Christ Came to Save Sinners; the Charge to Timothy (1 Timothy 1:16–20)

1 Tim. 1:16. But I received mercy for this reason, that in me, as the foremost, Jesus Christ might display his perfect patience as an example to those who were to believe in him for eternal life.

What deep humility! What a contrite awareness of his former guilt! I am, he says, so great a sinner that the Lord, being patient with me, exhausted upon me all His patience. And this He did not because He found anything worthy in me, but because no one more than I made possible the presentation of a pattern of mercy such that every sinner, looking at the mercy shown to me, might not waver, but be assured that he too will receive mercy and boldly come to believe in the Lord in undoubting hope that he too will receive eternal life. If even I have received mercy, who can doubt that he too will receive it?

Saint Chrysostom develops this at length: “Do you see how the Apostle again humbles and abases himself, adding something still more abasing? For having said that he received mercy on account of his ignorance, he indicates that one who has received mercy in this way is not a very great sinner and ought not to be severely condemned. But the expression that he received mercy in order that no sinner might ever despair, but might be assured that he will receive the same—this is a very weighty and very powerful (self-abasement). So that when the Apostle said of himself: I am the foremost of sinners, a blasphemer, a persecutor, an insolent opponent, and ‘I am not worthy to be called an Apostle’ (1 Cor. 15:9), and the like—even then he said nothing as abasing as this. Let us illustrate with an example. Let us imagine a great city whose every inhabitant was wicked—some more, some less, but all deserving condemnation; and among these many, one who more than all the rest deserved condemnation and punishment, a man who had experienced every kind of crime. If, let us suppose, someone were to say that the king wished to pardon them all, they would not easily believe this news until they saw that the most criminal of all had already received this pardon. For then no doubt would remain. The same thing Paul also says—that God, wishing to assure people that He forgives everything, showed mercy to the one who sinned most of all. For if I, he says, have received forgiveness, let no one doubt that others will receive it too. And by this the Apostle shows that he did not deserve forgiveness, but for the sake of others’ salvation was the first to be counted worthy of it. Therefore, he says, let no one doubt their salvation when I am saved. And notice the humility of this blessed man. He did not say: that He might display patience in me, but: ‘his perfect patience’—as if to say: in no one else has God displayed more of His patience than in me, and He did not find another such sinner who required all His mercy, all His patience and not merely part of it, as those who sinned only in part. ‘As an example,’ he says, ‘to those who were to believe in him for eternal life’—that is, for their encouragement and incentive.”

Blessed Theodoret, to clarify what the Apostle has said, offers another comparison, in which he shows that from the Lord one receives not only mercy and forgiveness of sins, but also healing of sinful wounds. “As a physician,” the Apostle seems to say, “when in one house and at the same time there are many sick and all despair of recovery, takes the one most gravely ill, gives him healing remedies, and restores him to complete health—by this very act inspiring confidence in himself among all the other sick—so also the Lord Christ, physician of souls, who was made man for our salvation, bringing me forth publicly, the most lawless of all, not only freed me from former defilements but showered me with the greatest gifts, thereby showing to all people His immeasurable patience, so that no one among the greatest lawbreakers, looking at me, might despair of salvation. But the divine Apostle said this with a humble estimate of himself. It should be known that it was not his (moral) life that he acknowledged as lawless; but he spoke thus in recalling his attacks on the Church, as he writes in the Epistle to the Corinthians: ‘I am not worthy to be called an Apostle, because I persecuted the Church of God’ (1 Cor. 15:9).”

“To believe in him for eternal life.” — “For eternal life” shows that the expectation of this life is an inseparable attribute of faith in the Lord Saviour. “Faith in Christ exists in the hope of obtaining eternal life” (Oecumenius). Eternal life is the crown of faith in the Lord. Faith in the Lord is the mystery of the restoration of the fallen. This restoration begins immediately as soon as one approaches the Lord in faith. But it ripens and is completed for the most part in a hidden manner. In all its brightness it will appear in the future life, where it will also receive its corresponding outward position and state. The hope of this encourages believers in the labors of restoration, while the first-fruits of restoration nourish and enliven the hope itself. This is why the Apostle, whenever he touches on the general features of faith, never fails to mention eternal life.

