Sermon Tone Analysis

! Miracles, Oracles and 1 Timothy 4

!! Introduction

\\ The Pastoral Epistles (1 & 2 Timothy, Titus) are crucial documents for insight into the development of Pauline Christianity.

Battle has raged in the scholarly world over the authorship of these letters.

The scholarly consensus is that they were not written by Paul;[1] however, a number of conservative scholars continue to argue for their authenticity.[2]

It is not my purpose, in this paper, to rehearse the arguments over authorship.

Suffice it to say that, even if they are accepted as written by Paul, nearly all conservative scholars agree that they were written towards the end of Paul's life.

On this view 2 Timothy functions as Paul's "last will and testament."

The Pastorals, whatever one's view on authorship, yield a picture of Pauline communities in transition.

With the apostle about to depart, or having departed within relatively recent memory, the communities have to face life without him.

Crucial questions have to be addressed in this transitional period.

What kind of leadership is appropriate in the post-Pauline era?

Can Paul's view of the body of Christ as a charismatic community be sustained?

How should Pauline ethics be worked out in succeeding generations?

etc.

It is not surprising, therefore, that the Pastorals major on church order and ethics.

Furthermore, in this transitional period, the problem of who has the right to interpret Paul for the next generation becomes acute.[3]

It is my view that the Pastoral Epistles have to be understood against the background of competing claims to represent the authentic teaching of Paul.

In addition, in the case of 1 and 2 Timothy, account has to be taken of their Ephesian background.

Gordon Fee[4] rightly points out that there is no hint that the false teachers in 1 Timothy come from outside the congregation.

The problem, according to 1 Tim 1:3, concerns the church in Ephesus; Fee argues persuasively that the situation in 1 Timothy is reflected in Paul's comments to the Ephesian elders in Acts 20:30.[5]

It is worth, therefore, reflecting for a moment on the origins of the church at Ephesus as recorded in Acts 19.

First, Paul is presented as a great /teacher/.

For three months he argues persuasively in the synagogue concerning the kingdom of God, and this is followed by a daily programme in the lecture hall of Tyrannus lasting two years (Acts 19:8-10).

Some manuscripts add that this programme lasted from 11.00 am to 4.00 pm!  Whether this was the case or not, the text makes clear that a great amount of teaching went on in Ephesus.

Paul could sum this up, in his speech to the Ephesian elders, as follows: "I did not shrink from declaring to you the whole purpose of God" (Acts 20:27).

Concerning the possibility of deception in Ephesus he states: "be alert, remembering that for three years I did not cease night or day to warn everyone with tears" (Acts 20:31).

Second, Paul is presented as a great /thaumaturge/ (miracle worker).

Acts 19:11-12 speaks of "extraordinary miracles" being accomplished through Paul.

For the church at Ephesus then, at least as Acts presents it, Paul was a great teacher, and not just a teacher but a thaumaturgical teacher.

However, it is notoriously difficult to hold teaching and thaumaturgy in balance.

Indeed, it is clear from Acts 19:11-20 that many converts gave up their magical practices precisely because they perceived a greater power at work in Paul.

Clinton Arnold persuasively argues that the magical background of Ephesus is crucial to an understanding of Ephesians.[6]

I would argue that this is equally true for an understanding of the Pastoral Epistles (at least 1 and 2 Timothy).

Arnold states, in relation to Ephesian converts:

{{{"

Although many new Christians in this area forsook their magical practices and burned their magical papyri, as Luke records, a good number would have been tempted to conflate their magical beliefs with Christianity.

"What could be wrong with wearing a magical amulet or invoking magical names for additional protection?" they may have asked.

On an even larger scale, there would also have been the danger of sects developing within the churches combining magical and mystery beliefs with Christianity and offering protection from the "powers."[7]

}}}

 In addition to the obvious danger of syncretism between magical beliefs and Christianity pointed out by Arnold, it is quite conceivable that converts from a background of magical practice, who had been converted through a demonstration of superior power, would continue to expect supernatural demonstrations in order to sustain their faith.

Furthermore, they could point to the thaumaturgical example of Paul himself.

I would suggest that the problem at Ephesus, which gave rise to 1 and 2 Timothy, was due, at least in part, to competing claims as to what was the most faithful interpretation of Paul for the next generation.

In other words, are the Pauline communities going to be built on Paul's teaching or on demonstrations of supernatural power?

It could be that this is already hinted at in Paul's speech to the Ephesian elders in Acts 20.  For, despite the emphasis on the miraculous in the previous chapter, Paul focuses on his teaching and proclamation (Acts 20:25-27), and does not explicitly mention the thaumaturgical aspects of his ministry.

I am convinced that the emphasis on teaching and tradition in the Pastoral Epistles has to be understood against the background of thaumaturgical demand - the persistent demand for miracles and oracles.

!! 1 Timothy 4

\\ I believe that this text, understood against the background outlined above, is of crucial significance in the current charismatic climate with the persistent demand for "miracles and oracles."

I shall argue that, although the specific content of the false teaching is very different, the spiritual environment which produced such teaching can be compared to the current charismatic environment.[8]

The chapter opens with a startling declaration: "Now the Spirit expressly says . .

."

This can be interpreted in one of two ways: either it refers to a prophetic utterance given by the prophetic Spirit;[9] or it refers to the warnings of Jesus concerning apostasy applied to the current generation by the Spirit.[10]

Whichever view is adopted there is no doubt that this emphasis on the Spirit implies that the charismatic dimension is still very much alive in the community represented by 1 Timothy.

