Rightly Dividing the Word of Truth (2 Timothy 2:14–19)

Finally, the holy Paul explains what the gift of sound-mindedness—or pastoral prudence—received through ordination imposes as obligation on the holy Timothy (2:14–3:9). The holy Paul expresses this generally in verse 15: “be diligent to present yourself approved before God, a worker who need not be ashamed, rightly dividing the word of truth.” He then shows how, by his actions, the holy Timothy will prove himself a skilled and unashamed worker. Since at that time the danger came particularly from those who taught otherwise, the wise manner of conduct is indicated primarily in relation to them. Here is what the Apostle enjoins in this regard: aa) do not permit others to engage in wrangling over words, and yourself shun these empty disputations. This is dangerous for the faith, and prudence requires keeping away from it (2:14–22); bb) if some necessity does compel you to converse with those who teach otherwise, do not quarrel with them but gently instruct those who oppose (2:23–26); cc) at the same time do not fail to take note of those who live badly, who, having themselves been corrupted, lead others astray from the good path as well. Turn away from these also (3:1–9). — Let us note that in the last section (3:1–9) the Apostle speaks of future corrupters; yet action against them was needed now, as a precaution—and besides, it seems the beginnings of this were already visible. Hence it is written: “turn away from these” (2 Tim. 3:5).

In clarifying the first point—about keeping away from empty disputations—and pointing out how harmful they are to believers, the holy Paul cited an actual example of such harmfulness: behold, he says, Hymenaeus and Philetus have deviated from the truth and, claiming that the resurrection has already come, are overturning the faith of some. This disclosure could distress those who love the faith, giving rise to questions: how can this be? In this way the whole Church may be shaken—if some go astray from the truth themselves, while others are drawn by them into such errors; and besides—why these who err, who mislead, and who are misled? To dispel such troubling thoughts the holy Paul presents two consoling propositions about the work of faith and the Church, with lessons drawn from them for all and separately for the holy Timothy. Thus this brief section (2:14–22) has two parts: α) first he speaks about keeping away from empty disputations (2:14–18); β) then he presents certain consoling propositions, to guard against the disturbances that could be generated by the preceding disclosures (2:19–22).

2 Tim. 2:14. Remind them of these things, charging them before the Lord not to wrangle over words, which is of no use, but only ruins the hearers.

Since disputes are harmful, it is senseless to give oneself over to them. Therefore just as for believers the prudent course is not to give themselves over to them, so for pastors the course of prudent pastoral ministry is not to inflame but to suppress quarrelsomeness in every way. There is a certain natural tendency of the soul toward controversy. Indulge this weakness—and there will be nothing but disputes and more disputes, while attention is diverted from what is essential. Disputes meanwhile bring no good but only harm; yet those who dispute always think they are doing something important. The result is something grotesque and senseless. This is why the Apostle urges the turning of believers away from this with such insistence—not only by pointing to the harmful consequences of disputing, but even by charging them in the Lord’s name.

The words “remind them of these things” serve as a transition to the next main subject—about turning away from quarrelsomeness—though not without relation to what precedes. “These things”—the immediately preceding word about the faithfulness of the promise of glory, with an implicit caution about the danger of losing it—not through any faithlessness on God’s part, but through one’s own weakness and negligence. One such form of negligence is then indicated immediately: namely, ruinous quarrelsomeness.

Since there is an inclination toward disputes and they are ruinous, a strong remedy for restraining from them is proposed. St. Chrysostom says: “What does it mean: ‘charge before the Lord’? That is, calling God as witness of his words and actions. If after this the hearers disregard the admonition, God is their judge. The Apostle knew that this is a common thing and that the human soul is always inclined toward contention and wrangling over words. Therefore, so that this might not be, he does not simply say: ‘do not wrangle over words’ (but also binds them to this by the name of God). It is a fearful thing to speak calling God as witness; for if no one would dare to break his word having called a man as witness, how much more so with God.”

