Sermon Tone Analysis

Andrew Hodge                                                                                                       13th July 2007

 

 

New Testament Survey NTES 111

 

 

Seminar 15

 

 

The Pastoral Epistles and Philemon

 

 

/1 and 2 Timothy, Titus, Philemon/

Irving L. Jensen /Jensen//’s Survey of the New Testament /1981, Moody Press, Chicago Ch 18

/Libronix DLS/

Guthrie, Donald  /New Testament Introduction  /Apollos, Leicester, England 4th Ed  1990 Ch 17

/Thompson// Chain// Reference Bible/  Fifth Improved Edition B.B.Kirkbride Bible Co., Inc.

Indianapolis, Indiana 1988

 

 

/Examine the authenticity, purpose and dates of these epistles:/

/            /It is not difficult to appreciate that these letters are “messages from one heart to another” (Jensen p 371).

And “because human nature does not change from generation to generation, we can easily see why these letters are so contemporary in their message to us” (ibid).

These letters are ‘Pastoral’ not because they are particularly addressed to Pastors but because they are Paul’s counsel to the ‘shepherds’ responsible for the ‘feeding, guiding and superintending’ of a church flock (ibid p372).

Also in the Greek, “pastor” is /poimen /meaning ‘shepherd’, a Church office equal to “bishop” (/episkopos /or ‘overseer’) and “elder” (/presbuteros /or ‘mature senior’) which are used specifically but interchangeably in the NT (see below).

Guthrie’s wet blanket is: “The epistles to Timothy and Titus have long been known as the pastoral epistles,1 but this designation is not strictly correct because they cannot be called manuals of pastoral theology.”[1]

“The Pauline authorship of these epistles has been challenged by liberal critics, but external and internal evidence strongly supports it” (Jensen p 372).

Guthrie: “These epistles have been more assailed than any of Paul’s other letters and it will therefore be necessary to discuss in some detail the question of their authenticity.”[2]

Guthrie allows: “Before examining the case against the Pauline authorship the testimony of the early church will be considered in order to show clearly that attacks against the authenticity were unheard of until the modern period.”[3]

I am perfectly happy to accept the verdict of the early Church over modern so-called scholarship any day.

I accept these letters in their entirety as the inspired Word of God, and having read Guthrie’s arguments against Pauline authorship, have no reason to change my view.

Paul spent about three years in Ephesus (Acts 20:31) mostly on his third missionary journey, with Timothy for part of this time (Acts 19:22).

It was in the region of Ephesus that Timothy was ministering when Paul wrote 1 Timothy about seven years later (62 AD Jensen p 374, Chart 61 p 241) ie after the first Roman imprisonment (assumed - see Jensen Chart 100 p 393), on Paul’s repeat journey into Macedonia (1 Timothy 1:3) when Timothy was having trouble coping with the demands of his regional ‘bishopric’ (assumed - see Jensen p 375).

These demands are listed in Jensen (p 377) as spread of false doctrine, spiritual coldness, personnel problems, problems of the worship services, problems related to the offices of the church and the care of widows.

Paul urges Timothy to stay on at Ephesus (1 Timothy 1:3), perhaps longing to be there himself to lend a hand, and gives instruction to the churches to continue propagating and preserving the truth of the gospel (eg 1 Timothy 1:11).

Jensen states (p 384) that “Soon after Paul wrote 1 Timothy to his closest friend, he wrote a letter to another co-worker and fellow-servant, Titus.

This letter has been called “a priceless and unrivalled manual of pastoral advice.””

According to Jensen (p 387) the purposes for writing this letter (to Titus in Crete where Paul, as far as Scripture is concerned, had seconded him but had never visited) were:

* To advise Titus in his task of superintending the circuit of Cretan Churches as Paul’s representative (Titus 1:5 - this must have been particularly difficult without the prior presence and preaching of Paul himself.

Timothy at least had had the ground broken for him.

Is this an argument for a visit to Crete by Paul?

Discuss)

* To instruct and exhort both Titus and the Churches regarding Christian behaviour consistent with Christian doctrine (Titus Chh 1-3)

* To instruct Titus concerning personal matters (Titus 3:12-13)

 

When Paul wrote 2 Timothy (in the year of his death 67 AD from a dungeon during his second Roman imprisonment - see Jensen Appendix B pp 518-9) he was anticipating execution (2 Timothy 4:16) and is expressing his ‘dying wish’.

He wants to see Timothy and Mark again (2 Timothy 4:9, 11, 21) and to have Timothy bring him his cloak, books and parchments which had been left at Troas (where Paul may have been arrested consequent on Nero’s persecution of Christians after the burning of Rome on July 19th, 64 AD).

In the midst of describing disappointments and every good reason for despair, the tone of this last letter “is triumph, and glory, and deep gratitude” (Jensen p 394).

Philemon is the shortest of Paul’s canonical writings, from Rome during the first imprisonment, 61 AD.

Jensen describes it as “a masterpiece of graceful, tactful and delicate pleading for a forgiving spirit” (p 400).

Jensen accepts the likelihood of a second Roman imprisonment on the basis of 2 Timothy 1:16-17, 2:3, 9-13, 4:6-8 and 16.

Chart 100 (p 393) compares and contrasts these two postulated imprisonments.

In my view this approach makes sense of the scripture.

Guthrie: “Many scholars reject this solution because there is no hint of it in Acts and because it has inadequate support in early Christian history.

It is therefore regarded as a desperate expedient designed to maintain at all costs the authenticity of the epistles.”[4]

I do not agree with this.