Cc) Honor and glory to the wise God! (1 Tim. 1:17)

1 Tim. 1:17. To the King of the ages, immortal, invisible, the only wise God, be honor and glory forever and ever. Amen.

“Having recalled God’s benefactions, the Apostle turns his tongue to praise” (Theodoret). It is the custom of the Apostle Paul, in the course of expounding the work of the economy of the Incarnation, to be lifted up to God in thanksgiving and doxology. So also here, having ascended to the contemplation of the inexpressible wisdom and goodness of God—that by abolishing the Law He opened a wide door of salvation in the Lord Jesus for all who wish to believe in Him—he praises God. Honor and glory to God, who graciously wills to save sinners!

Having mentioned that in faith God has opened to all the door of salvation with the promise of eternal life, the Apostle names God the King of the ages and immortal, showing that the fulfillment of such a promise God holds in His own hands. Being immortal—having within Himself life that is unceasing, unborrowed, and inexhaustible—He gives also to believers life; as King of the ages—eternal life; and as invisible—such an eternal life as has no likeness in anything visible. The wisdom of God, so clearly manifested in creation, is seen as shining most brightly in the economy of the Incarnation. Therefore the Apostle, moved to praise by the contemplation of this economy, magnifies God here—as everywhere—as the only wise. Honor and glory—divine worship and doxology—be or be offered.

Our commentators particularly direct attention here to the question of to Whom this doxology is addressed. Blessed Theodoret writes: “Since the Apostle has shown that the Lord Christ is the giver of so many good things, wishing to teach that this was done by the good pleasure of God the Father and the cooperation of the Spirit of God, he passed from a single Person to the common nature and offered a hymn to the Trinity, and, keeping silence about the Persons, gives praise to the divine nature. For it is not difficult to see that what has been said belongs not to God the Father alone, but also to the Son and the Holy Spirit. For the King of the ages is not the Father alone, but also the Only-begotten Son—since He is the Creator of the ages—as well as the Holy Spirit—since the divine Apostle also called Him eternal, saying: ‘who through the eternal Spirit’ (Greek: αιωνιου — eternal) ‘offered himself without blemish to God’ (Heb. 9:14). Likewise, immortality and invisibility belong to the Son and the Spirit as well. And since this has been thus made clear, the name of God is truly the name of the One Trinity. For besides It there is no other God by nature.”

The same is found in the others. Blessed Theophylact adds something to the interpretation of the words “the only wise.” “This,” he says, “is said to show that although Angels and men also have wisdom, yet truly wise is God alone, as the source and author of wisdom; all other creatures that have wisdom become participants in it.”

Saint Chrysostom draws from the words “honor and glory” the following application: “Honor and glory are rendered not by words. Therefore, since He also honored us not with words but in actual deed, let us too render Him honor by actual deed.” Blessed Theophylact continues this application: “Glory and honor rendered in word show us only as thankful; but rendered in deed they make us imitators of Him—which is far greater. God requires of us the glorifying of Him in word as well, so that we might love Him, attend to Him, and obey Him, and thereby ourselves receive benefit—just as one who marvels at the glory of the sunlight does himself a benefit by enjoying the light and using it in his works, while one who does not use it brings loss and deprivation upon himself.”

D) This is the charge I entrust to you (1 Tim. 1:18–20)

1 Tim. 1:18. This charge I entrust to you, Timothy, my child, in accordance with the prophecies previously made about you, that by them you may wage the good warfare.

“This” — ταυτην, such a, this very “charge.” What charge? That which was described before: both himself to turn aside, and to turn others away from all empty talk, and to fix all attention on the one thing—that salvation is only in the Lord Jesus Christ, for which purpose He came into the world.

“I entrust to you, child.” He gives a command, sets down a law—an act that is in some measure authoritative (blessed Theophylact), which weighs upon one and pushes one away. To soften it, the Apostle says: “I entrust,” παρατιθεμαι,—I put before you—and adds: “child.” “He gives the command as to a son, as to one of his own—not commandingly, not authoritatively, but as a father: ‘Timothy, my child’” (Saint Chrysostom). Moreover, “I entrust” means: I hand over—in the sense that the Apostles received from above the deposit of faith, which they transmitted to their successors. In this there is an obligation—to receive with reverence and to guard strictly. Saint Chrysostom says: “The expression ‘I entrust’ shows that what has been entrusted must be carefully guarded and did not originate with us. For we did not invent it, but God granted it to us. But what He granted to us we must guard. It is as if he were saying: it is not I who charge you, but the One who chose you.”

