Online Resource Library
Commentary Index | Return to PrayerRequest.com | DownloadLange Commentary - 1 Timothy 6:1 - 6:10
(Show All Books | Show All Chapters)
This Chapter Verse Commentaries:
Various Prescripts, Warnings, and Exhortations
1Ti_6:1-21
A.—The obligation of Christian slaves.—Warning against false teachers.—Praise of moderation, and warning against covetousness
1Ti_6:1-10
1Ti_6:2. And they … exhort. Christian slaves, who, on the other hand, have the privilege of believing masters, might easily forget that they who, as believers, were their brethren, yet had another relation as their superiors, and might thus withhold the honor due to them. The Apostle strongly opposes this exaggerated view of Christian freedom and equality.—They that have believing masters—[see Trench, “Synon.,” § 28, on the distinction between äåóðüôçò and êýñéïò . The former signifies the relation to those who have been bought, who are owned as property; the latter the family headship, the relation of the man to wife and children. It is to be observed that in his other Epistles St. Paul uses êýñéïò as the general title.—W.]—( ðéóôïὺò is placed before emphatically) let them not despise them, because they are brethren;i.e., the masters. Such a contempt is meant here as would wholly, or in part, lose sight of the natural difference between master and slave. There is no respect of persons before God; but before man the divisions of social rank must be held in due regard.—But rather do them service, because they are faithful and beloved. It is almost unexplainable, that both these last objections should have been thought to refer either to the slaves (Wetstein), or to masters and slaves together (Matthies). It is plain that the Apostle here expressly distinguishes the masters, and in such wise, indeed, as to persuade the slaves to honor and revere them. As believers in Christ and beloved of God, the masters can claim peculiarly the respect of their Christian bondmen. It is a harder question, what the Apostle means by the words: partakers of the benefit, ïἱ ôῆò åὐåñãåóßáò ἀíôéëáìâáíüìåíïé ; [qui participes sunt; Vulgate.—W.] We might, perhaps, suppose that åὐåñãåóßá = ÷Üñéò signifying the blessing of Christianity (comp. Rom_1:7; thus Heydenreich and others). But this thought is already expressed in ἀãáð . and ðéóôïß , and would thus be only an empty tautology. It is then better to understand, by åὐåñãåóßá , the faithful service of the slaves, so that the sense should be: slaves ought so much more to serve believing masters, because they who receive such service are believers and beloved. The remembrance that a true service, done from a Christian principle, would be a benefit to the believing masters, was indeed well calculated to persuade Christian slaves.—These things teach and exhort. A direct reference, as in 1Ti_4:11; 1Ti_5:7, to what has been said just before.
[This exposition, while it seems true to the letter, is untrue to the principle of Christianity. Undoubtedly St. Paul did not attempt to abolish slavery. But when it is inferred from this that the moral action of the primitive Church gives us the complete standard for all time, it is a petitio principii. The Church of that day was composed of men who had no political or civil ties outside their little body; to them, all else was “the world” of heathendom. It was enough for St. Paul to inculcate the law of love, and leave the larger question of Roman slavery to the future. But when Christianity became the religion of the State, and its believers citizens, there arose a new, definite sphere of social duty outside the church relationship. It may, indeed, be proven from this passage, that slavery is not absolutely and in all cases a sin, like lying or stealing; that, like polygamy, it may be one of the phases of social growth. But to say that, because Christian philanthropy did not then touch it, it may now claim the sanction of Christianity, is monstrous.—We might, indeed, draw from this very passage one of the strongest arguments against the modern apologist. St. Paul does not counsel masters to be kind, but slaves not to despite their masters, because they are brethren. The tone of the whole proves that slavery in that Christian community was hardly a yoke at all. What would the slaveholders of our Christian time think of a bishop who should mildly beg bondmen to treat a master with respect, not scorn him, because he was a brother?—But we take here the largest ground. To say that Christianity is to-day confined within the limits of St. Paul’s action, is to say that in 1800 years it has wrought no change in the world it came to reform. It is to say, that it is behind Judaism at that very time; for slavery, under the teaching of humane Rabbis, had in St. Paul’s day almost wholly vanished from Palestine. It is to narrow Scripture; it is to narrow Christian ethics; it is to narrow Christian history. Civilization has, step by step, been fulfilling the first prophecy of the Lord, that He came to “break every yoke.” As early as the code of Justinian, we have the statement of the maxim, “Cum jure naturali omnes liberi nascerentur;” Cod. Just., lib. i. tit. 5. It was a social law which the early Christian himself had not grasped: it was the new growth of social ethics. Christian jurisprudence and Christian philanthropy hare only interpreted it. We may well demand, at this day, that Scriptural criticism shall no longer make the word of God the apologist of social wrong.—W.]
