1 Timothy 1:3-11

II

Occasion for the writing of this Epistle.—Preliminary description and condemnation of the heretical teachers who had appeared at Ephesus, who misunderstood equally the nature both of the Law and of the Gospel

1 Timothy 1:3-11

3As8 I besought thee to abide still at Ephesus, when I went into Macedonia, that thou mightest charge some that they teach no other doctrine, 4Neither give heed to fables and endless genealogies, which minister questions [questionings], rather than godly edifying [the dispensation of God]9 which is in faith: so do. 5Now the end of the commandment is charity out of a pure heart, and of a good conscience, and of faith unfeigned: 6From which some haying swerved have turned aside unto vain jangling; 7Desiring to be teachers of the law; understanding 8[considering] neither what they say, nor whereof they affirm. But we know that the law is good, if a man use10 it lawfully; 9Knowing this, that the law is not made [set forth = posita] for a righteous man, but for the lawless and disobedient, for the ungodly and for sinners, for the unholy and profane, for murderers of fathers and murderers of mothers,11 for man-slayers, 10For whoremongers, for them that defile themselves with mankind, for men-stealers, for liars, for perjured persons, and if there be any other thing that is contrary to sound doctrine: 11According to the glorious gospel [the gospel of glory] of the blessed God, which was committed to my trust [which I have been entrusted with].

EXEGETICAL AND CRITICAL

Ver.3. Besought. For the occasion and object of this exhortation, see the Introduction. Timothy must remain at Ephesus, προσμεῖναι (the same word occurs in Acts 18:18), in order, by his presence, to oppose the evil which was becoming apparent there. The simplest explanation of this somewhat singular phrase, is, that Paul had already, at Ephesus, given this injunction to Timothy, and had then left him in order to set out on his journey to Macedonia. According to Chrysostom, the form in which this admonition is couched is a proof of the friendly spirit of the Apostle towards Timothy: “οὐ γὰρ ἐ͂ιπεν: ἐπέταξα, οὐδὲ ἐκέλευσα, οὐδὲ παρῆ̣νεσα, ὰλλὰ τί; παρεκάλεσά σε.”—Some. In Other places, also, the Apostle speaks, without any personal designation, of those whom he calls upon Timothy to oppose (1Ti 1:6; 1 Timothy 1:19; 1 Timothy 4:1; 2 Timothy 2:18). Timothy knew them from his own experience, and needed, therefore, no more exact advice. He was to charge them, not at once publicly (Matthies), yet in an earnest and emphatic way, to teach no other doctrine than that which the Apostle had before delivered. Ἑτεροδιδασκαλεῖν (comp. 1 Timothy 6:3; Titus 1:13). The word indicates the strange elements that may mingle with the teaching of the gospel, and easily assume a character hostile to it. The same warning Paul bad already given, in another form, to the elders of the church (Acts 20:29). The pure doctrine, in which men must steadfastly abide, is naturally, in his thought, identical with his gospel (2 Timothy 2:8).

1 Timothy 1:4. Fables and endless genealogies (comp. Tit 1:14; 1 Timothy 4:7; 2 Timothy 4:4; Titus 3:9). It is difficult to know with certainty what μῦθοι and γενεαλογίαι are here specially meant. From all that we gather, however, in this Epistle, it is most probable that reference is made to fables of Jewish form and origin, which were endlessly spun out, and had called forth much dispute in the church. “Although there were many fables among the heathen, yet the Apostle has in special view the Jewish traditiones; for it was asserted that Moses had not written down all the mysteries revealed by God, but had given much orally to the elders, by whom they were handed down as a traditional law, or Kabbala, although these Jewish notions were mostly of their own invention, and in part, too, drawn from heathen philosophy;” Starke. The genealogical records here mentioned appear also to have been mainly of Jewish origin, and, as we know, were held in high repute, and gave occasion for many useless and curious questions; although we need not entirely exclude a reference to the doctrine of Emanation, taught by the heretical schools. The ζητήσεις are nothing but the foolish questions (Titus 3:9), which lead to strife and discord. This love of fables and genealogies is held by the Apostle in such great aversion, because it furnished such material for dispute, rather than for a right knowledge of the essential way of redemption (οἰκονομία). “Μᾶλλον, non semper comparationis sed sæpius correctionis et oppositionis nota est (comp. 2 Timothy 1:4);” Glassius. Most commentators agree that the clause which begins the third verse should be understood to close at the end of the fourth verse, with an οὕτω καὶ νῦν παρακαλῶ, which certainly might be most fitly inserted in this place. Otherwise it must be supposed that the Apostle, after a long digression (1 Timothy 1:5-7), takes up again, at 1 Timothy 1:18, the thread of the broken exhortation; 1 Timothy 1:5 or 1 Timothy 1:12 forms no perfect conclusion.