By the “prophecies” made about Timothy, the Apostle most likely means either the general voice of approval for Saint Timothy from the believers in Iconium and Lystra, heard by Saint Paul as the voice of God, together with some special prompting given to him from above at the same time; or certain prophecies about Saint Timothy from Prophets who were in the churches at that time, similar to their prophecies about the bonds awaiting Saint Paul; or intimations from above given to Paul himself, known also to Timothy, one of which may perhaps have been repeated at the very time of his appointment to replace the Apostle in Ephesus (blessed Theodoret). In any case this should be seen as testimony to the care with which the Apostle chose successors for himself, and as an indication of how this should always be done in the Church. Saint Chrysostom draws particular attention to this aspect of the matter. “The calling of a teacher (of the faithful) and of a priest is very great and worthy of admiration, and a truly divine indication is needed in order that a worthy man be chosen for it. Such was the way in ancient times; and such it is now too, when we make the choice without human partiality, when we look neither at worldly matters, nor at friendship, nor at enmity. For although we do not participate in the Spirit to the same degree, a good intention is sufficient to draw down from above an indication of one worthy to be ordained. And the Apostles, when they chose Matthias, were not yet participants in the Spirit; but, having entrusted the ordering of the matter to prayer, they numbered him among the Apostles. For they did not look at human friendship. This is how it ought to be done among us now too. But we, having reached the utmost degree of negligence, pass over without attention even what is perfectly obvious. But if we do not discern what is obvious, how shall God reveal to us what is unknown? ‘If,’ He says, ‘you were not faithful in little, who will entrust you with much?’ But in those times, since nothing was done from human partiality, a priest was appointed through prophecy. What does ‘through prophecy’ mean? By the inspiration of the Holy Spirit. For prophecy consists not only in predicting the future, but also in pointing out the present. For God reveals His will to the righteous. The words: ‘Separate for me Barnabas and Saul’ (Acts 13:2) were a prophecy. Thus also Timothy was chosen. — But here the Apostle speaks of many prophecies, meaning perhaps both the one by which he received him to himself at the beginning, and this one, when he ordained him, as he himself writes further on: ‘Do not neglect the gift you have’ (1 Tim. 4:14).”

The Apostle chose Saint Timothy to take his place and entrusted to him the Church of Ephesus, in full confidence that he would rightly carry out the task laid upon him, being assured of this by the previous indications from above. He speaks of this to Saint Timothy in order to inspire him with zeal and courage. Saint Chrysostom says: “In order to rouse him to zeal and to make him sober and watchful, he reminds him of the One who chose and ordained him, speaking as it were thus: God chose you, He entrusted the Church to you; it was not by human choice that you became a servant of the faith: do not offend, do not put to shame the divine choice.”

“That by them you may wage the good warfare.” The governance of the Church, the safeguarding of the faithful together with guiding them in the work of salvation, the Apostle compares to the waging of war or to a campaign. For here there is an unbroken war with unbelief, superstition, empty rationalism, blind hostility—war both with men and with the dark powers rising against the truth through men. Therefore the Apostle writes to Saint Timothy: “wage warfare”—saying, as it were: “you must prove yourself worthy of your election, bring the prophecies to fulfillment, and enter courageously into battle with the adversary demons” (blessed Theodoret). “A mighty war has been raised up, and in general against all, but especially against teachers; therefore we must always keep ready strong weapons—namely, sobriety, watchfulness, unsleeping vigilance; we must be ready for bloody battles, must be armed and have not the least softness within us” (Saint Chrysostom).

“Wage warfare by them.” — “By them” refers to the prophecies and means: in fulfillment of them, by virtue of them, in their spirit—drawing from them both the inspiring motivation and the enlightening direction. “They (these prophecies) chose you for what they chose you for; heed them therefore, be obedient to them, rightly fulfill the good service of a soldier” (Saint Chrysostom). “Because of which (prophecies) you were received and for the sake of which you were chosen—in them and through them wage warfare, by the power of the Holy Spirit, from whom also the prophecies come” (Oecumenius).

“Wage the good warfare”—gives either this thought: maintain this warfare, for it is good; since what can be better than to assist others in salvation, furthering the fulfillment of that for the sake of which our Lord came into the world? Or this thought: maintain the warfare in a good manner, so that it may be recognized as good; for even a good thing can be done in a bad manner, when bad aims are pursued and bad means are used. Saint Chrysostom points out here what in the moral order generally constitutes bad warfare. “The Apostle said: fulfill the good service of a soldier—good, for there is also a bad service of a soldier, of which he says: ‘As you once presented your members as slaves to impurity and to lawlessness’ (Rom. 6:19)—as weapons for sin and impurity. These too fulfilled a soldier’s service, but under a tyrant’s authority; but you—under the authority of the King.”