1Ti_6:3. If any man teach otherwise, &c. The Apostle proceeds from the slaves to the false teachers. The connection of his thoughts seems this: that the false teachers have proposed dangerous maxims in regard of Christian freedom and order, which might, if they spread further, mislead the bondmen. We may thus understand the ἑôåñïäéäáóêáëåῖí definitely of corrupt maxims concerning the topics just discussed, although we may add that the Apostle takes occasion here, as in other passages of these Epistles, to point out and oppose false doctrines in general. Their character is here described, and their condemnation given with a fulness of language that might seem somewhat irrelevant, if we do not consider how dangerous such false teachers were, and how sad their corrupting influence on many.—And consent not. This more definite expression now marks the false teachers as men who were directly hostile to the gospel doctrine, which is enjoined by St. Paul as the fountain and touchstone of the truth.—Consent not ( ìὴ ðñïóÝñ÷åôáé ), naturally signifies that acceptance, in a spiritual view, which leads of itself to agreement (accedere opinioni, alicui accedere). The words of the Lord are spoken of as wholesome, in contrast with the diseased character of the false doctrines (comp. íïóῶí , 1Ti_6:4); and the truth of the gospel is here named as according to godliness ( êáô ̓ åὐóåâ .), to show the indivisible unity between Christian truth and morality, in consequence of which any, who has mistaken the latter, has already in himself the sentence of his condemnation. [Not “quæ ad pietatem ducit,” but “quæ pietati consentanea est;” Ellicott.—W.] Since Christianity directly quickens and demands godliness, a lax morality cannot have union with it The Apostle now proceeds, 1Ti_6:4-5, to show the sources and effects of each grievous error.
1Ti_6:4. He is proud … strifes of words. A darkened understanding is the first characteristic which St. Paul ascribes to such an errorist ( ôåôýöùôáé ); he is beclouded, wholly blinded, from his proud conceit (comp. Eph_4:18); knowing nothing [aright]; the result of the former vice. He who is blinded in his view of the whole, cannot possibly look at particulars from a right point of sight. To judge truly the special truths of Christianity, must require, in some measure, a knowledge of its whole character. To this sad state of the mind there is added a yet more melancholy state of the heart.—But doting about questions and strifes of words, íïóῶí ðåñὶ æçô ., ê . ô . ë . The proposition declares the objects in regard to which this disease is manifest The false teacher is unhappily busied with æçôÞóåéò and ëïãïìá÷ßáò . He is tormented with the pursuit of those beyond the good and needful limit; and while he perhaps believes that he may attain the right result, he opens for himself and others a source of deep wretchedness. What else can be the end of all these strifes? (see below.)—Whereof cometh, &c., ἐî ὧí , sc. æçôÞóåéò êáß ëïãïìá÷ßáò .—Envy, strife, railings; not directly against God (Chrysostom), but rather against other men.—Evil surmisings. “Suspiciones malæ, per quas ii, qui non statim omnia assentiuntur, invidi putantur;” Bengel.
