In the Latter Times Some Shall Depart From the Faith (1 Timothy 4:1–2)

1 Tim. 4:1. But the Spirit expressly says that in later times some will depart from the faith, heeding deceiving spirits and doctrines of demons.

In this verse the intellectual aspect of the false teachers is defined—specifically, whence they will derive their false teaching—while in the next verse the moral aspect is given: what they are with respect to conscience. Both, though extremely incriminating, may be applied to all false teachers, with rare exceptions.

The “Spirit” who speaks expressly is the Holy Spirit, who dwelt in the Apostles, abundantly filling them with His holy gifts, reminding them of what had been and foretelling what was to be—all in relation to the Kingdom of God. He revealed to holy Paul what was to come; and holy Paul judged it necessary to communicate to believers what the Holy Spirit had revealed. The words “the Spirit says” are “equally fitting to God as the (prophetic) expressions ‘thus says the Lord’ and ‘thus says the God of Sabaoth’” (blessed Theodoret). “The Apostle does not pass over in silence what the Holy Spirit has revealed about the future, for the edification and warning of the Churches—so that the Churches, forewarned of this, might maintain careful watchfulness lest such people circumvent them” (Ambrosiaster).

To whom does the Spirit speak—to holy Paul, or everywhere throughout the Churches? There were occasions when the speaking of the Spirit went through the Churches of God, and the Apostle heard it already from the Churches. Such was the testimony of the Spirit concerning the bonds awaiting the Apostle in Jerusalem, hearing of which the Apostle said: I do not know what will come of it (Acts 20:22, 23, 21:11). But there were occasions when the Spirit spoke expressly to the Apostle himself. — Thus He forbade him to speak the word in Asia and did not allow him to go into Bithynia (Acts 16:6, 7). In the present case one may allow for both: this word went through the Churches, and holy Paul also heard it from the Holy Spirit. And he heard it “expressly,” ρητως,—as a word uttered in articulate speech. How? It may have resounded in his ears and been impressed directly on his mind and heart, but still as a definite word. The Apostle added this word ρητως to make known that the Spirit’s testimony on this matter is “evident, clear, unambiguous, so that there remains no room for doubt whatsoever” (holy Chrysostom).

Know then for certain, he says, that “in later times some will depart from the faith.” — “Later times” are not those that will come before the end of the world and the Second Coming of Christ, but those that will come after us—the subsequent times. “Will depart”—literally means: they will abandon the Christian faith and become non-Christians, like Julian the Apostate. But, judging by the subjects of the coming false teaching indicated below, one may conclude that this departure will be from the purity of the Christian faith. The false teaching will arise among Christians and from Christian principles, wrongly understood and crookedly interpreted by human vain wisdom apart from the voice of the Church. Both the false teachers and those carried away by them will count themselves Christians, and even the most perfect of Christians—as proved to be the case afterward.

And will those who are to depart themselves be false teachers, or will the false teachers be separate persons, characterized below, while here it speaks only of those who will be carried away by their false teaching? “Will depart”—points directly to those who are to fall away through being carried away by others; but in the explanation of how they will depart, one cannot fail to see a depiction of how the very seducers into apostasy will also depart. Both will occur. In some, vain-minded ones, false teaching will arise; having fallen away from unity of faith because of it, and thereby from the one body of the Church, they will also carry away others who are not firm in the faith. This holy Paul had foretold to the Ephesians much earlier, in the speech he delivered to their presbyters when taking leave of them at Miletus: “savage wolves will come in among you, not sparing the flock; and from your own number men will arise speaking perverse things, to draw away the disciples after themselves” (Acts 20:29, 30). Blessed Theodoret writes: “The Apostle showed that some, having first joined the body of the Church, will subsequently become teachers of falsehood. For this is what the words mean: ‘some will depart from the faith, heeding deceiving spirits.’” And holy Chrysostom says: “There will be a time, says the Apostle, when those who have become partakers of the faith will act in a manner worthy of condemnation, giving harmful counsel not only concerning food, but also concerning marriage and everything of the sort.”