1 Tim. 1:19. Holding faith and a good conscience. By rejecting this, some have made shipwreck of their faith.

What at the beginning he indicated as the standard for the teaching and guidance of the flock, he now lays as a moral duty upon the teacher himself. There he said: “the aim of the charge is love from a pure heart and a good conscience and sincere faith” (1 Tim. 1:5); here he suggests: “wage the good warfare, holding faith and a good conscience.” The chief thing for both the flock and the shepherd is faith and a good conscience. Faith embraces all that is believed—God the Trinity, Creator, Almighty, Provider, Redeemer, Sanctifier, and Judge worshipped; and chiefly this: that He, who wills the salvation of every sinner and has arranged a wondrous way of salvation for all, will also receive me as I come to Him in faith for salvation, and will save me as He Himself knows how. A good conscience requires “a life adorned with chastity and righteousness (love and piety). Such a praiseworthy life must be joined to faith” (blessed Theodoret). And this is so for the flock, and all the more for the shepherd. And the Apostle here seems to say to Timothy, appointed to shepherd and teach: “Do not think it enough that by the prophecies you have been set to exercise priesthood; but you must have right faith, so as rightly to dispense the word of truth, and a good conscience—that is, an unblameable life, from which a good conscience flows—so that you may also exercise a beneficial oversight over others” (blessed Theophylact). “A good teacher abstains from all that is contrary to truth and thereby lends the greatest credibility to his preaching. By the example of good deeds alone he draws many to belief, disposing them to rely on his word” (Ambrosiaster). “Therefore the teacher must first teach himself. For just as a military commander, if he had not first been an excellent soldier, would never have become a commander—so also one who teaches. This the Apostle says also in another place: ‘lest, after preaching to others, I myself should be disqualified’ (1 Cor. 9:27)” (Saint Chrysostom).

“By rejecting which, some have made shipwreck of their faith.” — “Which”—the conscience—“by rejecting”—pushing away, despising, trampling on—they have fallen away from faith. So greatly does the rightness of faith depend on a good life. The Saviour placed even the coming to faith, or the understanding that His teaching is from God, in dependence on the fervent desire to do the will of God (Jn. 7:17). But as its beginning, so also the continuation of belief—or the firmness and rightness of faith—depends on a good conscience. One who tramples on conscience clearly does not value faith either. Therefore, if he is a teacher, he preaches his teaching hypocritically (Ambrosiaster). Moreover, one who neglects a good conscience, allowing himself license in the domain of life, acquires the habit of tolerating and admitting license also in the domain of thought, which in a believer is held in order by faith. This license readily receives all sorts of suppositions inconsistent with faith; these, not being rejected, soon pass into probabilities, and finally are held with conviction, in opposition to faith. This happens especially with respect to those points of faith which strongly trouble one on account of an evil life. One who has reached this point has already fallen away from faith, though he lives among believers. Thus, “if life is impure, then from this also perverted dogmas are born” (blessed Theophylact). “A dissolute life often serves as the foundation of ungodliness. Some, unable to bear the reproaches of conscience, together with it also rejected the all-encompassing Providence of God, and attributed what happens to fate and fortune” (blessed Theodoret). “When life becomes worthy of condemnation, then similar teaching also arises. And one can see many who, having fallen into the abyss of sins, swerved into paganism. They, in order not to be tormented by fear of the future judgment, try to persuade themselves in their soul that those threats are false. And all this comes from indulging the mind greatly (as they indulge the heart) and subjecting everything to rational investigation. Rationalism causes shipwreck (in the soul), while faith is in a certain sense a reliable ship—and those who deviate from it inevitably suffer shipwreck, of which the Apostle also gives an example” (Saint Chrysostom).

1 Tim. 1:20. Among whom are Hymenaeus and Alexander, whom I have handed over to Satan that they may learn not to blaspheme.

“Among whom.” Consequently, there were not only two such persons; these two are singled out presumably because of the uncontrollable nature of their tongues, by which they spread blasphemous words about the economy of salvation in the Lord Jesus everywhere. For this they also incurred a special punishment—spiritual, but visible to all and not without fear: namely, being handed over to Satan. This was not the first time the Apostle employed this punishment; in Corinth the incestuous man had been subjected to the same (1 Cor. 5:5). But what is this handing over to Satan?

