Perilous Times in the Last Days (2 Timothy 3:1–9)

2 Tim. 3:1. But know this, that in the last days perilous times will come.

“Know this”—a confirmatory expression, that this will undoubtedly be so—as in the First Epistle: “the Spirit expressly speaks” (1 Tim. 4:1). There he spoke of falling away from faith, while here he speaks of moral corruption. Perhaps this is also the reason why there he draws his assurance from the Spirit, while here he is content with his own word. “The last days”—the thought is usually referred to the end of the age; but here it points generally to times to come. “Perilous times”—hard times, in which it is difficult to live. The Apostle depicts extreme moral corruption; but since with this is inseparably connected the diminishing of righteousness, peace, and security, it is always difficult in such times to live—even for those who are themselves corrupt, but especially for those who do not live after their examples and customs. There is a prejudice in calling certain days and times bad or good, with the notion that they are bad or good in themselves. Holy Chrysostom exposes such thinking. “The Apostle does not condemn the days or times, but the people who will then exist. So we too have a custom of calling times bad or not bad, according to the character of the deeds performed during them by people. He immediately also points to the cause. The root and source of all evils, from which they all proceed, is excessive self-love.”

2 Tim. 3:2. For men will be lovers of themselves, lovers of money, boastful, proud, blasphemers, disobedient to parents, unthankful, unholy, unloving.

Self-love is the root of all evil passions. It suppresses love of neighbor and love of God and establishes in life orders completely opposed to them, from which no one has peace. But it is remarkable that self-love is itself its own punishment. The self-lover tends only to his own good; but since he cannot live happily on his own without others, the self-lover, precisely because he neglects others, harms himself or acts wickedly against himself. Holy Chrysostom unfolds this aspect of self-love thus: “One captivated by this passion cannot even watch over his own interests. For when someone does not observe what pertains to the good of his neighbor, how will he observe his own while neglecting the interests of his neighbor? Just as he who has regard for the interests of his neighbor thereby also places his own in a good condition, so he who disregards them will overlook his own as well. For if we ‘are members one of another’ (Eph. 4:25), then the salvation (good) of a neighbor is not his alone but belongs to the whole body, and the harm of a neighbor does not touch him alone but strikes all with painful sorrow. So likewise—if we are a building, then whatever part of it suffers, danger threatens the whole building; and when it is firm and solid, it helps all the rest to hold firmly as well. So it is in the Church. You despised your brother? You injured yourself. How? In that your own part also suffers no small loss on this account. For if he who did not give his talent to the bankers falls into hell, then he who sees one suffering from lack of the most necessary needs and does not extend a hand to him will suffer all the more compared to that one, in proportion to the greater extent of the harm. So the self-lover is most of all one who does not love himself; while the lover of neighbor is most of all one who loves himself.”

From self-love all passions proceed. The chief or parent passions among them are reckoned—and are—pride, covetousness, and sensuality. In the present passage the Apostle enumerates chiefly the offspring of pride, while of the other two he mentions only their progenitors themselves—love of money and love of pleasure—concluding with a showing of the relation to God of the life ordered according to their impulses and the impulses of passions in general.

“Lovers of money.” “Having indicated the root, he enumerates in particular the shoots from it, of which the first and greatest is love of money. For as from love—all good, so from self-love, the opposite of love—all evil. Love is broad and spreads everywhere; while self-love constricts its breadth and concentrates on oneself alone” (blessed Theophylact, holy Chrysostom). By love of money is meant generally a hoarding acquisitiveness. To have is a practical necessity of life. That it might not overcome the person and make a miser of him, God has implanted in his heart compassion for those in need, which opens the treasury for others. But when self-love gains mastery over it, compassion for others dies out and the treasury doors are locked. Everything is needed for oneself and is directed toward oneself; there is no concern for others. And so—a miser.

