Paul Commissions Timothy to Confront False Teachers of the Law

Some of the false teaching attacking the covenant community was based on misinterpretation of the law and improper speculation. See below.

%%SB1Tim.jpg%%The Artemis of Ephesus%%

1 Timothy 1:3-7 form a chiastic structure (a writing style that uses a unique repetition pattern for clarification and emphasis) stressing that true teachers instruct from the position of love, a pure heart, a good conscience, and faith:

• A. teach (1 Tim 1:3)
  • B. myths . . . endless genealogies . . . speculations (1 Tim 1:4)
    • C. faith (1 Tim 1:4)
      • D. The aim of our charge is love that issues from a pure heart and a good conscience (1 Tim 1:5)
    • C'. faith (1 Tim 1:5)
  • B'. vain discussions (1 Tim 1:6)
• A'. teachers (1 Tim 1:7)

Picture: The Lady of Ephesus or The Artemis of Ephesus, 1st century AD. Courtesy of Ephesus Archaeological Museum.

Initial summary of false teaching. The false teachings at Ephesus which concerned Paul arose from misreadings of the Law of Moses, including false myths and genealogies that may have been tools for speculations about the origins of the world. Rooted in the ambitions of the false teachers, these misreadings swerved from a proper focus on faith in God's work, causing damage to the faith of some in the church.

The conflict in Ephesus centered on improper teaching (1 Tim. 1:9-11; 4:1-2; 6:3-5; 2 Tim. 2:18). See BC 7. Hughes states:

The "certain men" who were teaching false doctrines are unnamed, but the people knew who they were. They were even elders, as Paul had so clearly predicted in his farewell to the Ephesian church leaders: "Even from your own number men will arise and distort the truth" (Acts 20:30). Gordon Fee convincingly argues that this is evident from 1 Timothy because of: 1) the fact that they presume to be "teachers of the law" (1 Tim. 1:7) and that teaching in 1 Timothy is a specific responsibility of elders (cf. 1 Tim. 5:17; 3:2); 2) the fact that two are subsequently named, "Hymenaeus and Alexander," and are excommunicated by Paul rather than by the elders of the church (1 Tim. 1:19, 20); and 3) the fact of the repeated concerns expressed about elders in this letter regarding their qualifications (1 Tim. 3:1-7), their discipline, and apparently their replacement (1 Tim. 5:19-25).

Stott makes an interesting statement concerning the norm of doctrine. He says:

The verb heterodidaskaleo, which Paul uses both in 1 Tim 1:3 and in 1 Tim 6:3, clearly indicates that there is a norm of doctrine from which the false teachers had deviated. It is variously designated in the Pastorals. It is called 'the faith' (1 Tim. 1:3, 19; 3:9; 4:1:6:21; 2 Tim. 3:8; 4:7; 6:10, 12, 21; Tit 3:15), 'the truth' (1 Tim 2:4, 7; 3:15; 4:3; 6:3, 5; 2 Tim 2:18, 25; 3:7-8; 4:4; Tit 1:1, 14), 'the sound doctrine' (1 Tim 1:10; 6:3; 2 Tim 1:14; 4:3; Tit 1:9; 2:1), 'the teaching' (Tit 1:9; 1 Tim 6:1), and 'the good deposit' (1 Tim 6:20; 2 Tim 1:4) In nearly every one of these expressions the noun is preceded by the definite article, indicating that already a body of doctrine existed which was an agreed standard by which all teaching could be tested and judged. It was the teaching of Christ (1 Tim 6:3) and of his apostles (1 Tim 1:1; 27; 2 Tim 1:13; 2:2; 3:10, 14).