“Heeding deceiving spirits.” This is how the false teaching will arise and apostasy take its beginning! Two forces will draw toward apostasy: deceiving spirits and demonic doctrine—one from within, the other from without. They will give heed to deceiving spirits, will receive false views, will acknowledge them as true, and will depart from the faith that proclaims truth regarding the matters on which they have received false views and convictions. The visible departure from the faith, expressed by falling away from the Church, is preceded by an inward falling away from it, arising from consent to suggestions of deceiving spirits that are incompatible with the faith. Deceiving spirits are the unclean powers—servants of the father of lies—demons. They are called “deceiving” because they draw into falsehood through guile, seduction, and deceit. They cover falsehood with the appearance of truth and draw people in. But how? Directly themselves, or through other people? The Apostle does not distinguish this, but only indicates the source of the falsehood. They will heed, he says, deceiving spirits and will depart from the faith. One may suppose it thus: noticing persons more susceptible to novelties, the spirits of falsehood will inwardly lead them astray from the path of truth into apostasy, and will then begin to carry away others through their agency—outwardly, through their false-teaching word, and inwardly, through seduction in their thoughts. Since the enticement of the latter as well—or their final consent to the falsehood—also does not occur without the inward working of deceiving spirits, the Apostle sets this out beforehand as the ultimate source of the falling away from true faith into falsehood. Here the same thing occurs as in falls into sin. Toward sin both the examples of others and one’s own inclinations draw; but the actual enticement and fall do not occur without the participation of unclean powers. They cloud the mind and surround sin with phantasmal delights; and the will inclines to sin. This inward fall is then followed by the outward one. So too in falling away from the faith—whether complete or in certain points only—one’s own reasonings and the words of others both play a part; but the final consent to receiving the falsehood and following it does not occur without the clouding wrought by spirits of falsehood, who, covering falsehood with a seductive semblance of truth, extort this consent to it. This is what the Apostle expresses in the words: “heeding deceiving spirits.”

“Doctrines of demons”—the Apostle called by this name that mode of viewing Christianity which is formed within under the action of deceiving spirits and then, clothed in corresponding expressions, circulates among people in the form of a certain special teaching—as a temptation and enticement to depart from truth into falsehood. Demons attack, in the consciousness of believers, first one particular side of the faith—the one where it is easier for them to present an apparent inadequacy of the truth and an illusory adequacy of the opposing falsehood. Having succeeded in this, they then teach how to restructure the whole of Christian teaching in the spirit of that falsehood.

When this is accomplished and the formed viewpoint receives its expression and structure—the false teaching is ready. Demons thereafter inflame those they have instructed with a zeal seemingly for the truth of God—and they rush irresistibly to spread the false teaching suggested to them by deceiving spirits. Whoever heeds it heeds demonic teaching, for it received its origin from them. Meanwhile demons do not slumber but hasten to act directly and seductively on the soul to which the attention shown toward their false teaching opens them an entrance. Such is the second agent in drawing believers toward apostasy from the faith. What an unflattering origin for false teaching and for the zeal of false teachers! “Heeding the demons,” Theophylact writes, “the false teachers found fault with certain foods and with marriage. However, the Apostle has in mind here all other heresies as well; for all of them derive from the delusion of spirits of falsehood and from demonic teaching.” Ambrosiaster infers from this: “What better could have been said beforehand about false teachers and false teaching to move people to avoid or rather condemn them, than by calling their view a delusion and their teaching demonic? After this, hearing words contrary to the truth, everyone already knew that this is a teaching composed by demons, as the Holy Spirit foretold through the Apostle.” — And in this, of course, they had the strongest motive to turn their ears away from it.