1 Timothy 1:5. The end of the commandment. It is a question, whether reference is made to the command given by Paul, in 1 Timothy 1:3, to Timothy, or, in a wider sense, to the Divine commandment in general, which Timothy is to impress upon his hearers. The latter is the more probable, since the Apostle begins forthwith to oppose a false view of the Mosaic law. “Παραγγελία, practical teaching as the chief element of the διδασκαλία ὑγιαίνουσα; a contract to the μῦθοι;” De Wette.—End; Luther: The sum, as this word designates that to which we are chiefly to look, and toward which we are to strive. “The ultimate aim of all the admonitions of the Christian preacher should be practical—to call out a true love;” Olshausen. Even to Timothy, Paul writes very little of the mysteries of Christianity, that, by his example, he may yet more put to shame this germinal Gnosticism.—Charity out of a pure heart, &c. Love, “the bond of all Christian virtues,” the fruit of the tree, whose root, faith, is presupposed as already existing, and commended at the close of the exhortation. This love can only spring out of a pure heart, cleansed from all selfishness and evil desires; out of a good conscience, which, being free from the guilt of sin, and reconciled with God, can then first love in truth; and from an unfeigned faith.—Unfeigned, ἀνυπόκριτος; that is, no empty thought or fancy, but a spiritual light and spiritual life not consisting in words, but in a living assurance of the heart, and proving its life in its fruits. Without real faith there is no good-conscience; without a reconciliation of the conscience there is no pure heart; without a pure heart there is no true Christian love conceivable. Thus all are blended in the closest union. [Alford: “It is faith—not the pretence of faith, the mere Scheinglaube of the hypocrite. Wiesinger well remarks, that we see that the general character of these false teachers, as of those against whom Titus is warned, was not so much error in doctrine, as leading men astray from the earnestness of the loving Christian life to useless and vain questionings, ministering only strife.”]

1 Timothy 1:6. From which vain jangling.Ὧν, that is, from the Christian dispositions and virtues mentioned in 1 Timothy 1:5. The polemic character of the Epistle of Paul appears immediately after the statement of the τέλος τῆς παραγγελίας. The heretics were separatists, ἀστοχήσαντες; they had failed of the end which the Apostle has set forth—the same word occurs in 1 Timothy 6:21; 2 Timothy 2:18—and were thus astray in a false path, because they had turned εἰς ματαιολογίαν. The etymology indicates the meaning of this word, which, besides, is found only here. (Titus 1:10, ματαιολόγοι occurs). Here is suggested that waste of words, that empty talk, in which there can be found no rational sense, no unity of conviction. Compare the βέβηλοι κενοφωνίαι (1 Timothy 6:20), and the βέβηλοι καί γραώδεις μῦθοι (1 Timothy 4:7; Titus 3:9). The character of this vain jangling is more exactly defined by what immediately follows, in 1 Timothy 1:7.