1Ti_6:5. Perverse disputings; ðáñáäéáôñßâáé , according to the common reading, to which, however, another ( äéáðáñáôñéâáß ) deserves the preference (see Tischendorf). The first denotes useless disputation, the other, growing hostilities and conflicts (comp. Winer, Gramm., p. 92).—Men of corrupt minds, destitute of the truth. The Apostle states here the deepest ground of this blindness, which he has described in 1Ti_6:4. Here, too, the corrupt heart is, in his view, the abyss out of which proceeds the darkness which obscures the spiritual vision. “This and the preceding participial clause denote, therefore, that the errorists were before unperverted, and in possession of the truth; but both these royal jewels have been forfeited, and, according to 1Ti_4:1, through demoniacal influence;” Huther. As a signal proof of the extent of this perversion, the Apostle adds the following.—Supposing that gain is godliness. This trait completes the sketch of the false teachers, who thus appear as unprincipled hypocrites, abusing the spiritual gifts they had received to their selfish ends (comp. 2Ti_3:5). ÅὐóÝâåéá is not here the objective religion, which is ἥ êáô ̓ åὐóåâåßáí äéäáóêáëßá (1Ti_6:3), but godliness in a subjective sense, the religious spirit, or piety. This was regarded by the heretics as ðïñéóìüò , a source of secular gain. They put on the guise of godly, conscientious men, from pure selfishness. A show of Christian life was in their view a lucrative business (Tit_1:11, a trade; Luther); and they may be thus called an order of Jesuits before Loyola, since they followed in this the rule, that “the end sanctifies the means.” The contempt of the Apostle for such worthless men is seen in his choice of words; and Timothy hardly needed the express exhortation, “From such withdraw thyself,” which is not in the original text (see Critical notes).
[There is a singular likeness between this sketch of the false teachers, and the Sophists so keenly portrayed in Plato as the opponents of Socrates. Their philosophy was a mere dialectic hair-splitting, without any moral truth—a ëïãïìá÷ßá , a word-fighting; and the æçôÞóåéò of this Epistle answer exactly to the captious, questioning style of the Greek schools. As a last feature, they were ÷ñçìáôéóôÜé , and boasted that they sold their wisdom to the youth of Athens. See Gorgias, c. 7; Protag., c. 3. It was the same empty, immoral sophistomania, cropping out in this refined Jewish-Christian shape.—W.]
1Ti_6:6. But godliness with contentment is great gain. It might be thought that the Apostle denied godliness to be in any sense a ðïñéóìüò . To correct so wrong an inference from his words, he would show how far godliness gives true success; and this leads him to a full view, reaching to the end of 1Ti_6:10, of the Christian contentment Ἐóôé äὲ ðïñéóìüò . Godliness is the very reality, although in another and higher sense, which these errorists pervert—With contentment. If it be closely joined with contentment, then it is a nobler gain. In this concise and weighty meaning the Apostle expresses both these main ideas, that godliness makes us content, and to be content is the highest good. “Eleganter, non sine ironicâ correctione in contrarium sensum, eadem verba mox retorquet, ac si dixisset; perperam illi et nequiter, qui venalem habent Christi doctrinam, quasi vere pietas esset quæstus. Ideo autem sic vocat, quod plenam et absolutam beatitudinem nobis affert. Ita vero felicitas in pietate sita est, hæc vero sufficientia est veluti quoddam auctorium;” Calvin.
1Ti_6:7. For we brought nothing into this world. In this and the following verses the Apostle shows the many grounds of this Christian áὐôÜñêåéá . The first lies in the very nature of those worldly things for whose possession the unsatisfied man strives. They are not our lawful property, but a loan, received at our birth, to be soon surrendered at the first summons. As we brought nothing into this world (comp. Job_1:21), it is certain we can carry nothing out (comp. Psa_49:17-18; Luk_12:15-21). The absence of äῆëïí in A. F. G., 1Ti_6:17, seems to us a mere error of the MSS., since this word can hardly be dispensed with. It is hence justly restored by Tischendorf, in his 7th edition, although he had before erased it.