1 Tim. 4:2. Speaking lies in hypocrisy, having their own conscience seared.

How do the propagators of demonic teachings succeed in drawing people after them? By hypocrisy. They assume the appearance of persons somehow special, who have grasped all wisdom; they clothe themselves in a mask of holiness—and, having thereby disposed their hearers toward themselves, cause them willingly to drink the poison of their false teaching and to be carried away. This the Apostle expressed in the words: “speaking lies in hypocrisy.” Holy Paul called them “liars” because in their teaching, as something false, there are only words and words, with nothing corresponding to reality—as in phantasms. Further: since falsehood cannot maintain moral forces in due tension, these liars naturally give themselves much latitude in many things, even in those matters which, as impermissible, are forbidden by their own teaching—which, however, they cannot do openly, because this would undermine their authority as teachers and the teaching itself. Hence hypocrisy is inevitable in them—the concern to appear holy and blameless while living an unholy and far from blameless life. This is one side of hypocrisy. To it, one may say, another is inevitably joined, namely: when deeds contrary to the teaching are admitted, the conviction of the viability of the teaching itself is weakened or entirely disappears in the soul of the one who preaches it, and he becomes a preacher without conviction—a hypocritical teacher. This latter side is what our commentators especially bring out in connection with these words of the Apostle. “In hypocrisy,” writes Oecumenius, “means: in craftiness and cunning evasiveness, whereby, even knowing that the dogmas they have fabricated are false, they contrive to present their false-speaking as truth.” The same is in Theophylact: “What they falsely speak, they falsely speak not out of ignorance, but, knowing it to be false, they teachingly pretend it is true” (from holy Chrysostom). Blessed Theodoret takes the general sense: “having taken upon themselves the name of Christians, they teach what is entirely contrary.”

Holy Paul mentions such hypocrisy as a preventive against future departures from the faith. For nothing repels people from teachers so much as the discernment of hypocrisy in them.

“Having their own conscience seared.” Hypocrisy is partly visible from without, while the searing of conscience is an entirely inward matter. Only in its final stages does it manifest itself in a kind of brazen shamelessness in the pursuit of goals recognized as evil. In any case, however, the Apostle has placed before us this characteristic trait of false teachers as a preventive against being carried away after them, with this thought: you will notice the hypocrisy—look closer and you will see the searing of conscience; and once you notice that, what good can you expect from such people?

The searing of conscience suggests two ideas: either that their conscience is burned out, or that they are burned by their conscience. Conscience itself never burns out; but the soul may reach such a state of insensibility to its promptings and reproaches that it is as though there were no conscience—as though it had burned away. The Apostle presents the false teachers as people who live contrary to their teaching and who teach in words contrary to their conviction. Conscience could not leave this without reproach, and undoubtedly reproached them. If now, despite this, they continue to live and act in the same spirit, it is evident that they have already silenced conscience, or have become deaf to its promptings—which is the same as being seared. Blessed Theodoret writes: the Apostle called them “seared in conscience,” “showing their extreme insensibility; for the place that is cauterized, having become deadened, loses its former sensitivity.”

One may also understand the searing of conscience as being branded—or more precisely, marked—by conscience. This is suggested by the Greek: κεκαυστηριασμενον. — Καυστηριαζειν means: to burn in a mark. In the East, owners brand animals with marks by which both they themselves and others recognize that these are their animals. Similar marks on the forehead of consciousness are branded by conscience in the false teachers, so that those who have eyes to see can see and recognize that they belong to the number of the guilty—worthy of condemnation here, and ready for condemnation there, at the judgment of God—and that they carry condemnation within themselves. Blessed Theophylact writes: “since they knew of much that was unclean in themselves, conscience had in them the brands of their unclean life” (likewise in Oecumenius). Ambrosiaster clarifies this: “as a brand damages the skin and impresses a mark, so conscience marks out the false teachers for ruin, on account of their deceitfulness—whereby they craftily hold one thing in mind while expressing another in word. The Apostle gives to understand that such people cannot change for the better so as to be saved; for as a brand (on animals) cannot change, so their soul cannot be corrected. There is nothing worse than hypocrisy.”