1 Timothy 1:7. Teachers of the law, νομοδιδάσκαλοι, not in a good, but in a bad, unevangelical sense of this word; men who so mixed together law and gospel, that the latter was weakened, and who would likewise force a Mosaic system upon the Christian, in the notion that they themselves had pierced deeper than others into its nature and spirit. It is the same Jewish legalism, which, in its special relation to the Gentiles, the Apostle opposes in Romans 12:17 and Galatians 6:12; because, in its inmost spirit, it is in irreconcilable conflict with Christian truth and freedom. In the keenest way, throughout the following verses, it is held up to view in its utter nakedness, μὴ νοοῦντες, κ.τ.λ. “Bonus doctor debet esse intelligent, simulque certus: istis, inquit Paulus, utrumque deest;” Bengel. They themselves understand not what they say, nor whereof they affirm. If we may draw a distinction between these two expressions, the former seems to mean the subjective opinions, the expressed ideas, the fictions of these men; while the second designates the objective views, the material, on which they based their convictions with the greatest confidence, but into which, according to the assertion of Paul, they had no clear insight. So also Raphelius: “Qui neque ea, quæ loquuntur satis intelligant, neque quibus de rebus loquantur, considerant.” What these νομοδιδάσκαλοι held as to the unaltered authority of the Mosaic law, rested on their plain ignorance of the very purpose of the law; which is therefore, in the 8th and following verses, designedly placed by the Apostle in its true light. It appears, also, from this whole argument, that these heretics were not already separated from the community, or in opposition to it—in which case Timothy could have had no further influence over them—but they were still within its pale. It is worthy of note, too, that they continually sought authority in the writings of the Old Testament for their half-heathen speculations.

1 Timothy 1:8. But we know. An authoritative apostolic οἴδαμεν, of quite other worth than that of the Scribes and Pharisees (John 9:29; John 9:31). The Apostle places the declaration of his knowledge, which he had learned in the school of the Holy Ghost, against the arrogant view of the false Gnosis. Perhaps its advocates had thought to raise a suspicion against him, as if he despised the law, or, at least, denied it any real worth. He opposes to this his doctrine, which he fully knows will be received by Timothy—that the law is good (properly, beautiful, καλός), and in itself blameless (comp. Romans 7:12); yet only on condition that every man use the same lawfully, νομίμως, which was not done by these heretics. A play upon the word; as if to say, that the law must be fulfilled according to law. We have special cause to be thankful that the true definition of the law has been so fully stated by Paul in the Epistles to the Romans and Galatians, as rightly to explain 1 Timothy 1:8-10. Νομίμως is the use of the law by the man who allows it to exercise its proper office, who is brought by it to a knowledge of his own sin and liability to punishment. “This knowledge will give us its spirit and intent—not room for idle questions and subtleties, nor for self-deception through a feigned and outward righteousness. This lawful use of the law is meant by Christ, when He promises life to those who keep the law (Luke 10:28; Luke 18:20, et seq;)” Von Gerlach. It is self-evident, also, that Paul in this place speaks not of the hearer or the reader of the law, but solely of its application by its teachers, who may well reflect on the verses which follow.