I urged you when I was about to depart into Macedonia. Some have described Paul's first letter to Timothy as a 'mandate letter,' designed not only to instruct Timothy for his difficult task in Ephesus, but to give him authority or a mandate before the church. The present tense of the participle (poreuomenos), may indicate that a form of this letter was communicated orally before the leaders of the church or the congregation as Paul departed Ephesus for Macedonia. A different doctrine. Timothy's central task was to confront and correct false teachings rooted in misreadings of the Law of Moses. The errors at Ephesus did not arise from a well-developed doctrinal system, but the ambitions of 'certain men' to be recognized as 'teachers of the law' (1:7). See note 1:7.

See 1 Timothy 4:7 and 2 Timothy 4:4. In Titus 1:14 Paul spoke of "Jewish myths" (see "Jewish myths - Titus 1:13-14" below), which is perhaps a reference to the kinds of legends about Old Testament figures that are found in many of the apocryphal Jewish writings. See "Apocryphal Accounts" below.

Paul also uses the phrase "endless genealogies" that is perhaps a reference to an early form of the detailed speculations (often combined with Jewish myths) that later developed in Gnosticism concerning the origins of the world and the innumerable spiritual beings supposedly involved in creation (Tit. 3:9). See WLC 113. Milne says of these "devotees":

It is fair to say that they were of Jewish background, perhaps in the light of further references to them in the Pastorals, claiming to possess and to offer special and advanced spiritual knowledge. They built their speculative ideas on the basis of their fanciful interpretations of Old Testament genealogies, as for example in Genesis 5 and 11 (2 Tim. 3:8f; Tit. 1:14; 3:9).

Hendriksen adds:

The expression "myths and genealogies" is one. It must not be divided, as if Paul were thinking, on the one hand, of myths, and on the other, of genealogies. The apostle refers undoubtedly to man-made supplements to the law of God (see 1 Tim 1:7), mere myths or fables (2 Tim. 4:4), old wives' tales (1 Tim. 4:7) that were definitely Jewish in character (Titus 1:14). Measured by the standard of truth, what these errorists taught deserved the name myths. As to material contents these myths concern genealogical narratives that were largely fictitious.

stories. In Titus 1:14, Paul wrote about 'Jewish myths.' In 1 Tim 4:7 he wrote of 'godless myths and old wives' tales.' Coupled here with 'endless genealogies,' Paul may be referring to legends about well-known figures in the Old Testament found in many non-canonical Jewish writings of the Second Temple period. He may also be referencing 'genealogies' and 'stories' about the Greek gods propagated by the Temple of Artemis. Later, Gnosticism developed speculative genealogies about spiritual beings that populated their myths about the origins of the universe. See note 1:3.

Because of his love and concern for the people of God, Paul insisted that false teaching be corrected. See WLC 147; WSC 80; BC 24. Knight says:

"Love," says Paul, is the goal of the Christian teaching. This affirmation is in accord with Jesus' teaching (Matt. 22:37-40 par. Mark 12:28-31; Luke 10:27), which Paul seeks to communicate (cf. 1 Tim. 6:3), as do the other apostles and writers . . . "Love" is not defined in the NT but Paul does describe it in terms of Christ giving himself for the church (Eph. 5:25; cf. Rom. 5:8; cf. further John. 3:16; 14:23), in terms of the summary and fulfillment of the law (Rom. 13:8-10), and in the hymn of love in 1 Corinthians 13. In the first of these, Paul describes love in terms of Christ's self-giving to encourage husbands to love their wives by giving themselves for the good of their wives (cf. 1 John 4:12, which also speaks of human love as the expression of God's love at work through us). When Paul speaks of love here, he probably has in mind love in this full-orbed sense (cf. further Gal. 5:6; Col. 3:14).

the goal of the commandment is love. Paul makes the goal (telos) of this instruction plain. His love for the believers in the church at Ephesus motivated this pastoral intervention to instruct their heart and mind, that their conscience might not be corrupted, so they might stay on course in their faith and love. See 1:14; 6:11; Titus 3:15; 2 Tim 1:13 and cf. 2 Cor 8:7; Gal 5:6, 22; Eph 1:15; 3:16-17; 6:23; Col 1:4; Philemon 1:5 where Paul coupled 'faith' and 'love' as identifying marks of Christian characteric—faith in Christ and love for other people, especially fellow members of God's household. Elsewhere, Paul adds 'hope.' Cf. 1 Thess 1:3; 1 Cor 13:13.

