XlV.
2. There is no ccrUiiu evidence tliat Paul visited the church at Epiie.sus after iiis first iinprisonincnt at Ilorne. It is certainly possible that he did, but tliere is no record of any such visit in the New Testament, nor any historical record of it elsewhere. If there had been such a visit after his release, and if this epistle was written then, it is remarkable that the ajxistlo does not make any allusion to his imprisonment in this epistle, and tliat iie docs not refer at all to his own escape from tiiis danger of death at Home. Comp. 2 Tim. iv. IG, 17.
y. The suppositiun that the epistle was written at the time supposed, agrees belter with the character of the epistle, and with the design for whicli Timothy was left at Ephesus, than the others. It is manifest from the epistle that the church was in some respects in an unsettled condition, and it would seem also tiiat one part of the duty of Timothy there was to see that it was placed under a proper organization. This Paul had evidently proposed to accomplish himself, but it is clear from ch. i. 3, tliat he left his work unfinished, and that he gave what he had proposed to do into the liands of Timothy to be perfected. After t!ie first imprisonment of Pttul at Rome, however, there is every reason to suppose that the church was completely organized. Even when Paul went from Macedonia to Jerusalem (Acts x.\), there were •elders' placed over the church at Ephesus, whom Paul assembled at Miletus, and to whom he gave his parting charge, and his final instructions in regard to the church.
4. At the time when Paul wrote tiiis epistle, Timothy was a young rnan — a youth. 1 Tim. iv. 12. It is true, that if he was somewhere about twenty years of age when he was introduced into the ministry, as has been commonly supposed, this language would not be entirely inappropj!ate, even after the imprisonment of Paul, but still the language would more properly denote one somewhat younger than Timothy wouid be at that time.
5. To this maybe added the declaration of Paul in 1 Tim. iii. 14, that he • hopetl to come to him shortly.' This is an expression which agrees well with the supposition that he had himself been driven away before he had intended to leave; that he had left something unfinished there which he desired to complete, and that he hoped tiiat affairs would soon be in such a state that he would be permitted to return. It may be also suggested, as a circumstance of some importance, though not conclusive, that when Paul met the elders of the church of Ephesus at Miletus, he s;iid that he liad no e.xpectalion of ever seeing them again. " And now, belmld, I know tJiat ye all, among whom I have gone preaching the kingdom of God, shall bce my face no more." Acts.\x. 25. I do not tliink tliat this is to be understood as an inspired prediction, affirming with absolute certainty that he never would see them again, but tiiat he rather e.vpressed his apprehensions that it would be so from the circumstances wliich then e.visted. Acts XX. 22, 23. Still, this passage shows that when he uttered it he did not expect to visit Ephesus again, as he manifestly did when he wrote the e)i.^tle to Timothy.
Tliesc considerations seem so clear that they would leave no doubt on the mind, were it not for certain thinijs which it seems to many impossible to reconcile with this supposition. The difficulties are Uie following: —
1. That before Paul went tn Macedonia, he had sent Timothy with Erastus before him (Acts.xix. 22), purpcising to follow them at no distant perii^l, and to pass tiirou^^h Macedoniu and Achaia, and then to i;o to Ja' rusalem, and afterwards to visit Rome. Acts xix. 21. As he had sent Timothy before him but so short a time before he left Ephesus, it is asked how Timothy could be left at Ephesus when Paul went himself to Macedonia 1 To this objection we may reply, that it is not improbable by any means that Timothy may have accomplished the object of his journey to Macedonia, and may have returned to the apostle at Ephesus before he was driven away. It does not appear, from the narrative, that Timothy was intrusted with any commission which would require a long time to fulfil it, nor tliat Paul expected that he would remain in Macedonia until he himself came. The purpose for which he sent Timothy and Erastus is not indeed mentioned, but it seems probable that it was with reference to the collection which he proposed to take up for the poor saints at Jerusalem. See Notes on Acts xix. 21, 22. Comp. 1 Cor. xvi. 1 — 6. If it was the purpose to prepare the churches for such a collection, it could not have required any considerable time, nor was it necessary that Timothy should remain lonn^ in a place; and it was natural also that he should return to the apostle at Ephesus and apprize him of what he had done, and what was the prospect in regard to the collection. It has been clearly shown by Hug (Intro, to the New Test. ^ 104. 109), that such a journey could easily have been made during the time which the apostle remained a Ephesus after he had sent Timothy and Erastus to Macedonia.