“Of no use”—not “for no need” but: επ’ ουδεν χρησιμον — to no profit whatsoever. Charge them in the Lord’s name not to wrangle over words, if for no other reason than that disputes lead to nothing profitable. For, having been granted existence and now vouchsafed also faith and grace, we ought to direct every hour and minute of life toward what is useful—to the glory of God, our own salvation, and the good of our neighbors; disputation is empty talk—an arrangement of empty words, but such as can cause harm. And in this last fact lies the second incentive to restraint from disputes. “For from this comes not only no benefit, but great harm: ‘the ruin of the hearers’” (St. Chrysostom). The opponent of truth who disputes spares no one and, throwing words about at random, can cast into the minds of the hearers a multitude of thoughts and impressions that will begin to shake the faith—not through their own strength, but through the weakness of the hearers, who are not yet able to see the falsehood lurking behind fine phrases. Ambrosiaster writes: “Disputation can breed doubts in those not yet fully confirmed; for in disputation one commonly sets against the truth many things that can strike the souls of beginners with the honed sword of malice and evil speech.” In this way through disputes “the faith of the hearers is overthrown, as if by battering-rams of verbal warfare” (blessed Theophylact). For us “it is sufficient only to believe and not to turn discourse about this into an occasion for blasphemy, nor through our disputes to harm those who hear” (blessed Theodoret).

2 Tim. 2:15. Be diligent to present yourself approved before God, a worker who need not be ashamed, rightly dividing the word of truth.

A general exhortation is expressed here, which, however, in its present context must be understood in its relation to the flow of the discourse. “Be diligent to present yourself approved”—in this respect, that is, insist that they not give themselves over to disputes; while you yourself with still greater intensity distribute the word of truth—the word of truth alone—so that believers, being filled full with it, may have no inclination whatsoever to open their ears to disputes, being as they are sated with the pure bread of truth and feeling revulsion at a mixture of the tares of falsehood—fodder unfit for human beings.

Be diligent to present yourself “approved,” δοκιμον — a proven master of one’s work who is wise, and this not in appearance only but by the inner worth of one’s actions: “before God”—who sees all things as they truly are in essence, not merely in appearance. Or “before God” suggests the thought: He who has chosen you and entrusted to you the ministry of proclaiming the Gospel; show yourself therefore a wise fulfiller of God’s will, justify His choice and His hope in you.

“A worker who need not be ashamed,” ανεπαισχυντον — which means both blameless and unashamed. Of skilled workers it is said even in ordinary speech: they will not find fault with their own handiwork. So, he says, conduct your work in such a way that you have no reason to be ashamed of it—neither before God, nor before men, nor before your own conscience. Act in the proclamation of the Gospel and in pastoral ministry according to the full breadth of your awareness of how one ought to act, not deviating in the least from the demands of that awareness, not diminishing or curtailing them by substituting something else. That something else, in the present context, is giving oneself over to disputes instead of setting forth pure truth. The Apostle says, as it were: do not disgrace yourself with these disputes—“calling those who give themselves over to disputes men of shame” (Ambrosiaster). “Unashamed” also means: not being ashamed of the work one has taken up and is doing. And this meaning too is applicable in the present context. The preaching was humble concerning Christ Jesus—the Crucified. There were not a few who taught otherwise, who, being ashamed of this, devised brilliant reflections—but instead of lending greatness and radiance to the Gospel, only distorted it and robbed it of all its power. On this account the temptation might arise to enter into dispute with them, in order to remove the supposed shame of extreme simplicity from the face of the Gospel. The Apostle says: be not ashamed, whatever they may say—do your own work as you ought, and do not listen to them. “Just as the worker (the farmer who knows his trade) labors without being ashamed of anything (ploughs and ploughs, sows and sows), so the worker of the Gospel must act. Be not ashamed in the least to do everything that pertains to proclaiming the Gospel, even if you must on account of it submit (not only to shame, but even) to bondage or suffer something else” (St. Chrysostom).