Bb) Certain subjects of the false teaching (1 Tim. 4:3)

1 Tim. 4:3. Forbidding to marry, commanding to abstain from foods.

Only two subjects from the whole of the false teaching are indicated, probably because they, being more visible, were to stand out more sharply from among others less visible, and moreover to point clearly to the principles on which the entire false teaching would be built; with them, perhaps, the false speakers were to begin their seductive discourse; and, having succeeded in confusing people on these points, to move on to presenting the whole false teaching and especially their evil principles.

Abstaining from marriage and from certain foods is not blameworthy in itself; it can be blameworthy only on account of the thoughts with which it is done. Evidently, by the principles of those false speakers it turned out that marriage and certain foods are impure. Whoever abstained from them in this spirit would be uttering a blasphemy against the Creator of all things. Blessed Theodoret writes: “they call marriage and most foods abominable—in mockery of their Creator, who made these things for (blameless) use.” For this reason the Apostle calls abstinence of this sort blameworthy and warns against it.

In what spirit and with what motives believers may abstain from marriage is indicated by the Apostle in the First Epistle to the Corinthians (chapter 7). There he also indicates that an athlete ought to abstain from everything, giving himself as an example of this (1 Cor. 9:25–27). The false speakers erred not in recommending celibacy and abstinence, but in turning both into an obligatory law, and moreover on false principles. This is what the Apostle condemns. He “does not reject celibacy and abstinence, but reproaches those who compel others to regard these as a legal obligation” (blessed Theodoret)—as though those who partake of these things are for that very reason already unclean and ranked among the perishing.

Blessed Theophylact raises the question: “But what? Do we not forbid marriage?” — and answers: “By no means. But those who do not wish to marry we guide toward the keeping of virginity, teaching that it is more honourable. This does not mean, however, that marriage is dishonourable; just as the fact that gold is more honourable does not mean that silver is dishonourable. And generally, the more honourable is more honourable precisely because it is more honourable than what is honourable, and the better is better than the good—not than the bad. So, let him who is able take hold of the gold of virginity; and he who cannot, let him receive the silver of marriage.”

Who are these false teachers? The Jews abstained from certain foods. But they had a specific commandment about this, and as long as they remained Jews they could not act otherwise. Holy Paul in his other Epistles does not reproach them for this, but only teaches that the observance of this law is no longer timely. But evidently, in the present passage the Apostle has in mind not them, but those who abstained not on account of God’s commandment but on account of their own vain wisdom—though it may be considered probable that the example of abstaining from foods they borrowed from the Jews and even built their false teaching on that occasion. Thus the prohibition of foods may, in some small measure, be considered as resting on Judaism—but not in the Jewish spirit. As for the prohibition of marriage, neither Judaism nor paganism could have given it occasion or support. This is something entirely new. Where, then, did it come from? Is it perhaps the offspring of the false teaching that was creeping into Colossae and spreading through Phrygia, in which the severe treatment of the flesh stood as a prominent point (Col. 2:23)? To it the prohibition of marriage would very naturally have been added—and this is what the Ephesians did.

From the word “forbidding” one cannot directly conclude that this was already occurring in practice at the time of writing; for, in connection with the preceding discourse, this can also mean: those who are about to forbid. But one cannot deny that the beginnings were already there; such a teaching was already circulating, but was still weak, both because of the small number of adherents and perhaps because its whole system had not yet been established. Both the one and the other were still expected in the future; and the Apostle warns against them. Among the heresies that appeared afterward, one may see indicated here the Manichaeans, the Encratites, and the Marcionites. So holy Chrysostom and all our other commentators.

Grammatically: “forbidding… to abstain from foods” would directly mean: requiring people not to abstain from foods—that is, to partake of all food without scruple. But this would be contrary to the Apostle’s meaning. Therefore it must be understood as if it read: “forbidding to marry and commanding to abstain from foods” (blessed Theophylact). Oecumenius cites several examples from Greek writers to show that the Apostle’s words contain no error, but that it is characteristic even of Attic speech to express itself in this way.

Cc) The groundlessness of the false teaching (1 Tim. 4:3–5)