“Boastful, proud.” The second offspring of self-love is pride. Its manifestations are various. In the present passage the Apostle indicates two forms of it: αλαζονειαν — and: υπερηφανιαν. “Boastful,” αλαζονες — vainglorious, “they exalt and elevate themselves above others” (blessed Theophylact). “Proud,” υπερηφανοι — together with vainglory, contemptuous; they count others as nothing and are ready to dominate them willfully.

Here holy Paul begins to enumerate the offspring of pride. “Blasphemers,” βλασφημοι — speakers of impiety, blasphemers. “From vainglory—contemptuous and willful arrogance; from arrogance—blasphemy (impious speech, wrong sentiments toward God, rebellion against God)” (holy Chrysostom). Or “from both, blasphemy” (Oecumenius). For it is natural that “when evil from self-love grows progressively, it reaches even rebellion against God” (blessed Theophylact). Holy Chrysostom explains this aspect of the matter at length. “One who is arrogant toward men will easily be arrogant before God as well. This is how sins are born; they often rise from below upward. Whoever is respectful toward men is all the more reverent before God; whoever is obedient to his fellow servants will be all the more submissive to the Master; but whoever despises his fellow servants will gradually come to despise God Himself. Let us not therefore despise one another. This is a bad lesson, which teaches us to despise God, and even by the very fact that we despise one another we already show contempt for God, who has commanded us to have great care for one another. If you will, I will make this clear by another illustration—an example. Cain despised his brother and immediately also showed contempt for God. How? Look how disrespectfully (υβριστικως — insolently, rudely) he answers God: ‘Am I my brother’s keeper?’ (Gen. 4:9). So too Esau, who despised his brother, showed contempt for God (counting as nothing the privileges of the birthright given by God). The brothers of Joseph despised him and showed contempt for God. The Israelites despised Moses and showed contempt for God. So too the sons of Eli despised the people—and showed contempt for God. Would you like to see examples of the opposite? Abraham was forbearing toward his nephew, and was obedient to God as well, as is evident from his obedience concerning his son Isaac and from all his other virtues. So too Abel, being meek toward his brother, was pious toward God as well. Let us not therefore despise one another, lest we learn to despise God also; let us honor one another, that we may learn to honor God as well. One who is bold toward men becomes bold toward God also. And when self-love, love of money, and contempt are joined together, what more is lacking for utter ruin? All has been corrupted, and a multitude of sinful impurities pours in.”

“Disobedient to parents,” απειθεις — disobedient. “Arrogance and haughtiness teach one to rebel even against nature (against those who gave life)” (Oecumenius). “Blasphemers are also disobedient to parents—which is logical; for whoever blasphemes God, how will he honor his parents?” (blessed Theophylact).

“Unthankful.” In blasphemy and disrespect toward parents, ingratitude is already evident. For “one who does not know gratitude to God his benefactor—how will he show gratitude to people?” (Oecumenius). Likewise, one who is ungrateful to parents—how will he be grateful to other people? (blessed Theophylact). Ingratitude is the daughter of pride, which holds that what is done for it is simply as it ought to be. But no less is it the fruit of love of money, as holy Chrysostom explains: “And can a lover of money be grateful? To whom can he feel gratitude? To no one. He counts all as his enemies, wishing to take everything from everyone. Even if you gave him all your property, he would show you no gratitude, but would be vexed that you had no greater wealth and did not make him master of more. Even if you made him lord of the universe, he would show you no gratitude, but would think that he had received nothing. His desire is insatiable: for it resembles a desire inherent in illness; and such desires are insatiable. As one suffering from fever can never be satisfied but is constantly thirsty and never quenches the unquenchable desire to drink; so too one seized by passion for riches can never satisfy his desire. And never being satisfied, he will not be grateful to you, however much you give him. He would be grateful to one who gave him as much as he desires. But no one can do this, because his desire is boundless. Therefore he cannot be grateful to anyone. There is no man so ungrateful as the lover of money, and so insensible as the covetous man.”