“Rightly dividing the word of truth,” ορθοτομουντα — cutting straight and severing—and cutting straight in order to distribute, as, for instance, one cuts bread to be shared. All these meanings are fitting here. “Cutting straight”: as is said even in ordinary speech of a person—he cuts the truth straight—so you too, he says, cut the truth straight, speak the one word of truth, pure and unmixed, without giving way to extraneous reflections of your own that add no firmness to the truth but only weaken it—and equally, do not be tempted to diminish its force because in its pure form it may perhaps prove too much for the mind of some respected person. Cut it straight: thus and thus God has spoken and commanded, and trouble yourself with nothing more. “We praise farmers who cut straight furrows; so too is the teacher who follows the rule of the divine words worthy of praise” (blessed Theodoret). One may also understand “cutting straight” in the sense of: cutting away, severing every willful admixture from the truth; and by what means? By that same straight cutting of the truth. St. Chrysostom says: “The Apostle did not say απευθυνοντα — directing straight, but ορθοτομουντα — cutting straight away. And he said this well; for many misuse and distort the word of truth, adding much that is wrong to it. He suggests by this: separate what is wrong and repel and cut away everything of that kind with great force; as if by a taut cord, cut away with the spiritual sword everything superfluous and alien to the Gospel.” “Like a sword, cut away superfluous and false teachings (‘like superfluous growths on skin’ [blessed Theophylact]) and lead (minds) on the straight path, or toward what is right, by the grace of the Holy Spirit” (Oecumenius). And all this without disputes, but by that same resolute straight cutting of the truth: thus it has been said, thus it has been commanded—and there is nothing more to interpret. The last meaning is also applicable: cutting straight the bread of the word of truth, so as to distribute it in sufficiency to the faithful for their satiation with truth and for the establishing in them of revulsion toward everything alien to it and superfluous. Just as a steward in a household is appointed to distribute to all in right measure grain and other necessities: so the pastor of the Church is appointed to distribute to all the pure bread of the word of God’s truth. You have been appointed to this, says the Apostle, and distribute therefore in right measure the right word of God, and in distributing it, nourish the souls of the faithful. Having been filled with it, they will naturally have revulsion toward everything extraneous, superfluous, and all the more toward what is wrong—as our ancestors used to say: no one, having tasted the sweet, will want the bitter.

2 Tim. 2:16. But avoid godless and empty chatter, for it will lead to ever-increasing ungodliness.

“Godless,” βεβηλους — impure, defiling—such as not only are themselves impure and defiling, but render impure and defiled everything that comes into contact with them—just as in Judaism a carcass defiles everything that touches it. “Empty chatter,” κενοφωνιας — not merely idle talk, but empty sounds containing no meaning—in plain language, hollow noise. With respect to the true faith, attested by God Himself, everything at variance with it is truly hollow noise. Let us note that St. Chrysostom read not κενοφωνιας — empty chatterings—but καινοφωνιας — novel chatterings, new expressions, new locutions, of course prompted by new teachings as well. Oecumenius follows him; and the Vulgate reads: vocum novitates. “Avoid,” περιιστασο — leave to one side, stand clear—or surround, encircle, and confine, giving no room to spread. Thus these words convey two thoughts: stand clear of empty chatterings, that is, of disputes in which there is much noise, much clamor and outcry, but no sense; and—contain the novel chatterings, that is, fence in the new teachings so that they do not spread, as one fences off a district where a contagious disease has taken hold, and not merely fence them in but press them, so as to suppress them. St. Chrysostom says: “Things do not stop there (at the emission of only novel sounds); but when something new is introduced, it constantly generates καινοτομιας — new cuttings (in the teaching and in what follows from it); the one who has left the calm harbor (of the teaching maintained by the Church) wanders without end and will never find rest.” Therefore “drive away everything introduced into the preaching from novel inventions, as contagious and defiling—press it so that it does not spread and ceases”—adds Oecumenius. This last thought is more in keeping with what is said immediately after.

