More on First Timothy
Who is Paul writing to? A young preacher in Ephesus. Are preachers and apostles any more important than anyone else? Well although Paul makes it clear that the body of Christ is made up of many parts that are to be respected for what they are, and no part is to elevate itself to a place of superiority or assume a position of supposed inferiority, he also seems to put the offices in a sort of order, with apostles first, prophets second and teachers third. (1 Cor. 12). And I am humbled by James 3:1 that warns teachers will receive a stricker judgement. So as I stated before, since this letter is addressed to Timothy, as opposed to the saints as in other places, I think it is fair to say that Paul presupposed a certain maturity and authority of his reader, that might not be expected of the whole congregation.
Who is Paul writing about? He is concerned with false doctrines that are creeping into the Church. What false doctrines, and who is teaching them? My first thought was that Paul writes a lot about the Jewish Christians who insisted that to be saved one had to become a jew. Cirrcumsision was a big issue to Paul and his gentile converts. But since Timothy was in Ephesus, and Ephesus is one of the seven churches in Revelation, I dug a little deeper and found the Nicolaitans, who apparently were teaching, among other things, that since we are saved by grace, and are free from the Law, anything goes...especially sexual lewdness.
May I ignor the part about women not teaching? Should we ignor the part about Timothy being instructed to drink wine (for his health)? I think maybe if more churches adhered to the guidelines in Chapter 3 when chosing pastors and elders and board members, there would be a lot less trouble. When we speak of Holiness, working out ones salvation, making sure that we are not trusting in a dead faith, since faith without works is dead, I look at Chapter 4:1 and wonder. If some can (will) fall from the faith, then it is possible to loose the faith they had at the beginning. And how should we interpret the verse (10) that says we have fixed our hope on the living God who is the savior of all men, especially of believers? That is one I'll really have to look into. But not now. It is time to go to work. It will be another long day.
So I will end this by going back to 1:5
But the goal of our instruction is love, from a pure heart and a good conscience, and a sincere faith.
15 comments:
The interesting thing that I find in such discussions is this. So much weight is given to what Paul had to say. Above and beyond modern teachers, except perhaps those who quote him.
Wasn't he just another teacher? Aren't his letters to those churches the equivalent to what we are doing out here right now? You point to important teachings that he is addressing, but suggest dropping the parts about women teaching and drinking wine for one's health. Our understanding of science indicates the last is not a good idea. The evolution of our societal structure strikes down at the former.
If we can accept that our scientific and societal understandings have evolved in some manner, can we not then also assume that spiritually we may have evolved beyond him as well?
Or to look at it from a more base perspective: Science and the possibility of women to be as intelligent and capable as men were concepts that were beyond Paul at the time. Weren't they simpler concepts than God?
Now I am not saying everything he said was wrong, but I have to wonder at how much more weight his letters are given than the gospels themselves as far as how one should live the correct spiritual life.
Great thoughts, I enjoyed how you finished; "the goal is love." Thanks for your insight.
I do agree that some Christians put too much weight on the letters of Paul, and not enough on the actual teachings of Jesus or even on the Old Testement which is what Paul was refering to when he said "all Scripture is God breathed" He wasn't arogent enough
to include his own epistles in the same catogory as the Law and the Prophets. There are times when it seems prudent to consider the context and specific receivers of a particular portion of scripture. Although I am of the opinion that if Science contradicts Scripture it is Science we should rethink and not Scripture...and actually, some medical experts say that a little wine is good for the heart (ask any Italian), I do agree that time has had an influence on certain biblical practices, and what some believers held as "gospel" long ago is now considered outdated and unimportant.
For example teachings on dress - styles of worship - how we are to observe the Lord's day - how often we are to receive Communion - Woman in Ministry - Divorce. I could go on and on. Again, the main Idea is Love - Love God, Love each other.
where is my concordance when I need it. Peter also said that a lot of what Paul wrote was hard to understand. Hey, if Peter couldn't understand it all, how can we be expected to?