1Ti_6:8. And having food and raiment, let us, &c. A second reason for contentment, because men have fewer real wants than they commonly suppose.—Having food and raiment, äéáôñïöὰò êóὶ óêåðÜóìáôá ; both words ἅðáî ëåãüì .: that which serves for the nourishment and clothing of the body; under the latter, shelter also should be understood. “ Ἔ÷ïíôåò , habentes, implicate affirmatur, nos habituros esse;” Bengel.—Let us be therewith content, ἄñêåóèçóüìåèá . The future may here be considered perhaps as an exhortation. (Let us then be content; Luther). It is simpler, however, to take it in the ordinary sense, as that which may be reasonably expected. The folly of discontent is thus at once recognized.
1Ti_6:9. But they that will be rich, &c. A third reason of áὐôÜñêåéá , the sad result of the opposite state. (The Vulgate is logically right, but not strictly grammatical, nam qui volunt, &c.)—That will be; âïõëüìåíïé , not èÝëïíôåò . Bengel justly says: “Hæc voluntas animi suâ sorte contenti, inimica, non ipsæ opes, quas idcirco divites non jubentur abjicere” (1Ti_6:17-19).—Fall into temptation; that is, into the temptation to increase their worldly goods in an unjust way.—And a snare, êáὶ ðáãßäá . They are thereby fettered, and led captive by evil; with what results, appears directly after.—And many foolish and hurtful lusts, which drown men in destruction and perdition. The last two words strengthen each other, and may perhaps be distinguished by applying the former to the destruction of the body, the latter to the perdition of the soul. It is arbitrary, in any case, to refer them wholly to moral corruption (De Wette), into which they are already so sunken as to be incapable of any further degree; or to eternal perdition (Huther), because that is only the complete manifestation of what is aleady begun on earth. The here and hereafter in this warning of St. Paul must not be wilfully disjoined. But that he has not spoken too strongly here, is proved by the next verse.
[The force of the compound form ἀðþë ., and the more abstract termination of the latter word, perhaps, give a hint that a climactic force is intended; ὄëåèñïò is destruction in a general sense, whether of body or soul; ἀðþëåéá intensifies it, by pointing mainly to the latter; Ellicott, in loco.—W.]
1Ti_6:10. For the love of money is the root of all evil. The omission of the article before ñßæá should be understood. [A root; Alford, Conybeare and Howson; see, however, Ellicott for the other view.—W.] St. Paul does not say that the root of all evil is the desire of money, in which case this would be here represented as the source of all other sins—a view opposed as well to sound sense as to daily experience—but he only enumerates together the êáêÜ springing out of the öéëáñãõñßá ; although it is as true that the same can be said of other sins; ambition, lust, indeed every evil passion which masters mankind. Yet it must be acknowledged that there is no sin which so entirely rules, influences, and hardens men against every better feeling, as this. (This is contrary to De Wette in loco.) This love of money ( öéëáñãõñßá ) not merely signifies the lust for gaining money in all possible ways, but the desire of keeping it at every cost.—Which while some coveted after, they have erred from the faith; ἦò .sc. öéëáñãõñßáò . As this last is an ὄñåîéò , it must be granted that the connection of thought seems not quite correct, since, in a strict sense, the money itself, not the love of it, is the object of such toilsome effort. The sense is, however, clear enough; and it is therefore needless to explain ὀñÝãåóèáé in the sense of deditum esse; Matthies. Whoever thirsts after money, seeks at the same time to satisfy his passion with his whole power, and thus he wanders from true Christian faith (comp. 1Ti_1:6; 1Ti_1:19), and has pierced himself through with many sorrows. The ὀäýíáé , here imaged as a sword piercing the soul (Luk_2:35), and leaving a deep wound, are the pangs of conscience which the covetous feel when their eyes are opened to the shameful means they have used toward the end. They are, further, the forewarning of that ἀðþëåéá whereof the Apostle has spoken in the previous verses. Personal recollections of this or that covetous man may have risen to his mind. Instead of ðáñéÝðåéñáí , transfixerunt, some critics have ðåñéÝóðåéñáí —a reading on which the Vulgate translation rests (inseruerunt), signifying that they have surrounded their life with pain, as with a hedge of thorns. It is clear, however, that the Recepta, which critically is far better sustained, gives us likewise a much stronger sense.