1 Timothy 1:9. That the law is not made for a righteous man. It is not strange that this passage should at first awaken surprise in many readers, and that, at the time of the Reformation, it should have been controverted by Agricola. The first question is, whom the Apostle means by this righteous man—a question which is at once answered by the antithesis following it, ἀνόμοις δὲ, κ.τ.λ. In distinction from this, the person meant by δίκαιος may be one whose life is righteous and moral according to the requirements of the law. But since, according to the invariable doctrine of the Apostle, all who are under the law are also under the curse of the law, so that by the works of the law no flesh can be justified (Galatians 3:10; Romans 3:20), it follows, that by the righteous Christian man must be meant one who has been justified by faith in Christ, and wholly renewed by the Holy Spirit (justus per justificationem, et per sanctificationem). Of such a man Paul says, that the law is not made for him, νόμος οὐ κεῖται. As the article is wanting before νόμος, it may be thought that only a general proposition is stated as to the nature and purpose of any moral code (Chrysostom, Brentano). But the mention of the gospel in contrast with the law (1 Timothy 1:11), and the argument against the νομοδιδάσκαλοι (1 Timothy 1:7), imperatively requires us here to understand the Mosaic law alone. On the omission of the article, see Winer’sGrammar, in loco. This law, then, is not made for the righteous man; that is, it is not given to him, as such. When De Wette says, “This view of the law seems foreign to the Apostle,” he seems to forget entirely such passages as Galatians 5:18-23. The thought, that the letter of the Mosaic law possesses no more binding force for the redeemed in Christ, is so entirely Pauline, that it forms one of the main pillars of his whole doctrinal structure. It certainly gives also a fulfilment of the law from the Christian standpoint, as it is announced in Romans 3:31; Romans 8:4, and in other places. But in this passage the Apostle expressly shows its meaning for the wholly unconverted, in order to expose more clearly the folly of those heretics who will put the law by the side of, or even above the gospel, for the Christian. [Augustin on Psalms 1:0 : “Justus non est sub lege, quia in lege Domini est voluntas ejus; qui enim in lege est, secundum legem agitur; ille ergo liber est; hic servus.” Hooker, Eccl. Pol., B. 1, c. 8. “A law is a directive rule unto goodness of operation. The rule of Divine operation is the definitive appointment of God’s own wisdom set down within Himself. The rule of natural agents that work by necessity is the determination of the wisdom of God, known to God, but not unto them. The rule of voluntary agents on earth is the venture that reason giveth concerning the goodness of those things which they are to do. Neither must we suppose that there needeth one rule to know the good, and another the evil by. For he that knoweth the straight, doth even thereby discern the crooked. Goodness in actions is like unto straightness; wherefore, that which is done well, we term right.”—W.]—But for the lawless. In contrast to this true spirit of law, the Apostle now names a long list of evildoers, for whom the law remained in full force; a list in which one familiar with the Pauline writings will not expect completeness, systematic order, or logical strictness, in its various conceptions; yet which by no means lacks connection, and has clearly this thought at the bottom, that they who are most zealous for the law often most grossly transgress it (comp. Romans 2:20). He names, at the outset, two by two, six classes of wicked men—ἀνόμοις καί ; that is, such as care nothing for the law, and have altogether refused obedience to it (comp. Titus 1:6-10); ἀσεβέσι καὶ ἁμαρτολοῖς, godless (comp. Titus 2:12) and gross sinners, who have no fear of God in their hearts (comp. Romans 4:5; Romans 5:6). Here the hostile attitude toward God becomes more prominent, while the preceding two are violators of the law in general. Ἀνοσίοις καὶ βεβήλοις blend both the first conceptions, as the irreligious and profane, here depicted, are alike despisers of the Holy God, and of His holy law. Here follow, more in detail, certain specimina mali, from which we may suppose that, with the exception of the last vitium, ἐπιόρκοις, the various statutes of the second table passed before the mind of the Apostle. He names the murder of father and mother—those who violate the first commandment with promise (Ephesians 6:2), and grossly abuse their parents (πατραλοίας; ὁ τὸν πατέρα , τύπτων ἢ κτείνων; Hesychius). Murderer, consequently a breaker of the sixth commandment, ἀνδροφόνοις; in the New Testament an ἃπαξ λεγόμενον. Further, those who sin against the seventh commandment, commit fornication with women (πόρνοις), or with the male sex (ἀρσενοκοίταις), comp. Romans 1:27; both natural and unnatural crime (comp. Leviticus 19:23). Then follow transgressions of the eighth commandment, here wholly concerning men—the sin of man-stealing, specially forbidden in Exodus 21:16; Deuteronomy 24:7; ἀνδραποδισταῖς, plagiariis. It was, besides, no rare crime among the Greeks to steal boys or girls, that they might be sold into slavery. Lastly follow those who break the ninth commandment, ψεῦσται, ἐπίορκοι; such as deliberately speak falsehood, or swear to a falsehood, or break an oath already taken. By the following εί τε ἕτερον, κ.τ.λ., we may suppose meant transgression against the tenth commandment, which is here omitted. We find, however, in this catalogus-criminum, no orderly reference to the commandments of the first table; and Bengel has clearly gone too far, when he writes, “Paulus pro ordine decalogi hic nominat injustos.” This is true only of the second half of the decalogue.—And if there be any other thing that is contrary to sound doctrine. Sound doctrine—one of the expressions characteristic of the Pastoral Epistles (comp. 2 Timothy 4:3; Titus 2:1, and elsewhere). Not healthful doctrine is meant (Luther), nor a sound morality (Leo), but the Christian teaching in general is approved in its inner soundness, as opposed to the ματαιολογία of the heretics. This phrase is used also to express those symptoms of disease which St. Paul saw with grief springing up in the church (comp. 2 Timothy 2:17). [It is observable that the word “wholesome” occurs nine times in the Pastoral Epistles, and always in reference to doctrine; Wordsworth.—W.]

