, seeing that our reward is to share the nature of the Angels. <em><a href='B:650 2:16-18'>Heb 2:16-18</a></em> repays closer reflection in this context of Angels and possibility to sin. It speaks of the reasons why the Lord Jesus had to be of human nature: “For verily he took not on him the nature of angels; but he took on him the nature of the seed of Abraham. Wherefore in all things it behoved him to be made like unto his brethren, that he might be a merciful and faithful high priest in things pertaining to God, to make reconciliation for the sins of the people. For in that he himself hath suffered being tempted, he is able to succour them that are tempted”. Exactly because the Lord Jesus had to be tempted to sin, He did not have Angelic nature but human nature. His mission was to save humanity from human sin and death, not the Angels who cannot die. So, He had to have human nature so that He could be tempted to sin; and so this section so labours the point that therefore He did not have Angels’ nature. Which, by inference, is&nbsp;<em>not</em>&nbsp;able to be tempted to sin. Note how the Bible speaks of “Angels” as if there is only one category of Angel– obedient Heavenly beings.</h4>