Guthrie takes 42 pages to discuss authenticity, and while ultimately accepting Pauline authorship, does not accept the second Roman imprisonment as a means of explaining what I believe to be the scriptural timeline.

Guthrie also has trouble in assigning a purpose to the writing of 1 Timothy and Titus, [5] seemingly being unable to project himself into Paul’s situation and taking the Word literally.

He does better with 2 Timothy.[6]

/ /

/Discuss Paul and Timothy’s relationship 1 Timothy 1:1-20:/

/            /It is generally assumed that Timothy - in his late teens - is converted to Christianity under the ministry of Paul on his first missionary journey when he went through Timothy’s native region of Lycaonia.

If so, Timothy had only been saved for three years or less when he again met Paul and began his own missionary experiences.

Described by Paul as his most important and effective assistant, Paul goes as far as to call Timothy a “man of God” (1 Timothy 6:11) which from the lips of the church’s greatest missionary, is praise indeed, and an indication of Timothy’s spiritual capacity.

Paul may have received special assurances for accepting Timothy (1 Timothy 1:18; 4:14.

Which presbytery?

Acceptance confirmed by Paul by the laying on of his hands 2 Timothy 1:6 When would this have occurred?).

Timothy (of Derbe) is highly recommended to Paul as his assistant by the new Christians in the nearby cities of Lystra and Iconium on the second missionary journey (Acts 16:1-2).

Perhaps the Christians in Derbe were reluctant to put one of their own forward - a not uncommon occurrence.

Paul accepts their recommendation and Timothy must have agreed, for Paul circumcised him “because of the Jews which were in those quarters: for they knew all that his father was a Greek” (Acts 16:3).

Wood states that this was done “To allay any needless opposition from local Jews, …….

before setting out on his journeys.”[7]

It might be argued that although the local Jews knew Timothy was half Greek by birth (father, who presumably vetoed circumcision on the eighth day), the Gentiles would come to know that he was half Jew by birth (mother).

As Paul’s missionary endeavour had already been established as being preferentially to the Gentiles, leaving Timothy uncircumcised might have made a better testimony ie it is not necessary for a Gentile to be made artificially into a Jew (by late circumcision into the Abrahamic Covenant) so that you can then be saved.

Both Paul and Timothy may have had a difficult situation to resolve in terms of local witnessing - this apparently cannot be a win-win situation - but adult circumcision as a way out seems highly artificial.

Perhaps they thought that witnessing to any Jew anywhere by someone known to be uncircumcised would never have borne fruit, whereas the Gentiles could not have cared less.

Against this is the observation that both Luke and Titus, Gentiles, appear to effectively evangelise Jews.

Discuss

In the end, after salvation when the middle wall of partition is broken down between Jew and Gentile in the local Churches, the whole question becomes irrelevant, and Timothy is perfectly acceptable to both camps.

From the beginning in Derbe, Timothy serves as (Jensen pp 373-4):

·         Paul’s aide on the missionary journeys including ministering the word of God

·         Paul’s representative to groups of Christians young in the faith while Paul was ministering elsewhere:

1.      left behind at Troas Acts 17:14

2.      sent to Thessalonica 1 Thess 3:1, 2, 6

3.      preached to the Corinthians 2 Cor 1:19

4.      sent into Macedonia Acts 19:22

5.      sent to Corinth 1 Cor 4:17

6.      with Paul in Rome Phil 1:1, 2:19, 23

7.      left at Ephesus 1 Tim 1:3

·         Paul’s companion in prison Phil 1:1; Col 1:1; Philem 1; Heb 13:23

 

A scriptural picture of Timothy can be visualised (Kent, quoted in Jensen p 374):

1.      tender, affectionate (1 Corinthians 4:17; Philippians 2:20-21)

2.      timid, tactful (1 Corinthians 16:10-11; 1 Timothy 4:12; 2 Timothy 1:6-7)

3.      faithful, loyal (1 Corinthians 4:17)

4.      conscientious (Philippians 2:19-23)

5.      devoted to God (1 Timothy 6:11)

6.      with a physical infirmity (1 Timothy 5:23)

 

 

/Utilising the marginal notes in the Thompson Chain Reference and attempting to keep only to the topic of the question:/

/ /

/Discuss Paul and Timothy’s relationship 1 Timothy 1:1-20:/

/            /1:1-3 Paul’s counsel to Timothy Paul wishes this letter to carry a good deal of weight with Timothy.

Hence his up-front designation of himself as “an apostle of Jesus Christ by the commandment of God”.

Although Paul calls Timothy “my own son in the faith”, this letter is more than just “family news on a spiritual level”.

Being “a son in the faith” implies a strong spiritual bond (Paul also uses this of Titus), and may indicate that Timothy was saved under Paul’s direct ministry (see above).

But for Paul and Timothy it is more than this.

Pastorally speaking Timothy is Paul’s most accomplished protégé, and the person to whom Paul delegates sensitive and spiritually challenging tasks.

Their working relationship was “as one” and I suspect was closer than the relationship Paul ever had with Barnabas, Silas, John Mark or any of his other co-labourers.

It would have been a joy to see the two evangelising together.

In spite of their close ties with each other, both know the source of their strength.

Paul blesses Timothy with “Grace, mercy, and peace, from God our Father and Jesus Christ our Lord”.

One possible conclusion from “I besought thee to abide still at Ephesus” of v 3 is Paul’s awareness of Timothy’s potential timidity in the face of the need to confront heretics.

Paul is not addressing a faceless congregation, but an individual that he knows very well so he cuts to the chase immediately.

He is also so secure in his relationship with Timothy that he knows that his potential criticism will not cause offence, but result in a bolstering of courage.