“Unholy,” ανοσιοι — without holiness or unfitting—not such as they ought to be by their calling, estate, position, place—“they set aside the fitness, or what is fitting and obligatory for them” (blessed Theophylact).

“Unloving,” αστοργοι — devoid even of natural affection for their own kin, “even enemies to their own” (Oecumenius).

2 Tim. 3:3. Irreconcilable (presumptuous, high-minded, traitors), slanderers, without self-control, brutal, despisers of good.

“Irreconcilable,” ασπονδοι — they accept no terms for ending a quarrel; once parted they are parted forever and shun every reconciliation—they will not look at you, so do not even show yourself.

The following words—“presumptuous, high-minded, traitors”—are not read by any of our commentators.

“Slanderers,” διαβολοι — that is, “those who think unjustly and speak ill of others. These are such as, seeing nothing good in themselves, find a certain consolation in speaking evil of others, so as to undermine the good opinion of them; but since they speak of others at random, they err and transgress—and so are truly slanderers” (holy Chrysostom, blessed Theophylact).

“Without self-control”—“in speech, in appetite, and in everything else” (holy Chrysostom).

“Brutal,” ανημεροι — harsh and turbulent, in look, word, and movement. “Hence savagery, hence ferocity—when one is a lover of money, when one is self-loving, ungrateful, and intemperate” (holy Chrysostom). “Do you see what self-love and love of money make of a person? Beasts instead of men” (blessed Theophylact).

“Despisers of good,” αφιλαγαθοι — “enemies of all good” (blessed Theophylact) or enemies of every good and benevolent person.

2 Tim. 3:4. Traitors, headstrong, puffed up, lovers of pleasure rather than lovers of God.

“Traitors,” προδοται — “betrayers of friendship” (holy Chrysostom)—“or of fellowship” (Oecumenius)—not for the sake of the common good, but for the sake of their personal interests, to the harm of others.

“Headstrong,” προπετεις — “having nothing solid in themselves” (holy Chrysostom)—“unstable, inconstant” (blessed Theophylact)—“reckless” (Oecumenius): they rush this way and that, or charge ahead like bears—self-confidently swift and resolute in affairs.

“Puffed up,” τετυφωμενοι — “full of conceit, arrogance, and haughtiness” (blessed Theophylact, Oecumenius)—inflated, thinking much of themselves, though they have nothing worthy of greater attention.

“Lovers of pleasure rather than lovers of God—Lovers of pleasure,” φιληδονοι — living for their own pleasure; whatever one loves to find pleasure in, that one does. This is the most flattering offspring of self-love and the most wide-ranging in application: because it is prone not only to carnal pleasures—though this is the predominant case—but also to pleasures of the soul, and even spiritual ones.

“‘Rather than lovers of God.’ A lover of pleasure, accustomed to the pursuit of pleasure, values nothing else—neither law, nor righteousness, nor the fear of God—and is ready to sell everything for pleasure. Hence even in divine things (attending church), he loves not God but the pleasure that divine ordinances and laws give or promise. ‘Rather than lovers of God.’ It cannot be otherwise; for where there is love of worldly pleasures, there is no place for the desire of the Divine” (blessed Theophylact). “The desire for the Divine they have replaced with the love of shameful things” (Oecumenius).

2 Tim. 3:5. Having a form of godliness, but denying its power.

Being, however, such in the dispositions and feelings of their heart, they outwardly refrain from showing themselves as such, and on the contrary endeavor to maintain all the external forms of a devout Christian life, where it is impossible to depart from them without clearly revealing one’s own impiety. Hence, play-acting is an inevitable consequence in people possessed by passions, yet moving among those who love godliness. But in their own circle they usually do not dissemble, but openly blaspheme all things divine and scoff at everything. Our commentators, understanding by godliness the faith, write about this as follows. Oecumenius: “if you judge them by what they say, they are devout; but if you judge by what they do, they are found and shown to be contrary to their own words.” Theophylact: “they assume only an outward form of godliness and pretend, but by their deeds they deny it. Note that the power of godliness, or as it were its sinew, lies in works. Wherefore it is rightly said that it without works is dead.” Holy Chrysostom: “by the word ‘form’ the Apostle here expresses something lifeless and dead—outward appearance, seeming, hypocrisy. Faith without works is only outward appearance without power. As a body that is beautiful and blooming but without strength is like a painted image, so is right faith without works. Let us suppose that some lover of money, traitor, or headstrong person holds the right faith; what profit is there in this, if he is distinguished by nothing befitting a Christian, if he does nothing proper to godliness, but surpasses the pagans in his impiety, is a contagion to those near him and an occasion of blasphemy against God—if he dishonors the teaching by his deeds?”