2. The next objection — and one which is regarded by Paley as decisive against the supposition that the epistle was written on this occasion — is, that from the second epistle to the Corinthians (i. 1), it is evident that at the time in which this epistle is supposed to have been written, Timothy was with the apostle in Macedonia. The second epistle to the Corintliians was undoubtedly written during this visit of Paul to Macedonia, and at that time Timothy was witli him. See the Intro, to 2 Cor. ^ 3- How then can it be supposed that he was at Ephesus ] Or how can this fact be reconciled Vv'ith tlie supposition tliat Timothy was left there, and espepecially with the declaration of Paul to him (1 Tim. iii. 14), that he 'hoped to come to him shortly V That Paul expected that Timothy would remain at Ephesus, at least for some time, is evident fi-om 1 Tim. iii. 1.5, " But if I tarry long, that thou mayest know how thou oughtest to behave thyself in the house of Grod;" and from cli. iv. 13, " Till I coine, give attendance to reading, to exhortation, to doctrine." The only solution of this difficulty is, that Timothy had left Ephesus, and had followed the apostle into jNIacerlouia; and the only question here is, whether, since the apostle designed that he should remain at Ephesus, and expected himself to return and meet him there, Timothy would be likely to leave that place and go to Macedonia. It is certain that the history in the Acts does not make this record, but that is no material objection — since it cannot be supposed that every occurrence in the travels of the apostles was recorded. But there are two or three circumstances which may render the supposition tliat Timothy, either by the concurrence, or by the direction of Paul, privately communicated to him, may have left Ephesus sooner than was at first contemplated, and may have rejoined him in Macedonia. (1.) One is, that the main business which Timothy was appointed to perform at Ephesus — to give a solemn charge to certain persons there to teach no other doctrine but that wiiich Paul tauglit (1 Tim. i. 3) — might have been speedily accomplished. Paul was driven away in haste, and as he had not tlie opportunity of doing this himself as he wished, he left Timothy in cliarge of it. But tliia did not require, of necessity, any considerable tinie. (2.) Anotlicr is, that the business of apjwinting suiiablc offiuors ovor tho church there, nii;L,'-ht also have been sfXHi accomplished. In fact, the church thiTC is known to iiavc bern supplied with proper oflicers not lon<j at\er this, for I'aul sent from Miletus for the elders to meet liim there on his way to Jerusjilcm. This remark is made in accordance with tho opinion that a part of the work which Timothy was expected to perform there was to constitute proper ofKcers over tho church. But there is no ]>rnof that that was a part of his business. It is not s])ecificd in what Paul mentions, in cii. i. 3, as the design for which he was lell there, and it is hardly probable that the ajwstle would have spent so long a time as he did in kphesufi — nearly three years (Acts x.x. 31) — without having- organized the church with proper officers. Besides, the address of Paul to the elders at Miletus implies tiiat they had received their appointment before he left them. See Acts.\x. I"? — 3.5, particularly ver. 3o. The instructions to Timothy in this epi.-;tle about the proper qualifications of the officers of the church, do not prove that he was tlien to appoint officers at Ephesus, for they are senerul instructions, having no particular reference to the ciuirch there, and designed to guide him in his work through life. Tiiore is, therefore, nothing in the duties which Timothy was to perform at Ephcsua which would forbid the supposition that he may have soon followed the apostle into Macedonia. (3.) It appears that though Paul may have intended, if possible, to visit Ephesus on his way to Jerusalem, in accordance with 1 Tim. iii. 14, 1.3; iv. 13, yet, if that had been his intention, he subsequently changed his mind, and found it necessary to make other arrangements. Thus it is said (Acts.x.v. 16), that " Paul had determined to sail bij Ephesus, because he would not spend the time in Asia;" tliat is, he had resolved to sail past Ephesus without visiting it. It would seem probable also, that this resolution hud been formed before he left Macedonia, for it is said that he '■had determined' it Qx^ivt), and if so, there is no improbability in supposing that he had in some way caused it to be intimated to Timothy that he wished him to leave Ephesus and join him before he lef\ Macedonia. (4.) In fact, and in accordance with this supposition, we find Timothy with Paul when he went on that occasion into " Asia." Acts.x.x. 4, 5. These considerations render it probable that the epistle was written to Timothy soon alter Paid left Ephesus to go into Macedonia after the tumult excited by Demetrius. As Paul was driven away unexpectedly, and when he had not completed what he designed to do there, nothing is more natural than the supposition that he would embrace the earliest opportunity to give suitable instructions to Timothy, that he might know how to complete the work.