“For they will progress to ever-increasing ungodliness,” επι πλειον γαρ προκοψουσιν ασεβειας — for they will make progress—advance, plunge—into a greater measure of ungodliness, if, of course, you do not cut them off, fence them in, and suppress them. On the one hand, novelty attracts attention and widens the circle of those who hear and heed it; on the other, the generation of one novelty stimulates the craving and need to generate further novelties, and new cuttings—new teachings—naturally multiply as polyps multiply when severed. “If something adulterous—counterfeit—is introduced (into the domain of faith), it steps further and further from absurdity to absurdity and daily increases” (Oecumenius). If truth were to spread in this way, godliness would spread through it; but since novelty in faith is therefore falsehood, and falsehood is always from the devil—the first adversary of God and the first teacher of opposition to God—through the spread of novelties nothing will spread but ungodliness. Novelties corrupt the faith, and attracting by their novelty the attention of the faithful, corrupt and plunge them too into ungodliness, placing them not in the right relation to God—instead of godliness, which is the right relation to God, the one in which faith maintains them. Novelty itself is ungodliness, for it sets its own invention above the divine ordinance expressed in God’s word. It is a repetition of the deed of our first parents, who, attaching a new interpretation to the commandment on the word of the father of lies, fell into extreme ungodliness and plunged all of humanity into it. Being what it is by its very nature, novelty in faith always and everywhere brings forth fruit after its kind—that is, it plunges into ungodliness and spreads it in proportion to its own spread.

2 Tim. 2:17. And their talk will spread like gangrene. Among them are Hymenaeus and Philetus.

“Their”—refers to persons, namely to the spreaders of empty noise, or to the inventors and disseminators of novelties in the faith. Hence in the foregoing, at the word “they will progress,” the same persons are to be kept in mind, though there one may also think of empty chatterings and novelties, since it is fitting to say of them too: “they will progress.” “Gangrene”—cancer, a disease that, having arisen in one place, begins to destroy the neighboring parts and does not remain in one spot, but eats away more and more of the body until it has consumed it entirely. “Will spread” — νομην — pasture, feeding ground. Gangrene is likened to a voracious beast which, having found a meadow of rich grass, greedily begins to devour it and does not move on until it has consumed everything. So too cancer seems to have the soft parts of the body as its pasture, grazing upon them and consuming them until it has eaten away the whole body. “Will have,” εξει — will possess. What this cancer is to our body once it has taken hold in it—such too is the word of novelty to the body of the Church, or to the body of true teaching, to the sum of God’s truths, when it is admitted among them: one member of the Church after another it will corrupt, and one truth after another it will pervert, until it has corrupted all and perverted all truths. The members of the Church and the very truths of God will be for the word of novelty as a pasture which it will greedily consume until all is consumed. Blessed Theodoret writes: “Gangrene is a disease that continually spreads and corrupts healthy parts of the body. The Apostle has likened to it those who undertake to teach what is contrary to the truth; for they frequently corrupt even those who are free from disease.” This comparison alone is sufficient for a pastor to be kindled with zeal to resist every new teaching. St. Chrysostom says: “This is an uncontrollable evil that cannot be stopped by treatment but infects everything. The Apostle makes clear that καινοφωνια — novel speech, new teachings—is a disease, and even worse than a disease; he also expresses the incorrigibility of such people: they err not by chance but willfully (the contagion is not from without but from within themselves) and are therefore entirely incorrigible.”

“Among them are Hymenaeus and Philetus.” Of Philetus nothing is known. Of Hymenaeus mention is made in the First Epistle (1 Tim. 1:20), that he together with Alexander was “delivered over to Satan, that they might learn not to blaspheme.” They were of course known to the holy Timothy; therefore there was no need to speak at length of their persons, and the Apostle, having cited their names, hastens to indicate their chief error—which is precious knowledge for us.