The Spirit is still currently speaking to the Ephesian community (/legei/ is in the present tense).

This is very important, the emphasis on teaching which follows in this chapter must not be interpreted as anti-charismatic; it occurs in the context of a message revealed by the charismatic Spirit.

The writer does not oppose the elevation of thaumaturgy by denigrating the role of the Spirit.

The phrase "in later times" (/en hysterois kairois/) must not be taken as a reference to the remote future.

This must be understood against the background of the Pauline understanding of the eschatological Spirit.

The advent of the Spirit inaugurated the "last days."[11]

The New Testament communities were conscious of living in the last days.

This word of the Spirit is directed to the situation faced by the Ephesian community.

This situation is serious; the false teaching has made real inroads into the community.

It calls for extreme language - the teaching is demonic and is, therefore, causing deception.

The teachers are accused of being hypocritical liars whose consciences are either seared with a hot iron or branded (as a mark of ownership by Satan) with a hot iron.[12]

This language is quite in keeping with Paul.

Where there were problems of divisiveness in the church Paul would use the language of exhortation and appeal;[13] however, where deception was involved he was prepared to use the strongest possible language.[14]

I have already stated above that I do not consider the actual language used here to be appropriate in the current charismatic climate.

Nevertheless, what can and must be recovered is polemical theology.

The great credal statements of the early church were hammered out on the anvil of controversy.[15]

Much leadership in charismatic churches today is pragmatic, and rightly so.

However, my plea is that theological expertise is equally necessary.

Pragmatic leadership cannot suffice to test /theological/ claims which are inevitably going to be made about the work of the Spirit.[16]

!!!

The Nature of the Problem (vv 1-3a)

\\ The specific elements of the false teaching mentioned in our text concern forbidding marriage and demanding abstinence from foods.

There has been much speculation as to the nature of the heresy.

Those who opt for a late date for the Pastorals tend to see an early form of Gnosticism being combated.

Others point to the similarities between the over-realised eschatology at Corinth, reflected in texts such as 1 Cor 7:1-7 and 1 Cor 15:12, and the syncretistic Hellenistic Judaism reflected in Col 2:16-23.

However, as stated in the introduction, I do not believe that scholarship to date has paid sufficient attention to the background of the Ephesian converts as a way of understanding the nature of the problem addressed in 1 and 2 Timothy.

This is further compounded by a misunderstanding of Weber's sociological concept of the routinisation of charisma amongst New Testament scholars.

The scholarly consensus is that the Pastorals reflect the inevitable institutionalisation of the Pauline churches.

This is inevitably accompanied by the view that such /structural/ institutionalisation[17] necessarily involved the attenuation, or even cessation, of charismatic phenomena in the Pauline churches.[18]

It does not seem to have been considered that structural institutionalisation (which is undoubtedly present in the Pastorals) can go hand in hand with charismatic persistence, and that, in fact, such charismatic persistence, particularly in its manifestation as thaumaturgical demand, can be a catalyst for further institutionalisation.[19]

I have argued above that a superior demonstration of power was the reason for the conversion of many of the first converts at Ephesus.

Those who have come from a background of magic are used to demonstrations of power.

It seems inherently likely that such converts would expect regular demonstrations of the power of the Spirit to continue as a vital element of their new-found faith.

We know, from Paul's language in 2 Cor 11 and 12, that he was concerned that the Corinthians would be taken in by the false apostles who boasted of their visions and revelations, and their signs, wonders, and mighty works.

Their own claims were so strong that Paul was forced to spell out his own credentials in similar terms.

Paul was well aware that thaumaturgical demand could lead to deception at Corinth.

Ralph Martin, after a careful discussion concerning the identity of Paul's opponents in this section of 2 Corinthians, concludes:

{{{"

"another Jesus" for the opponents is the wonder-working Jesus, rather than Paul's crucified and risen Lord.

The alien "spirit" is the spirit of power and ecstasy which these messengers claimed to possess and embody in their ministry, rather than the Spirit of Christ which Paul exemplified.

The new "gospel" is the message of power and present glory, based on demonstrable tokens of the divine and evidences of authority in their lives as Christ's servants (v 13), rather than Paul's kerygma of the suffering Christ whose power is displayed incognito and in patient love (13:3, 4).[20]

}}}

 It seems to me highly probable that, if Paul was encountering problems due to itinerant miracle workers at Corinth, similar problems were occurring at Ephesus.

The major difference is that, in the case of Ephesus, thaumaturgical demand was coming from within the community.

The background of the Ephesian converts is an adequate explanation for this.

Of course any explanation of the problem has to take account of the specific details of the text!

How does the false teaching concerning the forbidding of marriage and the demand for abstinence from foods relate to the demand for miracles and oracles?

Robert Karris examines the polemical passages in the Pastorals[21] and persuasively argues that they conform in form to the traditional schema employed by philosophers in their attacks on sophists.

Because of this schema he argues that it is methodologically unsafe to regard all the details in these polemical passages as describing the actual errors of the opponents.

Most of the time, as is the case in the polemic of philosophers against sophists, the terms used amount to no more than "name-calling."

Instead, we can only use the details in these passages which depart from the schema with any degree of certainty.

In the case of our passage, the specific items mentioned do depart from the schema so we can infer that the false teachers really did oppose marriage and demanded abstinence from certain foods.[22]

However, it is not only the polemic of philosophers against sophists that follows a schematic pattern.