This is specified in ch. i. 3. Paul had gone into Macedonia, having been suddenly driven away from Ephesus, before he had entirely done what he had desijfned to do there. lie left Timothy there to 'charge some tliat tliey teach no other doctrine;' that is, no other doctrine than that which he had himself taught when there. It is clear, from this, that there v»-ere certain errors prevailing there which Paul thought it of the highest importance to have corrected. In regard to those eirors, see the Introduction to the Epistle to the Ephcsians, and tlie Epistle to the Colo»- 11*
Eians. Some of the circumstances which gave occasion to this epistle can be gathered from the history in the Acts of the Apostles; others can be derived from the epistle itself From these sources of information we learn the following things in reference to the state of the church in Ephesus, which made it proper that Timothy should be left there, and that these instructions sliould be given him to regulate his conduct.
(1.) There was much opposition to the apostle Paul from the Jews who resided there. Acts xix. 8, 9.
(2.) There were in the church teachers who endeavoured to enforce the maxims of the Jewish law, and to represent that law as binding on Christians. 1 Tim. i. 6, 7.
(3.) Some of the Jews residing there were addicted to exorcism, and endeavoured to make use of Christianity and the name of Jesus to promote their selfish ends. Acts xix. 14. Comp. 1 Tim. i. 4.
(4.) The Jewish teachers laid great stress on genealogies and traditions, and were much given to debates about various questions connected with the law. 1 Tim. i. 4—6.
(5.) There were erroneous views prevailing respecting the rights of women, and the place which they ought to occupy in the church. 1 Tim ii. 8—15.
(6.) The organization of the officers of the church had not been effected as Paul wished it to be. It is probable that some of the officers had been appointed, and that some instructions had been given to them in regard to their duties, but the whole arrangement had not been completed. 1 Tim. iii., iv.
(7.) There were certain questions in regard to the proper treatment of widows which had not yet been determined. 1 Tim. v.
(8.) The apostle in his preaching had inculcated benevolent principles, and had asserted the natural equality of all men, and it would seem that certain persons had taken occasion from this to excite a spirit of discontent and insubordination among those who were servants. The doctrine seems to have been advanced, that, as all men were equal, and all had been redeemed by the same blood, therefore those who had been held in bondage were free from all obligation to serve their masters. There were those evidently who sought to excite tliem to insurrection; to break down the distinctions in society, and to produce a state of insubordination and disorder. 1 Tim. vi. Comp. Eph. vi. 5 — 10. Col. iii. 22; iv. 2.
Such appears to have been the state of things w'hen the apostle was compelled suddenly to leave Ephesus. He had hitherto directed the affairs of the church there mainly himself, and had endeavoured to correct the errors then prevailing, and to establish the church on a right foundation. Matters appear to have been tending to the desired result; religion was acquiring a strong hold on the members of the church (Acts xix. 18 — 20); error was giving way; the community was becoming more and more impressed with the value of Christianity; the influence of idolatry was becoming less and less (Acts xix. 23, seq.), and the arrangements for the complete organization of the church were in progress. Such was the promising state of things in these respects that the apostle hoped to be able to leave Epheeus at no very distant period, and had actually made arrangements to do it. Acts xix. 21. But his arrangements were not quite finished, and before they were completed, he was compelled to leave by the tumult excited by Demetrius. He left Tircothy, therefore, to complete the arrangements^ and, in this first epistle, gnve him all tho instructions which were ncccs- Bary to guide him in that work.
Tliis view of tlio state of Ihinfrs in Ephesus at the time when tho apostle was constrained to leave it, will enable us to understand tho drift of the epistle, and the reasons wiiy the various topics found in it were introduced. At the siimc time, the instructions are of so general a character that they would he an invaluable guide to Timothy not only at Ephesus, but through his life; and not only to him, but to all the ministers of the gospel in every age and land. A more detailed view of these topics will he furnished in tiie analysis prefixed to the several chapters of the epistle.
The epistles to Timothy and Titus occupy a very important place in the Vew Testament, and without them there would be a manifest and most naterial defect in the volume of inspiration. Their canonical authority i:is never been questioned by the great body of tlie chnrcli, and there i3 10 doubt that they are the productions of the apostle Paul. If tho various pistles which he wrote, and the various other books of the New Tcstaii'icnt be attentively examined, it will be found tliat each one is designed to accomplish an important object, anft that if any one were removed a material chasm would be made. Though the removal of any one of them would not so impair the volume of the New Testament as to obscure any essential doctrine, or prevent our obtaining the knowledge of the way of salvation from the remainder, yet it would mar the beauty and symmetry of the truth, and would render the system of instruction defective and incomplete.