2 Tim. 2:18. Who have gone astray from the truth, saying that the resurrection has already come, and they are upsetting the faith of some.

“Have gone astray from the truth,” ηστοχησαν. Αστοχειν — to miss the mark. They aimed at the truth but did not hit it; the flight of their minds took a wrong direction and, having passed past the truth, came to rest upon a lie. Their fault lies in the fact that they should never have undertaken to fly to the truth on the wings of their own minds. The bearers of divinely revealed truth were present; one ought to have turned to them with questions—but they themselves undertook to resolve those questions with their own intellect and made a muddle of things. Such is the general origin of heresies. Today one should turn to the Church for the resolution of questions; for the Apostles deposited all truth in her—and she has become in their stead the bearer of truth. Whoever turns to her for knowledge of the truth will not go astray; but whoever undertakes by his own intellect to hit upon the truth places himself in great danger of hitting upon falsehood instead.

In what did the error of these heterodox teachers consist? In saying that “the resurrection of the dead has already taken place.” According to the truth of God, uttered by the Lord Saviour and proclaimed by the holy Apostles, Christians await the resurrection of the dead—when their bodies, now separated from their souls by the action of death, will be reunited with them by the action of God’s boundless omnipotence, and will rise in a brightness like the brightness of the body of the risen Lord. The present period of the existence of the human race and the world is a transitional one. It will come to an end in its own time, and another period of existence will begin—in which there will be a new heaven, a new earth, and a new mode of existence for the human race, when people will neither marry nor be given in marriage, but will live as God’s Angels live, an immortal and eternally glorious life. In the Gospels and in the Apostolic writings there is constant mention of this reconstitution of all things. Nourished by this teaching, Christians keep the gaze of their mind and the expectation of their heart fixed upon it, and are inspired by this hope in the hardships that are inseparable from true Christianity. To take away this hope is to take away the most essential support of Christianity. And this is precisely what those foolish speculators were demolishing—those who said that the resurrection had already taken place. For to speak thus was to say: expect nothing better—what you see now is the best there is. And from this, how many conclusions destructive of God’s truth followed: consequently, there will be no second coming of Christ, no judgment, no recompense. — You, virtue, are suffering; this is your reward. You, vice, are comforted; this is your punishment. What could be more ruinous to faith and virtue?! But moreover, if there will be no resurrection, then “neither has Christ been raised.” And if “Christ has not been raised, your faith is vain” (1 Cor. 15:13–14). It follows—everything is demolished by this small proposition: “the resurrection has already taken place.” How apt, therefore, was the Apostle’s comparison above of the empty noise or novel speech of those who teach otherwise with cancer—which, having arisen in one part of the body, then corrupts and consumes it all!

St. Chrysostom says: “Well did the Apostle say above: ‘they will progress even more.’ It appears to be an evil in itself only; but see what consequences flow from it. If the resurrection has already taken place, then the harm to us is not only that we have been deprived of great glory (‘we are deprived of the second coming of Christ—what could be more grievous than that? Christ is made a liar, He who proclaimed this; He will not sit on the throne as Judge of the living and the dead’ [Oecumenius]), but also that both judgment and recompense are abolished; the righteous have not received their reward for sorrows and sufferings; and the wicked have not been punished.” “The righteous have enjoyed sorrows and afflictions, and the wicked have been punished by wallowing in pleasures. What need then is there to hold to virtue, if such are the recompenses?” (blessed Theophylact). But when it is said that the resurrection has already taken place, one is thereby saying that the resurrection which Christians await—the glorious one, with the reconstitution of all things—will not come, that there is no place for it. But “if the dead are not raised, then neither has Christ been raised; and if Christ has not been raised, your faith is vain” (1 Cor. 15:16–17). And not only that; but “if (again the words of St. Chrysostom) Christ has not risen, then He was not born, and did not ascend into heaven. Do you see how opposition to apparently only one doctrine—that of the resurrection—entails many evil consequences?”