1 Timothy 1:11. According to the glorious gospel committed to my trust.Κατά is not used here for the more exact definition of sound doctrine, as some have thought; for, in that case, τῆ̣ would have to be repeated before κατά; nor need it be supposed in apposition to ἀντίκειται, which would give a very awkward conclusion. 1 Timothy 1:11 is an addition, which refers to the whole preceding line of thought, and means that, according to the gospel of Paul, the law has no other purpose than that fully explained in 1 Timothy 1:6-10. The Apostle would have us understand, that his view of the law is not the fruit of his private opinion, but rather the true summary of the gospel committed to him. This qualification of the gospel is really apologetic. The gospel of glory, τῆς δόξης, not signifying ἔνδοξον (Heydenreich), in the sense of blessed, glorious doctrine, but the gospel by which the glory of God in Christ has become manifest to the world; whose especial and chief substance is this Divine glory (2 Corinthians 4:4), and indeed the glory of the blessed God, τοῦ μακαρίου Θεοῦ (comp. 1 Timothy 6:15). If God Himself be blessed, then the revelation of His glory, which has been proclaimed, not through the law, but through the gospel, will be full of blessing. Perhaps the repeated use of the epithet in this Epistle has a certain reference to the system of Æons taught by the heretics. This gospel is committed in trust to Paul, ὃ ἐπιστεύθην ἐγώ. A peculiarly Pauline construction, on which, comp. Winer, Gramm. N. T., p. 40. In other places, too, the Apostle speaks with warmth of this his dear prerogative; as Romans 15:16; Ephesians 3:8; Colossians 1:25. Those who oppose the genuineness of the Pastoral Epistles, are therefore wrong in thinking such emphatic reference to his person and his office at all extraordinary. The consciousness which Paul had of his high calling, rises with redoubled power as he contends with the heretics; and in this letter to his friend and scholar he follows the warm outpouring of his spirit, not in a logical order, yet in harmony with his whole thought, as we read in 1 Timothy 1:12-17.

DOCTRINAL AND ETHICAL

1. Two opposite views, in regard to the character and condition of the early Christian Church have prevailed, with more or less success, in our time, both of which are disproved in the opening verses of the first Pastoral Epistle. In the one view, it is thought that the apostolic age was a kind of paradisaic state of the young community—a state full of love, and innocence, and purity; in contrast with which the post-apostolic age seems a fall, like that of our first parents (Thiersch, and others). In the other view, there was at first only a chaos of manifold parties and tendencies, out of which there gradually rose, in the second century, after many conciliatory efforts, the harmonious structure of the Catholic church (Tübingen school). But the little we have already learned from the Epistle to Timothy neither favors the one nor the other view. It is apparent that already, soon after A. D. 60, heresies and factions sprang up in the church, hostile to the original spirit of Christianity, which the Apostle believed that he must oppose with all his energy. We find that the germs of Gnosticism, whose formal development we can trace in the second century under manifold shapes, were already broadcast in the second half of the first century. But, on the other hand, this error appears only as a fleck of rust on the pure metal of that truth, earlier taught and fully acknowledged. We see the Apostle, clothed with an authority which no one can defy with impunity, and rising high above the strife of parties. His gospel is no other in substance than that proclaimed by his fellow-Apostles, and by his and their coworkers. His word becomes the sharp but healthful corrective of the errorists, who have gained head so early; and it remains the norm of its development for the church, in the second and the succeeding centuries.2. The characteristic marks of the heretics of the first century rise here already to our view. A sickly search after the discovery of the unattainable, with a thankless misconception of simple truth; an undue valuing of lesser things, with a depreciation of the essentials of Christianity; a striving after their own honor, while they cared little for the edification of believers; a fastening of their own philosophic theories on the falsely-interpreted letter of the Scriptures, whose spirit they sadly misconceived; a denial of the practical nature of Christianity, while its real freedom is abused as an allowance to the flesh; a falsehood as to the special relation between the law and the gospel of Christ;—all these symptoms of disease are found anew, in countless forms, among the sectaries and heretics of later days.3. The Apostle is alike removed from the one-sided view either of a love without faith, or of a faith without love. He will neither have the fruit without the tree, nor the tree without the fruit. He knows only the one requirement of the gospel—love; yet only the love blossoming in a heart purified through faith. Here, as afterwards more frequently, purity of faith and purity of conscience are linked in their inmost relationship.4. “Love, out of a pure heart,” &c. In this Statement of the chief requisite of Christianity there is confirmed the essential unity of theology and morality, whose arbitrary separation so often does unmeasured injury to each, and has kept many from the right understanding of the gospel.5. We have here a weighty help toward answering the question, how far the Mosaic law has a binding power. But fully to understand the Apostle’s mode of thought upon this subject, the Epistles to the Romans and Galatians must be specially compared. Here, also, Paul appears the same glowing and zealous advocate, as he had before shows himself, of the right of Christian freedom. While he exalts the worth of the law in its own proper sphere, beyond any disparagement, he shows its entire insufficiency whenever it is placed by the side of, or above the gospel.