Blessed Theodoret concludes this whole section on the moral corruption that is to develop as follows: “I think the Apostle foretold the present time, for our life is full of these evils, and while clothing ourselves in the outward appearance of godliness, we prepare ourselves by our deeds as idols of wickedness: instead of lovers of God we have become lovers of money and love slavery to the passions; in a word, in us may be found all the rest that the divine Apostle foretold.” One cannot deny that a similar application is even more apt for our own time.

2 Tim. 3:5. And from such people turn away.

“And these also”—that is, turn away from such as teach otherwise and are contentious, and also from these, the morally corrupt. Or thus: and from these, the hypocrites, turn away—of those, the morally corrupt, there is nothing left to say. “But if such people will exist ‘in the last days,’ why does he say: ‘and from these turn away’? Probably even then there were some such—not in large numbers, but there were” (holy Chrysostom). Or he speaks in this sense: as soon as they appear. One must suppose that, according to the Apostle, holy Timothy will live to see the mentioned last days—that they will begin after the death of holy Paul, and holy Timothy will himself see them; and behold, for this occasion a commandment to him: turn away from such persons (Oecumenius, blessed Theophylact). But whichever of these meanings one holds in mind, the application from this to later times and persons is very natural. Holy Chrysostom also says: “What is certain is that through Timothy the Apostle exhorts all—to keep away from such people.” All—not only Timothy’s contemporaries, but all the more “those who will live after him” (Oecumenius).

2 Tim. 3:6. For of this sort are those who creep into households and make captives of gullible women, loaded down with sins, led away by various lusts.

“For of these are they”—from this circle are they. But those spoken of before will yet come, while these already are. Consequently they are reckoned the predecessors and germs of those. “Those who creep into households”—those who steal in secretly. “By this word the Apostle expresses their shamelessness, dishonesty, deception, and seduction” (holy Chrysostom). And furthermore ανελευθερον — “want of freedom” (blessed Theophylact). Conscience would rebuke doing this openly, or there was fear that they would encounter obstacles—acting openly. “And capture weak women.” “Do you see how these people imitate the ancient seducer, using the same instrument that the devil used against Adam?” (holy Chrysostom). “Of course, they also had in mind, through the women, to attract the husbands to their side” (Oecumenius). “Capture,” αιχμαλωτιζοντες — taking captive. It is characteristic of women to be charmed by novelty and appearance and, being charmed, to give themselves over into slavery to the charm and to the charmers. Standing at this vantage point they become very convenient instruments in the hands of those who seek to achieve their aims by indirect means. “Weak women,” γυναικαρια — a diminutive word of contempt. The Apostle expressed himself thus to expose their susceptibility to seduction or proneness to deception—hinting at the same time that a man too, if he proves easily deceivable, is no better than a woman. It is not nature that is blamed, but character (holy Chrysostom, Oecumenius, blessed Theophylact).

