Showing posts with label NT-1 Timothy. Show all posts
Showing posts with label NT-1 Timothy. Show all posts

Sunday, July 24, 2011

Honour in 1 Timothy

  • "Honour widows who are truly widows" - 1 Tim 5:3-16 deals with how you honour widows by providing for them financially.
  • "Let the elders who rule well be considered worthy of double honour" - 1 Tim 5:17-24 deals with how you honour elders by financial provision and respect.
  • "slaves regard their own masters as worthy of all honour" - 1 Tim 6:1-2 deals with how slaves honour their masters by serving them.

All are in the context of the two verses of the letter that end "Amen", 1:17 and 6:16, which make clear that ultimately it is the Lord Jesus Christ who deserves and receives all the honour.

(with thanks to MT)

Tuesday, April 26, 2011

1 Timothy 2: The mission of GOD in desiring ALL to be saved

God desires all people to be saved (1 Tim 2:4).

But this is not a dispassionate or passive 'wish'. God is active. The God who desires all to be saved is "God our Saviour" (v.3). We see that in the flow of the whole chapter:

v. 5: It all begins in the reality that there is one God. He is Lord of all the earth, Jew and Gentile, those in authority and those under authority, rich and poor, male and female (cf. both Rom 3:30, Eph 4:5 and Gal 3:20).

v. 5-6: Then it moves on to what God has done in Christ, "who gave himself as a ransom for all".

v. 7: Then Paul moves on to what Christ has done in appointing Paul to be an apostle (cf. Rom 1:1, Gal 1:16).

v. 8-15: Then he moves onto the church's role in spreading the mission. They are to pray, be unified (like their God, cf. Eph), they are to live holy lives.

So for Paul there is a narrative of God's actions in bringing about his desire. But is a narrative that flows from the sending of the Son, to the sending of the Apostles to the sending of the church. There is no unmediated way of salvation. There is one mediator, Jesus Christ, who we know through his body, the church.

[With thanks to Dave and Chris, for reminding me of the pursuing desire of God, and my housemate who is preaching on 1 Timothy 2 in a few weeks.]

Thursday, February 04, 2010

A few notes on not coveting

Listening to: Belle and Sebastian: The Life Pursuit

Mark 10:19 (parallel: Luke 18:20)

The Christianity Explored booklet asks "What did Jesus expect the man to notice about his list of the commandments in Mark 10:19?" I can't remember what it exactly wants to answer to be, but you have commands 5-9 listed - i.e. not the first table and not the command not to covet. I think Jesus was pointing out to the rich young man that while he had not done the external acts prohibited by the second table of the law, he had not obeyed the spirit of them.

I have been challenged before that honouring your father and mother is not an external act but, like coveting, is about the state of your heart. But Exodus 21:15-17 expounds the commandment as not striking or cursing your parents. Deuteronomy 27:16 talks about not dishonouring and Matthew 15:4 (parallel: Mark 7:10) expands on honouring by saying that it is not reviling. All of which suggests it was seen more as an external act.

1 Timothy 1:9-10

the law is not laid down for the just but for the lawless and disobedient, for the ungodly and sinners, for the unholy and profane, for those who strike their fathers and mothers [5th commandment], for murderers [6th], the sexually immoral, men who practice homosexuality [7th], enslavers [8th? cf. Deuteronomy 24:7], liars, perjurers [9th], and whatever else is contrary to sound doctrine,

Again the absence of the 10th commandment not to covet is notable. Also interestingly, I believe the Reformers considered this passage to be mainly about the 'civil use of the law'.

Hosea 4:2

there is swearing, lying [9th], murder [6th], stealing [8th], and committing adultery [7th]; they break all bounds, and bloodshed follows bloodshed.

... no commandment to honour father and mother, or not to covet.

James 4:2

You desire and do not have, so you murder. You covet and cannot obtain, so you fight and quarrel. You do not have, because you do not ask.

James sees coveting as the cause behind murder. Justifiably you could also quite easily see that it is the cause of breaking all the rest of the second table, or at least commandments 6-9. This is anticipated in part within the 10th commandment itself which lists some of the things we may covet - i.e. wives who we may commit adultery with and possessions we may steal.

Romans 7

When Paul chooses to explain how the law works to bring knowledge of sin, he picks the commandment not to covet. Mark Seifrid commenting on this passage explains this not an insignificant choice:

All other transgressions against other (the dishonouring of parents, murder, adultery, theft and false witness, and so on) have their root in coveting, which is the antithesis of the love commandment. In this commandment the whole weight of the law comes to bear on us.

(p. 117, Christ Our Righteousness)

Monday, May 25, 2009

The one mediator

"there is one God, and there is one mediator between God and men, the man Christ Jesus" (1 Timothy 2:5)

There is a discussion going on at the Coffee Bible Club Blog concerning whether the Angel of YHWH in the OT is God the Son. It is at 166 comments and counting - I've never seen anything like it. I haven't had the time to get involved and I don't have firm enough opinions on it anyway.

But I do have a nagging question:

Can there be a mediator between God and humanity who is not human?

Further, can there be a mediator between God and sinful humanity, who does not share in the suffering which is the just punishment for our sin?

The letter to the Hebrews has been brought into the discussion on the blog, although I've only skim read how people have dealt with it. However it would seem to me that Hebrews says several things that are relevant (that I can think of off the top of my head):

  • The Old Covenant was mediated by Angels but the New by God's own Son.
  • The Old Covenant was also mediated by imperfect sinful priests the New by a perfect sinless priest.
  • Jesus was tempted like we were and so can sympathise with our weaknesses.
  • Jesus was made perfect for his mediatory role by suffering.

The OT is characterised by a distance between God and humanity. We have to take at full seriousness the verses about people being unable to see God and live because of their sinfulness. Only in the NT did God come close. As Paul says in 1 Timothy 2:5 it is 'the man' Christ Jesus who is our mediator. That is why the most common places that the NT writers see Christ in the OT are in men - the priests, the kings, the nation.

I don't think the debate is really about whether the Israelites knew the Triune God or a Unitarian God, with the Angel of YHWH as a test case. I think the debate is really about mediation and revelation.

... sorry Glen. I perfectly understand if you want to shoot me now.

Thursday, November 15, 2007

Using the law lawfully

Perhaps there would be more light and less heat in the argument if Pauline scholars paid more attention to the Pastorals. 1 Timothy 1:8ff is something on which I haven't read much discussion:

Now we know that the law is good, if one uses it lawfully, understanding this, that the law is not laid down for the just but for the lawless and disobedient, for the ungodly and sinners, for the unholy and profane, for those who strike their fathers and mothers, for murderers, the sexually immoral, men who practice homosexuality, enslavers, liars, perjurers, and whatever else is contrary to sound doctrine, in accordance with the gospel of the glory of the blessed God with which I have been entrusted.

However we still have a choice over interpretations for what is a 'lawful' use of the law:

  1. You use the law lawfully if you use it to condemn non-Christians.
  2. You use the law lawfully if you realise that you the Christian are ungodly and sinners.

The argument for the first is that Paul does not seem to talk of Christians as sinners (they have died to that identity), and yet it is still the ungodly that are justified (Rom 4:5) so maybe the second interpretation is best... or perhaps there is a third way!

All this thinking is hard work. An Peter Dray has now gone and said that I'm 'drawing together and analyising a large amount of helpful scholarship'. Now I feel under pressure!