6. We find the chief forms of Judaism in the time of our Lord, again existing in His earliest church—Pharisaism and Sadduceeism. Against this united power of self-righteousness and unrighteousness, the disciple no less than the Master is pledged to bear the sword of the Spirit with all power (Matthew 16:6).

7. A precept, of the first importance in pastoral theology, is here given by the Apostle to the preachers of the Word. It is not enough to preach the truth free from all error; but they are also bound to contend with every energy against error. Persecution of heretics is indeed unchristian and unevangelical, and its frightful traces remain on many a page of Church history, marked with blood and tears. Yet he would be no less to blame, who, like Timothy a ruler in the church, capable of large in fluence, should allow the errorist to go unchecked, and remain satisfied, if not himself corrupted by the leaven of error. The bee which has lost its sting can produce no more honey. The saying of Calvin is that of every true witness of Jesus Christ: “A dog barks loudly when one seizes his master; and should I be silent when the truth of God is assailed?” Polemics against leading heretics ought not to be the chief staple of gospel preaching; nor should this be wholly and always lost sight of.

HOMILETICAL AND PRACTICAL

No doctrine should be permitted or preached in the church but the unadulterated apostolic doctrine.—The relation of Mythology to Christianity.—The difference between the holy “mystery of the gospel,” and a sickly mysticism.—A sermon whose first and last fruit is strife and dispute, instead of the promotion of the Divine way of redemption, is thereby self-condemned.—The sum of the commandment: (1) No Christianity without love; (2) no Christian love without purity of heart; (3) no purity of heart without a good conscience; (4) no good conscience without an unsullied faith.—How far we may swerve from the end of the Divine revelation, even when we believe ourselves very near to it.—The attitude of the Christian toward the law.—Among the confessors of the gospel there were and are at all times (1) some, who are neither under the law nor under grace; (2) others, who are indeed under the law, but not yet under grace; (3) others, who are under grace, and no more under the law.—The worth of the law as a bar, as a mirror, as a seal. [German: Riegel, Spiegel, u. Siegel.]—For whom the law is given, and for whom not.—The Christian redeemed from the curse of the law, so that the righteousness required by the law is fulfilled in him.—Every gross or slight, open or concealed immorality, is directly opposed to sound doctrine.—A noble eulogy of the gospel: (1) The gospel of the glory of God; (2) this God, the blessed God; (3) through this blessed God, the ministry of the gospel is entrusted to a man like Paul.—Every estimate of the law that does not accord with the gospel of Paul deserves to be rejected.—The ceaseless alternation of Legalism and Antinomianism in the Christian Church: (1) Its traces; (2) its causes; (3) its import; (4) its only remedy.—[Ignatius: Ἀρχὴ μὲν πίστις, τέλος τὲ . Faith the beginning, but love the end, or final cause.—W.]

Starke: Osiander: The pure doctrine is a great gift of God, therefore it is to be guarded well; a costly loan, therefore to be well laid out.—Lange’s Opus Bibl.: Pure doctrine and a godly life must always go together.—Hedinger: What helps not growth in godliness, we ought to banish from church and school.—Anton: If the enemy cannot else lead us astray in our Christianity, he sings to us of high things, which common Christians do not know.—Lange’s Op.: Theologians must especially care that they do not become loose talkers, and thus corrupters of others.—In nothing is pride more perceptible, more hurtful, and perilous, than in spiritual things.—Every preacher of the gospel is also a teacher of the law; for the gospel shows how man can and ought to hold the law of God in the gospel way.—Quesnel: Gospel doctrine does not so hold up faith as to bend the law (1 Corinthians 9:21).—Sins must not be judged by human fancy, but according to the law and the gospel.—Sins that are forbidden in the law, are also contrary to the gospel (Romans 3:31).—Anton: In the office of preacher, the whole aim must be to know the gospel as a gospel of the glory of God (2 Corinthians 4:6).

