1 Timothy 1:3Meaning & Commentary from the Church Fathers

Either this must be explained in that way, or perhaps one must suppose that this happened before the Epistle to the Ephesians was written.

Meanwhile he himself had struggled for a long time in that city. There was the temple of Artemis, and there he endured those troubles.

After that spectacle came to an end, he called and comforted his disciples. Then he departed by ship and came to them again.

It is fitting, however, to ask whether he appointed Timothy bishop there at this time. For he says, “charge certain persons not to teach differently.”

He does not list them by name, lest by the publicity of rebuke he make them still more shameless.

There were certain false apostles from the Jews who wished to draw the faithful back to the Law of Moses. The Apostle accuses them of this everywhere in his epistles.

They did this not so much by the prompting of conscience as from vainglory and the desire to have disciples. They rivaled blessed Paul and envied him.

This is the meaning of the words, “teach differently.”

He did not name them individually, lest by public rebuke he make them more shameless. To teach differently means to introduce other doctrines.

Among the Jews there were many false apostles who, out of love of glory and desire to be called teachers, were drawing the faithful toward the Law of Moses.

By “myths” (1 Tim 1:4), the Apostle did not mean the teaching of the Law itself, but the Jewish interpretation of it, called among them δευτέρωσις.

He teaches that superfluous questions are unreasonable, while faith enlightens the mind and reveals the divine economy.

The Greek word δευτέρωσις was used for the Mishnah, Hebrew for “repetition,” an early rabbinic tradition of interpreting Scripture.

Then follow special instructions to Timothy concerning the governance of the Church (1 Tim 5:1-22).

At the very end come instructions to Timothy as a civil member of society. They concern the rules by which he should build firm earthly well-being for those entrusted to him (1 Tim 6:1-21).

A. Rules and instructions to Timothy as guardian of the faith of Christ’s Church (1 Tim 1:1-20).

These rules are as follows. First, whether in private discussions or public conversations, he must avoid subjects that produce learned religious disputes more than direct edification in the faith.

By chasing abstractions and subtleties of lofty speculation, one may fall into empty talk about subjects that are in fact unknown to anyone.

One may also fail to understand the nearest and most vital truths, such as the meaning of the law. This is what happened with the Jewish false teachers (1 Tim 1:1-7).

The Jews, however, traced the list of grandfathers and ancestors back to Abraham, thinking thereby to adorn themselves (Oecumenius).

“In our time, the myths from which hearing and mind should be turned away may include the fantastical history of the world’s self-formation without creative action.

The aforementioned myths and genealogies, as human inventions, do not bear the seal of authority that verifies truth. Therefore they inflame curiosity and produce disputes.

Because of this, the realm of faith is obscured, grows dim, and is forgotten. The soul is filled with empty and fruitless representations and reasonings.

If, moreover, curiosity obtains self-made definitions and solutions inconsistent with faith, then faith is entirely destroyed.

Whatever serves faith also serves the reception of every good and is favorable to God’s economy. Whatever is not of this kind is not favorable to God’s economy and God’s ordering, which is in faith.

It disrupts faith, the only thing fit to receive the good that is generously distributed by grace from God’s economy” (Bishop Theophan).

Perhaps the Apostle also has in view here the Jewish teaching about the emanation of spirits. At least this may be thought because the Apostle decisively condemns these genealogies.

He finds that they only give occasion for new disputes, instead of providing divine edification and strengthening Christians in the faith (vv. 3-4).

Therefore Timothy had to be persuaded to separate for a time from his beloved teacher and father, whom he carefully guarded. St. Paul also could not fail to see the labors and dangers that St. Timothy had to meet if he remained in Ephesus. Therefore he does not command him authoritatively, "remain," but entreats him, so that this might be a matter of Timothy's own will. Such a will could give him greater strength for bearing labor and dangers, and remove every possibility of murmuring. Chrysostom says: "Hear what meek speech this is, how he speaks to him not with the voice of a teacher, but of a servant. He did not say: I ordered, or commanded, or even persuaded. What then? 'I urged you.' However, we should not act this way with all disciples, but only with the meek and well-disposed. With others, who are corrupted and not fully devoted, one must act otherwise. So he also writes elsewhere: 'Rebuke with all authority' (Tit 2:15)." "To remain in Ephesus," προσμειναι, means to wait, to stay for a little while without me. The Apostle intended to return soon, unless there proved to be need for delay (see 1 Tim 3:14-15). "As I was going into Macedonia." St. Paul would not have left Ephesus without arranging everything there, unless some extreme necessity had compelled him. This necessity could have concerned him personally, as on the first occasion, before his bonds, when believers urged him to depart because death threatened him. Or it could have come from the Macedonian Churches. Something there required St. Paul's personal presence without delay. He therefore went there, leaving St. Timothy in Ephesus as his deputy, confident that he alone could arrange what had to be arranged there. "That you might charge some," παραγγειλης. This means both simply to announce and to announce an order and commandment, to order, and to bind someone authoritatively to something. "He did not say, 'entreat,' but, 'that you might charge,' which has the sound of authoritative strictness" (Chrysostom, blessed Theophylact). "Some." He does not indicate definite persons, because, of course, they were known to St. Timothy. Or perhaps by this he suggests to St. Timothy that, in speeches to the believers, he should not name those teaching otherwise. This would avoid provoking them still more. Chrysostom says: "He does not list them by name, lest by the publicity of the rebuke he make them still more shameless." Yet below he indicates two of them, Hymenaeus and Alexander, who were delivered to Satan (see 1 Tim 1:20). "Not to teach otherwise," μη ετεροδιδασκαλειν, means "to introduce other teachings" (blessed Theophylact), and to teach differently from what was commanded. The norm of Christian teaching was given by the Lord, sealed and completed by the Holy Spirit, and constituted the pattern of sound words (2 Tim 1:13), which the Apostles everywhere handed on to the newly enlightened. For the Apostles, the origin of this teaching from God, Who is truth itself, was tangibly evident. Therefore they rightly considered every teaching that was not only contrary to this, but even different from it, incompatible with faith in Christ. They handed this conviction on to all the faithful. They did not allow believers to enter into dispute, but taught them at once, at first sight, to turn away from every teaching that was different. You possess undoubted truth, they said. Therefore everything different is not truth. There is no reason for you to defile your hearing by opening it to such words. As soon as someone appeared who had picked up other teachings from elsewhere and began to speak of them aloud among the believers, the Apostles stopped his mouth by forbidding him to speak. Or they drove such people entirely from the society of the faithful, if they did not submit to the prohibition. As they themselves acted, so they commanded those whom they left in the Churches in their place to act. Thus St. Paul now commands Timothy: do not allow anyone to introduce other teachings. St. Paul does not define what this other teaching was, or who those teaching otherwise were. It was enough that the teaching was different and that the teachers taught otherwise, for him to turn away from it and from them, and to turn others away. If this rule had always been preserved among believers, how many deviations from truth would have been prevented by this alone! Those teaching otherwise could have been from the Gentiles, who attempted to reconcile the faith of Christ with pagan speculations, composed a mixed teaching, and began to preach it. But it is more certain to suppose that they were from the Jews. At that time only Jews could discuss matters of faith with some degree of toleration. Our interpreters say precisely that these were Jews. Chrysostom says: "There were here certain false apostles from the Jews, who wished to draw the faithful back again to the Law of Moses. The Apostle accuses them of this everywhere. Yet they did this not so much from the prompting of conscience as from vainglory and the desire to have disciples. For they competed with blessed Paul and envied him." So say the others also.