But how did these teachers understand their resurrection, when the absurdity of asserting that we have already risen is so obvious, and when the Lord so plainly announced the resurrection that is to come? The Apostle does not say; but in the second century there appeared heretics who understood by resurrection the spiritual resurrection—that is, the enlightenment of the soul by truth and its attainment of holy life. They taught that the soul, departing from the darkness of ignorance and falsehood and entering into the light of truth, leaving vice and beginning to live in holiness, rises to a new life. Of them write St. Irenaeus (St. Irenaeus of Lyons. Against Heresies. 2, 31), Tertullian (Tertullian. On the Resurrection. 19; Against Marcion. 5, 10), and St. Epiphanius (St. Epiphanius of Cyprus. Heresies. 42, 3). It is not at all surprising that the fathers of these heretics were the Ephesian spreaders of empty noise and novelties; one may therefore suppose that these last understood by resurrection the spiritual resurrection, and thought that Christ the Saviour was speaking of precisely this resurrection—the one accomplished spiritually by grace. — But even if this is how they understood the resurrection, the falseness of their teaching is not thereby mitigated. For both the Lord and the holy Apostles speak of spiritual resurrection; but alongside this they also proclaim the bodily resurrection that is to come—at the end of the ages—which will be followed by judgment and universal recompense according to deeds, for some paradise, for others hell. Consequently they teach two resurrections, and to confound them into one is unjust and erroneous.

Blessed Theodoret maintains that these heretics called by the name “resurrection” the succession of generations—or the birth of children, in whom the parents supposedly appear again in the world. “These unhappy people,” he writes, “called the succession of generations by reason of child-bearing ‘resurrection,’ and deceived some into departing from the Apostolic teaching.” Ambrosiaster, also saying that these heretics saw resurrection in children, adds that he learned of this from certain books. It is not at all surprising that this was also the case; for to what other teaching could the name of empty chatter and old wives’ tales more fittingly apply? Those who treated of spiritual resurrection—the Gnostics—were idealists, not favorably disposed toward matter; but these were sensualists and materialists. One may conjecture that in their view there is no immortality either—just as modern-day materialists understand by immortality the memory of one’s deeds, deemed beneficial, preserved in posterity.

Despite its absurdity, however, this teaching did not remain without effect, but shook the faith of some. “And ‘they are upsetting,’ he says, ‘the faith of some’—not of all, but: ‘of some’” (St. Chrysostom), “of the more simple-minded and weaker” (Oecumenius, blessed Theophylact). “Upsetting,” ανατρεπουσιν — overturning, subverting. They do not merely sow doubt and wavering, but completely disrupt and destroy faith. “One cannot say that there were none who expressed agreement with their perverse teaching in opposition to the faith they had originally followed” (Ambrosiaster). It is incomprehensible how even the most absurd teachings cling to the mind and hold fast in it.

Having spoken of the upsetting or subverting of the faith of some as a result of the scandal caused by others who had erred concerning the truth, the Apostle—rightly supposing that sincere believers could be troubled by such incidents—hastens to prevent such trouble, elucidating in parabolic form the law governing the existence of faith and the Church. Two troubling questions could be raised by the preceding disclosures about those who had erred in the truth and about their shaking the faith of others: namely—how is it that people depart from the faith and are shaken in the faith? Could it be that all might be shaken and that the whole Church might therefore be disrupted? And the second: why are there those who err and those who are led away by them, and moreover so close to us? For they arise within the Church and mingle among the faithful. The Apostle answers the first—that faith, founded by God in the heart, will not be shaken, nor will the Church built upon such faith be shaken; and the second—that just as in a house there are vessels for honorable and dishonorable uses, so in the Church there are suitable and unsuitable members—interspersing these clarifications with strongly instructive moral lessons.