[Cudworth, Sermon I.: Christ came not into the world to fill our heads with mere speculations, to kindle a fire of wrangling and contentious dispute, whilst, in the mean time, our hearts remain all ire within toward God. Christ was vitæ magister, not scholæ; and he is the best Christian whose heart beats with the purest pulse toward heaven; not he, whose head spinneth out the finest cobwebs. Ink and paper can never make us Christians—can never beget a new nature, a living principle in us—can never form Christ, or any true notions of spiritual things, in our hearts. A painter that would draw a rose, though he may flourish some likeness of it in figure and color, yet he can never paint the scent and fragrancy.—Donne, Sermons: As the soul is infused by God, but diffused over the whole body, and so there is a man; so faith is infused from God, but diffused into our works, and so there is a saint. Practice is the incarnation of faith; faith is incorporate and manifest in a body by works.—W.]

Footnotes:

[1][Latin: Incipit ad Timotheum prima. English Version: The First Epistle of Paul the Apostle to Timothy; which is a translation of the title in the Recepta.

1 Timothy 1:1; 1 Timothy 1:1.—[χριστοῦ Ἰησοῦ, instead of Ἰησ. Χριστ., the reading of the Recepta, and of Lachmann also. The Sinaiticus has Ἰησ.—E. H.]

1 Timothy 1:1; 1 Timothy 1:1.—[κατ’ ἐπιταγήν. So all the authorities. The Sinaiticus has κατ’ ἐπαγγελίαν = according to the promise, &c.; cf. 1 Timothy 1:1. But the true reading, doubtless, is the received.—E. H.]

1 Timothy 1:1; 1 Timothy 1:1.—[Θεοῦ σωτῆρος ἡμῶν; the order of these words varies much in the later MSS. See Tischendorf; so Huther.—E. H.]

1 Timothy 1:1; 1 Timothy 1:1.—Received text: Lord Jesus Christ. [Omitted by Lachmann and Tischendorf; found in the Sinaiticus. In the Minuscules, καὶ is left out, or placed sometimes before σωτῆρος, according to Huther.—E. H.]

1 Timothy 1:2; 1 Timothy 1:2.—[ἡμῶν; in the Recepta, but to be omitted; is omitted by our author in his text.—E. H.]

1 Timothy 1:2; 1 Timothy 1:2.—[Χριστοῦ Ἰησοῦ; so Lachmann and Tischendorf, supported by the weightiest authorities. The Sinaiticus the same.—E. H.]

1 Timothy 1:3; 1 Timothy 1:3.—[No apodosis to καθώς. Lachmann brackets 1 Timothy 1:5-17; but this scarcely meets the case. Perhaps we had better supply, with our author, at the end of 1 Timothy 1:4, so now also I exhort thee. So likewise Conybeare and Howson.—E. H.]

1 Timothy 1:4; 1 Timothy 1:4.—Dispensation (Haushaltung), according to the reading οἰκονομίαν, instead of the οἰκοδομίαν of the Recepta, which has scarcely any critical confirmation at all. The reading οἰκονομίαν is supported by such weighty authorities (now also by the Sinaiticus), that its accuracy cannot be doubted. Matthäi says: “οἰκονομἰαν, ita omnes omnino mei, ac ii quidem, qui scholia habent, etiam in scholiis uti quoque interpretes editi. οἰκοδομίαν nihil nisi error est typothetarum Erasmi, δ cum ν confuso nisi Erasmus deliberate ita correxerit ad latinum: ædificationem;” Huther.

1 Timothy 1:8; 1 Timothy 1:8.—[Lachmann, on the authority of A., reads χρήσητοι; the rest have χρῆται. So also the Sinaiticus.—E. H.]

1 Timothy 1:9; 1 Timothy 1:9.—[πατρολῴαις, μητρολῴαις. Lachmann, Tischendorf, Sinaiticus, instead of πατρα., μητρα.—E. H.]