Ok Jason, I still need to read that one over and take a look at some other translations. I'm not denying that Peter is saying that Paul's writings are Scripture. He is saying that some of Paul's writings are hard to understand and that some people who are ignorant and weak in faith are explaining them falsly. But just now, I am wondering, are we sure that Peter is talking about the Scriptures (Law and Prophets etc) or about Writings in a more general context when he speaks of "the other Scriptures".
I love the letters of Paul to the various churches. The struggle for me is determining when what he writes is to be confined to the historical local church and when he is writing to the church today.
Sexual lewdness => clearly to the universal church.
Leadership and high standards => clearly the universal church.
Drinking wine => Historical local church???
~Kevin
I would suppose most of it would apply to the universal church...
one of the contextual issues i've been having lately is that most, if not all English Translations were greatly influenced by the anti-roman, anti-jew bias, as well as by the theological (although not neccessarily biblical) doctrines of Augustine, Luther, etc.
I really don't have the time, or the inclination, to list the Bibliography, or to pour through the numerous books in my husbands pastoral library for proof. It wouldn't really serve any purpose at this point in the discussion. It is Historical fact, and included in many of his biographies, that Luther was anti-semetic and he had asserted that the book of James (faith without works is dead) should not be included in Scripture. Luther was one of the first to translate the Bible in the common language of the people, and in doing so, chose to eliminate the Apocrypha from his translation. I will leave it at that.
forget the hebrew and forget the greek, forget Luther, Calvin, and Augustine...forget Jason and Chris.
Think only on Jesus for it is only by His name we are saved. That is the only doctrine we need to worry about. Jesus is the determining factor. Jesus is the Truth and the Light that shines in the darkness.
The Word is the Word, but the Bias is the problem, the presuppostions,
the doctrine of men who try to explain the mysteries of faith.
yeah, the NT was written in greek, however the writers were writing with a Hebrew mindset. There are so many good writings here in blog world. Robby is doing a good job, as is MO...nevermind Maryellen. I'm just an immature, emotional, menopausal crazy woman...and Poor Pastor Art has to live with me.
give it up Jason, Chris P. has.
Jesus is Lord. That is the teaching or doctrine to which I hold. As far as all the other stuff, if my beliefs are proof that I am not really saved, then so be it. You will not change my mind...I have not closed to the Holy Spirit, but I have closed it to you.
"You said..'He wasn't arogent enough
to include his own epistles in the same catogory as the Law and the Prophets.'
That's interesting, Peter felt that Paul's letters carried as much authority as the rest of the scriptures."
Just noting that there is no contradiction here. Peter saying it doesn't imply that Paul said or believed it, does it?
"I pray that your heart hasn't been hardened.
God bless
It is only out of respect for MaryEllen that I don't write the first words that came to mind.
You don't care about her heart. Her heart applies to the spiritual connection she has with God. You have ignored this all along, clinging to the mind. The scriptural issues. It isn't her heart that needs changing. I don't think her mind does either, not for the most part, but you seem to think so.
Why the pretense of caring for her? As Pastor Art pointed out, you took the opportunity once again to turn the subject to your own thoughts abandoning her post altogether. Your agenda is what you care about, and you haven't listened to the other side. Do you know what happens when you close your ears and just lecture your own philosophy at the walls? You have a church of one, and God stands outside of it and shakes his head.
"Peter said it under the inspiration of the Holy Spirit. Therefore, Paul's writings are God breathed as well."
Your homework for the day is to make it a point to read any post or comment you are responding to before replying.
Case in point. Inspiration is irrelevant to the comment I made. She said Paul didn't say it. You contradicted based on Peter's statements, and now on inspiration. This doesn't change her statement that Paul didn't say it.
"I do agree that some Christians put too much weight on the letters of Paul, and not enough on the actual teachings of Jesus or even on the Old Testement"
that is actually what I said
What I have said all along, is that the Bible has to be taken as a whole, with no part being more or less important than the other.
I have also said that when I look at the Word of God with the presuppostion that God is Love, that God is light, and in Him is no darkness, That God is a covenant making and covenant keeping God, the conclusions I draw are somewhat different than those of many of the so called "reformed" mindset.
So, Jason, I think she just graded your homework poorly. Try again with the next post. Reading and comprehension are good things.
Post a Comment