This is true in regard to the epistles to Timothy and Titus, as it is ol the other epistles. They fill a department which nothing else in the New Test'imcnt would enable us to supply, and without which instructions to man respecting redemption would be incomplete. They relate mainly to (he office of the ministrtj,- and though there are important instructions of the Saviour himself respecting tiie oflico (Matt, x., Mark xvi., and elsewlierc), and though in the address of Paul to the elders of Ephesus (Acta XX.), and in the epistles to the Corinthians, there are invaluable suggestions respecting it, yet such is its importance in the organization of the church, that more full and complete instructions seem to be imperiously demanded. Those instructions are furnished in these epistles. Ttiey are as full and complete as we could desire in regard to the nature of the office, the qualifications for it, and the duties which grow out of it. They are fitted not only to direct Timothy and Titus in the work to which tlicy were.specifically appointed, but to counsel the ministry in every age and in every!ind. It IS obvious that tiio character and weltare of the church depend O'rcatly, if not entirely, on the chnracter of the ministry. The office of the ministry is God's great appointment for the preservation of pure religion, and for spreading it abroad through the world. The church adheres t-) tlie trutii; is built up in faith; is distinguished for love, and purity, and /oal, in proportion as the ministry is honoured, and shows itself qualified tor its worlc. In every age corruption in the church has commenced in tlie ministry; and where the gospel has been spread abroad with zeal, and tiie church has arisen in her strength and beauty, it has been pre-eminently wiiore God has sent down his Spirit in copious moa-^ures on those who have filled the sacred oflice. So important, then, is this office to the welfare of the church and the world, that it was desirable that full instructions should be fiimifiJied in the volume of revelation in regard to its nature and desijfn.
Such instructions we have m these epistles, and there is scarcely any po tion of- the New Testament which the church could not better afFord to part with than the Epistles to Timothy and Titus. Had the ministry always been such as these epistles contemplate; had they who have filled the sacred office always had the character and qualifications here described, we may believe that the church would have been saved from the strifes that have rent it, and that the pure gospel would long ere this have been spread through the world.
But it is not to the ministry only that these epistles are of so much value. They are of scarcely less importance to the church at large. Its vitality its purity; its freedom from strife; its zeal and love and triumph in spreading the gospel, depend on the character of the ministry. If the church will prosper from age to age, the pulpit must be filled with a pious, learned, laborious, and devoted ministry, and one of the first cares of the church should be that such a ministry should be secured. This great object cannot better be attained than by keeping the instructions in theae epistles steadily before the minds of the numbers of the church; and tliough a large part of them is particularly adapted to the ministers of tne gospel, yet the church itself can in no better way promote its own purity and prosperity llian by a prayerflil and attentive fctudy of tlie epistles no Timo thy and Titus.
>AUL, an apostle of Jesus Clirist, " by tlie comniand-
Tlii.-J chapter comprises the followinjj subjects: —
(1.) The salutation to Timothy, in the usual manner in which Paul introduces his epistles. Vs. 1, 2.
(2.) The purpose tor which he had left him at Ephcsus. Vs. 3, 4. It was that he miirht correct the false instructions of some of the teachers there, and especially, as it would seem, in regard to the true use of the law. i'hey j^'avo undue importance to some tilings in the laws of JNIoses; they did not understand the true nature and design of his laws; and they min^jlcd in their instructions much that was mere fable.
(3.) The true u.«o and desii^n of the law. Vs. 't — 11. It was to produce Invp, not vain jan{^lin<»'. It was not made to fetter the conscience by vain and troublesome austerities and ceremonies; it was to restrain and bind the wicked. The use of the law, according to these teachers, and according to the prevailing Jewish notions, was to prescribe a great number of formalities, and to secure outward conformity in a great variety of cumbrous rites and ceremonies. Paul instructs Timothy to teach them that love, out of a pure heart and a good conscience, was the elementary princ pie of religion, mcnt of God our Saviour, ana Lord Jesus Christ, tv/iich is our hope. * and tliat the 'law' was primarily designed to restrain and control the wicked, and that the gospel brought to light and enforced this important truth.
(4.) The mention of the gospel in this connection, leads Paul to express his thanks to God that he had been intrusted with this message of salvation. Vs. 12 — 17. Once he had the same views as others. But he had obtiiincd mercy, and he was permitted to publish that glorious gospel which had slied sucli lighten tlie law of God, and wiiich had revealed a plan of salvation that was worthy of universal acceptation.
(5.) This solemn duty of preaching the gospel he conunits now to Timothy. Vs. 18 — 20. He says that he had been called to the work in accordance with the prophecies which had been uttered of him in anticipation of his future usefulness in tlie church, and in the expectation that he would not, like some others, make shipwreck of his tiiith.
2 Onto Timothy, « my own eon ' in the faith; Grace, = mercy, and peace, from God our Father and Jesus Christ our Lord.