“Laden with sins,” σεσωρευμενα — piled up with sins, on whom sins lie like a heap of every kind of refuse. “This signifies both the multitude, and the disorderliness, and the mixture of sins” (blessed Theophylact). “He does not condemn nature; for he did not simply say: women, but specifically such women. And this is why they give themselves over to seductions—because of sins, because they do not know the good (and cannot distinguish what is not good)” (holy Chrysostom). “And such a one is usually more quickly inclined toward false dogmas” (blessed Theophylact). “Led away by various lusts.” Not all women, of course, who are carried away by false teachings are burdened with sins; but few of them are not slaves to vanity, and from vanity—a swarm of desires and lusts. Let only a cunning man gain entry here, and he will certainly capture the feminine mind and heart and sow in them whatever he wishes. Moreover, “various lusts” may also signify a multitude of passions—no light ones. Holy Chrysostom says: “What does ‘various’ mean? Here he means much: luxury, shamelessness, debauchery. ‘Various,’ he says, ‘lusts’—that is, love of gain, love of glory, vainglory, ambition; and perhaps he points to other shameful desires as well.”

Having said this, the Apostle showed whom to turn away from. And certainly such persons existed. But one may suppose that in them he also points to teachers of the like kind who are yet to appear, indicating as well how those to whom the care of souls and their salvation has been entrusted ought to relate to them. Ambrosiaster had this aspect of the matter in mind: “Although it is characteristic of all heretics, stealing into households, to capture women with their cunningly woven seductive words, so as through them afterward to attract also the husbands to their side—imitating their father, the devil, who went around Adam through Eve—this applies most of all to the Manicheans. For no one is so persistent, so insinuating, and so false as they—holding one thing within and displaying another outwardly. They preach holy chastity but, under the cover of their law, live impurely; they praise mercy, but among themselves injure one another; they insist that the world must be despised, but are always revolving in it; they boastfully assert that they keep strict fasting, but in appearance are always sufficiently well-fed—only, by some artifice, appear pale, in order to deceive. Thus the Apostle foretold them by the present words, because in the time of the Apostles they did not yet exist. Diocletian in one of his decrees calls their heresy filthy and impure, having recently come out of Persia. They find women who, out of vanity, desire to hear something new and, presenting to them things that please, succeed in luring them to their impure teaching. And these eagerly listen to them, wishing to learn, but not having sufficient discernment to distinguish truth from falsehood. So it comes about that they are always learning yet never come to the knowledge of the truth.”

2 Tim. 3:7. Always learning, and never able to come to the knowledge of the truth.

And this also concerns women—that they, amid their vanity and passion, also learn continually. This in itself would be good; but it is not good that, despite this constant learning, they are never able to come to know the truth in the proper manner. Why? Because, evidently, they learn only out of feminine curiosity and a thirst for novelty, as for fashion—which does not allow them to examine whether what is presented is true, and they follow after it for the sole reason that it is new and has an attractive appearance. But truth is old, strict, and always the same everywhere. It does not satisfy them; and they permit themselves to seek something satisfying outside of it—and alight upon such, at the indication of those who teach otherwise and steal into their households. Truth therefore remains to one side with them, and something that lies outside of truth but appears to be true is held in its place. Holy Chrysostom asks: why is it so that they learn yet cannot come to know the truth? Because, he says, their reason has grown dull. And why has their reason grown dull? Because they have sunk into the aforementioned lusts and sins. And he draws the conclusion that the Apostle said this (that they learn) not to excuse them but to convict them more strongly (paraphrase). Theophylact continues this observation: “so that their incapacity to know the truth is not a natural deficiency but is the consequence of the wrong direction of their will.” Women are prone to falsehood as they are to sin. Therefore it is a great misfortune when they come forward as teachers, contrary to the general spirit of the teaching of the Church of God.

2 Tim. 3:8. Now as Jannes and Jambres resisted Moses, so do these also resist the truth: men of corrupt minds, disapproved concerning the faith.

