- I Timothy 1:4. Which genealogies does Paul speak of here?
He could well be speaking of the genealogies of our Bibles, as in Genesis and Matthew and Luke. He is in no way suggesting these lists are inaccurate or uninspired. Rather, it seems, he is responding to the strange interpretations put on these genealogies by Jewish rabbis. We’ve seen some of this in our day, especially in the cults. Jehovah’s Witnesses and others have devised chronological schemes to predict – always wrongly – the coming again of Christ. People who listen to the nonsense coming out of a genealogical study are distracted from the main truths of the Gospel, and for this reason Paul says, Leave it alone!
- I Timothy 1:18. How do prophecies help us wage a good warfare?
These were words spoken over a younger Timothy, words of encouragement, and quite possibly predictive words enumerating some of the victories that would be his. He is now called by his mentor to bring back into his mind the great things the Lord said about him, so as to be able faithfully to carry on with the work.
A large segment of the Body of Christ today believes that these prophetic words are still available. Others might suggest that key Scriptures spoken over a young minister of the Word would have the same effect. Either way, it is important occasionally to look back at that first call and remember how promising the ministry seemed then.
- I Timothy 1:20. How could Paul deliver someone to Satan?
Those in the church illegally are trespassers and simply need to be cast out. There is a proper way to do this, but it must be done. As an apostle of Jesus, Paul had the authority to ex-communicate anyone that needed it.
The church is a holy place, guided and protected by the Spirit of God Himself, as well as angels and godly saints. Herein is safety, though trouble is allowed believers from time to time. To cast one out of the church is indeed to put that person within the grasp of the evil one.
- I Timothy 2:4. Does God want every man to be saved?
That is what it says, isn’t it? But not everyone will be saved. The conflict between “Arminian” and “Calvinistic” theology raises its head again here. The same Paul that rebuked those who doubted God’s power of election in Romans, now says that God wants all to be saved.
I offer only a suggestion. Could it be that the heart of God from the beginning was not to destroy but to save all? Did He not desire that every member of creation come to Him and be happy with Him? The reality has been far from the truth. Could it be that election flows out of the fact that the entire world is lost by its own choice, but that some will be allowed to come to Christ, simply by the gracious call of God?
- I Timothy 2:5. What is a “Mediator”, and why is he needed?
A mediator is a go-between. He is the one who tries to get competing persons or organizations to talk, to come to the table, to make an agreement that is satisfactory on both sides.
In the case before us, God is on one side of the argument, mankind on the other. God has made laws, and mankind has broken them. God has sworn that lawbreakers must die and be punished. There is an impasse here. How shall the two parties be made one? Who will bring them to the table? How can God be a just and righteous God if He overlooks sin? The death price must be paid.
Enter our Mediator. Jesus pays the price for our sin by His death. God is pleased with this sacrifice. He can now be just, and the justifier of all who have sinned. Anyone who so desires may now enter Heaven, clean and justified before a holy God! An amazing plan. Amazing Mediator.
- I Timothy 2:5. Jesus seems separated from God here. Explain.
There is a plenitude of passages showing us the oneness of Father and Son. Here is one, and there are many such, that prove the Threeness (if you will) of the Trinity. Functions are different. Father is the one who made the plan, Son carries it out, Spirit brings it to us.
It was not the Father who died on the cross, one though He was with the Son. Functionally, the Mediator differs from the God who has brought His case before humanity. But see the perfect unity of it all. The separation is only in the visible performing of the whole drama, though no true separation ever occurs.
- I Timothy 2:15. What does it mean to be “saved in childbearing”?
Paul argues that the woman (Eve) fell first and we know that sorrowful times of childbirth were the punishment for her sin. Such has it ever been since those days. One could also add that the man’s punishment has continued, too. Generally speaking, hard work and the bearing of children are at the core of human life.
To encourage the women to whom he has just had to speak some harsh words, Paul lets them know that there is a pathway of victory in this lifestyle of Christ. Yes, the curse remains, but no, it does not mean that childbearing itself will curse you. Instead, you will be saved through it, difficult though it may seem.
Functions of men and women are spelled out clearly in this latter portion of chapter two. Both men and women can be discouraged by their lot in life and forget that a curse was placed on mankind. That curse will not be removed until Jesus comes. We must deal with sweat on the brow and serious birth pains until then. Faithfulness to the call of God on our lives is part of the salvation pathway set before the woman. Just as baptism, and no work, is the source of our salvation, so childbearing. But a set of works is given to each to work out our salvation.
Some have seen, because the Greek uses the definite article here, “the childbearing”, that Paul is saying that though the curse on women is painful, it was in spite of that curse that Jesus came into the world, and therefore all women will be saved by this historic childbearing.
Perhaps.
- I Timothy 3:2. The husband of one wife. One at a time, or a total of one?
Men have argued over the years about whether Paul was saying that a church leader should not be a polygamist, or that a church leader should have had only one wife, totally. We could end the argument by saying that he could well have meant both, since he does not explain himself.
It is true that polygamy was a problem in that age. Perhaps it was a problem in all ages. And the work of the Lord in His holy church has been to teach the truth about all things. In this case, the truth about marriage can best be lived out publicly by one man and one woman.
That’s the easy way out of the passage. There is another way:
That same desire of God to teach a holy thing about marriage would rule out second marriages, too, except in the case of death of the wife, or her infidelity, the very rules given for all men in regards to second marriages.
In my thinking, there is another factor here, that is not talked about much. A man who has had multiple marriages, though he may have been the victim and not the problem, will often be a man who should not be leading the family of God. She may have committed adultery. He is legally, Scripturally, justified in marrying again. But what drove her to unfaithfulness? Was he lacking in his emotional support? Did he value others above his spouse? Is he without blame?
Then there is the issue of the perception of this condition before the congregation. He may have had a superbly good reason for entering into this second marriage. But if there are children involved, or even if there are not, the word gets out that Pastor has been married before. What confidence does that give to the church, especially those contemplating marriage themselves, and looking for a strong role model behind the pulpit? Many have made it work, I doubt not. But Paul’s rule here may be more important than we have realized.
Older
Top