[This sentence has in it a weighty side of Christian truth, but it may be made that half-truth which is whole error. The gospel morality does not teach mere political equality; it does not upturn the just distinctions of social rank; but, while it first purifies the heart, it seeks also to abolish unsocial caste. It does not teach the slave to revolt; but it does pronounce slavery an institution debasing both to mind and body, and at war with the growth of Christianity. An Epictetus may be inwardly free in bonds; but his virtue does not justify servitude. The quietism here taught, which severs the Church of Christ from social philanthropy, like Simeon the Stylite in the desert, has too often proved itself the worst egoism, that of a selfish or an emasculated piety.—W.]
2. Here the Apostle commends a practical godliness, in his hostility to all strifes of words. “Dicat autem aliquis, unde discernam quæstiones utiles ab inutilibus? Respondeo, norma est fundamentum, ut Paulus inquit (1Co_3:11). Complectitur autem fundamentum scripta prophetica et apostolica, et illustre discrimen est legis et evangelii. Item justitia fidei et operum. Item veri cultus, a Deo instituti et falsi cultus ab hominibus instituti, etc. Intra has metas coercendæ sunt cogitationes, et frenanda est curiositas, et prorsus fugiendæ sunt illæ pestes, ostentatio argutiorum, sophistomania et amor contentionis;” Melanchthon, on 1Ti_6:3.
3. The warning of the Apostle against avarice recalls the impressive words of the Lord, especially in the parable, Luk_12:15-21. Compare also with this the excellent sermon of Ad. Monod, L’ami de l’argent, Paris, 1843; handled in part like the essay of Harris, “Mammon, or Covetousness the Sin of the Church.” It is clear, from Php_4:11-13, how far Paul himself had advanced in the art of the Christian áὐôÜñêåéá .
1Ti_6:3-5. Heresy: (1) Its characteristics; (2) its sources; (3) its results.—Error, the caricature of truth.—The connection of godliness and contentment. Godliness (1) makes content; (2) brings great gain.—Three motives to contentment: (1) We really possess nothing (1Ti_6:7); (2) we really need nothing (1Ti_6:8); (3) we become poorer in happiness the richer we become in worldly things (1Ti_6:9-10).—Avarice a root of all evil: (1) As every cardinal sin; (2) more than any other cardinal sins.—Avarice the most utter egoism, in its diametrical hostility to the gospel of love.—The many examples from sacred and secular history which confirm the power of avarice.—The friend of Mammon his own enemy.
Starke: Anton: Man is inclined to leap beyond his sphere; but such aims are unwise (Rom_12:16; Sir_3:19).—Spiritual brotherhood overturns no civil organization (Mat_16:24).—The false men of the world think religion harmful. Nay, it is great gain. But the enemy knows how to blind them (Rom_13:1, et seq.)—Lange’s Opus: A false, seducing doctrine and a corrupt spirit always go together, specially in perverted teachers. For as they are unenlightened, understanding and will are both evil (1Ti_6:4).—Cramer: The devil has no more direct way of doing injury to the Church, than to become a lying spirit in the mouth of the prophets (1Ki_22:22). He begins with insolence; then come strife of words, hate, slander, envy, and one misfortune on another, so that an incurable injury is brought upon the Church of God (Psa_133:1).—Starke: Whoever is godly, hath God; whoso hath God, hath all good.—Unhappy miser, restless with his heap, and never owning enough!—Nothing can more humble man, and help him to renounce the vanity of the world, than when he reflects aright on his entrance into, and his exit from the world (Job_1:21). We need food and covering for the body; God has promised both, if we do His will; yet He has not promised luxury. Let those who have that, be grateful, and all others contented (Gen_28:20).—Osiander: The avaricious man wants what he has, as well as what he has not.—Avarice is an evil mother, and has many hateful daughters.—Avarice can as little coexist with faith, as can any other ruling vices.—Avarice is fearful, not only because the Divine condemnation rests on it (1Co_5:11; Eph_5:5; Col_3:5), but because no vice so masters the soul, and keeps it from conversion.