The names of the sorcerers who resisted holy Moses are not given in Scripture. “In all probability the names stated by the Apostle were preserved in an unwritten tradition” (all our commentators). But this is not important; what is important is the application that naturally follows from this. Holy Moses was manifestly sent by God and spoke and acted in God’s name, as God commanded him; and those sorcerers came out against him. Manifestly they were not of the truth of God, not guided by the spirit that is from God, but by that which is always and in everything against God. The same is true now, he says. God sent us personally through the Lord Jesus Christ, and we preach what He commanded, being taught by the Spirit; but these, who steal into households and seduce weak women with a phantom of truth, are manifestly not from God and do not speak from the Spirit of God. Do not be amazed at this, as if holy Paul were saying: it is nothing wonderful that such persons have appeared. “As weeds usually grow among the wheat, so preachers of the truth have always had opponents. Who is more renowned than Moses for godliness? Yet even he had sorcerers, people who openly rose up against the truth” (blessed Theodoret). So do not wonder, you too, that opponents of the truth have appeared among you. They rise up against our teaching not because they have come to know the truth better, but because, being “corrupted in mind and unfit regarding the faith,” they hold falsehood instead of truth, which seems to them to be the truth.

Whose mind is corrupted? It is so also in those who, contrary to the natural laws of the mind, step off the straight path by which they arrive at truth and, having set foot on an improper path, alight upon false principles, and having assimilated them, begin to judge all things and decide everything on the basis of these principles. Since principles taken on the wrong path cannot be true, all their judgments and decisions are false, though they stand by them as true. So things appear to them through the principles they have assimilated. As one who has put on defective spectacles sees things either not in their proper place, or not in their true color and size, or upside down—depending on how the spectacles are damaged—so do these, since the eye of their mind has been distorted by the principles they have received, judge accordingly—and judge not according to truth but according to appearance. Throw off the defective spectacles and you will see things as they are: so too here—discard the false principles, step out of them, and you will see the truth. Another kind of corruption of the mind is domination by passions. Wherever the passions draw, the mind follows along, and what they consider worthwhile, the mind sees as such. The passions all stand outside of truth; therefore they also drive away from truth the mind that they have seized. In this sense blessed Theophylact writes: “When anyone corrupts his mind with passions, he is then unfit in the faith (or in the knowledge of the true faith). ‘The fool has said in his heart: There is no God. They are corrupted and have done abominable iniquities’ (Ps. 52:2). For the reception of (true) faith an uncorrupted (by passions) mind is needed. Let us therefore attend to ourselves, that we not be corrupted by passions and that corruption (distortion, falsification of the faith) find no place in us.”

The one who is most often unfit in the faith is he who undertakes to teach the faith, and he becomes such when, not knowing precisely the definitions of the faith, he counts as true those representations adjacent to the faith that only appear to be true but are not truly so, and by teaching others to hold them, he distorts the truth of the faith and departs from it onto the crossroads of heterodox thinking and falsehood. Those unfit in the faith arise from the same causes as those corrupted in mind. They are successors one to the other. One corrupted in mind will inevitably prove unfit in the faith when he undertakes to judge in matters of faith.

2 Tim. 3:9. But they will progress no further: for their folly will be manifest to all, as that of those men also was.

“They shall not prevail further—that is, no further than those sorcerers who resisted holy Moses. As those at first had some small success but afterward were exposed as powerless, so it will be with these. Soon their foolishness will be revealed before all—and they will be abandoned. So the fog they conjured will be dispersed and the phantoms will vanish. Holy Chrysostom says: ‘but they shall not prevail.’ But how is it that in another place he says: ‘they shall advance to greater ungodliness’ (2 Tim. 2:16), and here: ‘they shall not prevail’? There he affirms that heretics, having begun to introduce novelties and errors, do not stop, but constantly invent new seductions and perverted teachings; for error never stops (at one point). But here he affirms that they will not seduce, will not carry away (the faithful); though at first they apparently lead some astray, they will soon be exposed themselves. This he expresses in the words that follow: ‘for their foolishness shall be manifest to all.’ In what way? ‘As that of those men also was.’ Errors, though they succeed at first, do not continue to the end. Such is everything that is not truly good in itself, but only appears to be good; it succeeds for a time, but afterward is exposed and perishes. But our teaching is not such.”