There are two realms—the bright realm of faith and virtue, living in God and enlivened by God; and the dark realm of opposition to God and sin, ordered and maintained by our enemy Satan. The first is the Church of God’s saints; the second is everything outside the Church. Thus whoever steps out of the Church or is excluded from it inevitably falls under his power and influence. Saint Chrysostom says: “If you want to know how the Apostle handed the guilty over to Satan, listen. ‘When you are assembled,’ he says, ‘and my spirit is present, with the power of our Lord Jesus Christ, to deliver such a one to Satan’ (1 Cor. 5:4, 5). Consequently, the guilty one was immediately cast out of the general assembly, excluded from the flock, left alone and naked, given over to the wolf. For just as a cloud covered the Hebrew camp, so the Holy Spirit covers the Church. Therefore whoever was expelled from it was scorched; and the guilty one was expelled from it by the judgment of the Apostles. So also the Lord gave Judas over to Satan. For immediately ‘after the piece of bread, Satan entered into him’ (Jn. 13:27).”

But the punishment of being handed over to Satan was not limited to this invisible calamity, accomplished in the spirit alone. Certain guilty persons were punished for the instruction of the rest; therefore the punishment had to be visible, consisting either in bodily sicknesses and deprivations or in fits of mental disturbance that occurred from time to time. And one must suppose that just as in Corinth the guilty man was handed over to Satan for the destruction of the flesh, so something similar was suffered by those punished in the same way in Ephesus. Blessed Theodoret writes: “The Apostle handed them over to the devil as a harsh executor of punishment. For (at that time it was customary that) those excommunicated from the Church and deprived of grace were subjected to fierce blows from the adversary, falling into grave illnesses, sufferings, losses, and other calamities. Satan takes pleasure in inflicting these on people, since he is, according to the word of the Prophet, both enemy and avenger (Ps. 8:3).” In clarification of this Ambrosiaster adds: “This is why it is said in the Gospel, among other things, to the man who had been ill for thirty-eight years: ‘Sin no more, that nothing worse may happen to you’ (Jn. 5:14), showing that on account of sin the body sometimes falls into illness. And that the devil serves as the instrument for this, the Lord explained when in one case He said: ‘And ought not this woman, a daughter of Abraham whom Satan bound for eighteen years, be loosed from this bond on the Sabbath day?’ (Lk. 13:16).”

To such punishment Saint Paul handed over those two guilty persons during his stay in Ephesus—personally and solemnly, in the presence of all the believers and perhaps of unbelievers as well. The purpose: “that they” may learn “not to blaspheme.” Who? Not these two alone, but all who were partaking of the same fault, though less bold than they—such was their blasphemy. “The Apostle did not disclose the nature of the blasphemy itself; because he was writing to one who knew the matter” (blessed Theodoret). But evidently it was directed against the work of God—the economy of salvation in the Lord. To cut short such blasphemy, the Apostle solemnly punished the chief offenders, both to correct them and to bring the rest to their senses. “Those being instructed, on seeing the harm arising from blasphemy, would naturally change their way of thinking” (blessed Theodoret). Saint Chrysostom says here: “But how does Satan teach one not to blaspheme? For if he teaches others not to blaspheme, he should all the more teach this to himself. But if he cannot to this day teach himself, he cannot teach others either. — The Apostle did not say: that they might teach them not to blaspheme, but: ‘that they’ may learn ‘not to blaspheme.’ He does not do this, but it is the consequence (of his actions). In a similar way the Apostle also says elsewhere of the fornicator: ‘to hand such a one over to Satan for the destruction of the flesh’—not with the aim of saving the body, but: ‘that his spirit may be saved’ (1 Cor. 5:5). That is, this is said impersonally. How then does this come about? Just as executioners, being themselves full of countless crimes, bring others to their senses—so here (the same is said) of the evil demon. — But why, Apostle, did you not punish them yourself, as you did Bar-Jesus, as Cephas did Ananias, but handed them over to Satan? — In order to combine with the severity of the punishment a stronger condemnation of their guilt; besides, it was no small thing for the Apostle to show that he had the power to command the devil. For by this it became evident that the devil submits and is already subjected against his will to the Apostles (in carrying out their verdicts). Therefore this greatly contributed to the manifestation of the grace-gifts.”