Heubner: Pastors should not neglect to look specially after servants.—Meditation on death is a safeguard against avarice.—The Christian limitation of our wants.—Discontent is a source of discouragement.—Avarice is already a lapse from Christianity. The avaricious is his own tormentor.
Lisco (1Ti_6:1-2): How Christian liberty proves itself the true, by obedience (1Ti_6:3; 1Ti_6:10).—Godliness: (1) In relation to false doctrines; (2) to worldly goods.—The incompatibility of avarice with godliness.—The wealth of the godly spirit.—K. J. Klemm: The great prize of the Christian.—Gerok: A contented spirit great gain: (1) Shields us from the snares of the devil; (2) teaches us to strive after heavenly wealth; (3) gladdens the brief time of life; (4) prepares us to die.—Marezoll: Encouragement and aid to contentment.—Dietzsch: How incalculable a good is contentment in regard of our worldly possessions.
Von Gerlach (1Ti_6:5): The gospel casts a wondrous light, to warm and illuminate man; but if it fail through his own sin, then that light thrown back from him flings its rays on the world, and dazzles him with deceitful images, till he loses at last the trace of truth, although he eagerly follows after its shadows. Sin remains undestroyed in his heart, and fleshly desires take advantage of the confusion. Such were the heretics of old, and such the Gnostics of all time.
[Pascal, Penseés, i., p. 1 Timothy 6 : The discontent of man.—Our desires flatter us with the image of a happy condition, because they add to what we have, the pleasures we have not; but when we reach these, we are no happier, for we then have still new desires for a happiness beyond them.
Dr. South, Sermons: Godliness is gain. “To exhort men to be religious, is only, in other words, to exhort them to pleasure—a pleasure high, rational, and angelical, with no sting, no loathing, no remorses, or bitter farewells; neither liable to accident, nor exposed to injury. And when age itself shall begin to remind us of mortality, yet then the pleasure of the mind shall be in its full youth, vigor, and freshness. A palsy may as well shake an oak, or a fever dry up a fountain, as shake or impair the delight of conscience. For it lies within; it centres in the heart; it grows into the very substance of the soul, so that a man never outlives it; and for this cause, because he cannot outlive himself.”—W.]
Footnotes:
1Ti_6:2.—[The words ὅôé ἀäåëöïß åἰóéí are wanting in the Sinaiticus.—E. H.]
1Ti_6:3.—[The Sinaiticus, in contrast with the other witnesses, has ðñïòÝ÷åôáé .—E. H.]
1Ti_6:5.—[Instead of the received reading, all the authorities have äéáðáñáôñéâáß .—E. H.]
1Ti_6:5.—According to A. D. F. G., and others, these words are to be regarded as a spurious addition, and are consequently left out by Tischendorf. They are not in the Sinaiticus [nor in Lachmann.—E. H.].
1Ti_6:7.—[ äῆëïí : no competent authority for this word, although retained by Tischendorf. It is omitted by Lachmann; nor is it in the Sinaiticus.—E. H.]
[On the relation of Paul to slavery, comp. also the remarks of the Am. Ed. in Com. on Ep. to Philemon.—P. S.]