These false teachers wanted to be known as experts in the law of Moses. While Paul did not forbid - even encouraged - a knowledge of the Mosaic law (2 Tim. 3:14-17), the problem was that these false teachers did not know "what they [were] talking about." In other words, they did not interpret the law correctly, which Paul addresses in the verses that follow. See WLC 113. Milne explains:

By deliberately rejecting the right path (the same verb is used in 1 Timothy 6:21 and 2 Timothy 2:18), the false teachers have demonstrated that their religious claims to knowledge are spurious. In the same way the apostle John declares that people who forsake the assemblies of God's people make it plain that they have never been true disciples of Christ (1 John 2:19). Apostasy is the proof of terminal unbelief. In the same way these religious gurus at Ephesus preferred the innovations of their own path of enlightenment, and the empty chatter that was part of it.

Apparently they want to be teachers of the law, but they do not know what they are talking about or what they so confidently affirm (1 Tim. 1:7). Their ambition is way ahead of their actual ability and knowledge. They covet the teacher's role but they are totally unsuited to the position. Their vain boasting and loud claims are a cover-up for profound ignorance and a total absence of authority. Their public display of spirituality is a balloon, filled with the hot-air of their own vanity and vaulting ambition. They are hollow people lacking all spiritual substance.

One must wonder if many so-called internet Christian forums, chat rooms, etc., are launching pads and encouragement for such false teaching today. Proper moderation is essential.

teachers of the law. The problem was not reading the Law, but misreading and misusing it. Paul encouraged Timothy and the church to study the Scriptures (cf. 1 Tim 4:13; 2 Tim 3:14-17), including the Law of Moses, but said plainly these teachers "do not know what they are talking about." Paul demonstrated sound readings of Moses about gender and marital relations, food use, treatment of widows, how to handle charges against leaders, etc. in this letter, and explained a proper use of the law in 1:8-11.

Paul comments on the purpose of the law. See "The Law of God: What is God's Law?" and "The Three Uses of the Law: What Good is the Law?" below.

One of the Law's purposes is to restrain unrighteousness. Paul described a particular use of the law here, the restraint of evil, including "whatever is contrary to sound doctrine" (1:10). This use is vital for a community's well-being, because it provides the basis for correcting members whose behaviors undermine the common 'good' (1:8). By pointing to this use of the law, Paul underscored the seriousness of the false teachings at Ephesus, as damaging to the life of the church and out of "accord with the glorious gospel" (1:11)

Like Jesus himself (Matt. 5:17 ff), Paul believed that the Mosaic law in itself was a wonderful gift from God (see Rom. 7:12-13,16; cf. Psa. 19; 119). Yet, this good gift could be abused and turned into a curse. See "Holy, righteous and good - Romans 7:12" below. Hughes eloquently describes this:

Proper use. Paul opens his digression by saying, "We know that the law is good if one uses it properly" (1 Tim. 1: 8). In Romans 7:12 he gave his classic statement of the law's goodness: "So then, the law is holy, and the commandment is holy, righteous and good." Despite the misunderstanding and errant teaching of some, there is no disjunction between the law and the gospel. Law and gospel rest on the same moral base, and they complement each other. People have always been saved by grace, whether living under the law or the gospel.

The law's excellency affords three uses - a restraining use, a condemning use, and a sanctifying use.

The restraining use of the law is seen in public life, as an external restraint on wrongdoers (cf. Galatians 3:23-4:7). And it does a "good" (literally, kalos, "beautiful") job of this. Without law, everyday public life would be impossible.

The condemning use of the law involves spiritual guilt and judgment (cf. Romans 7:7-25). Paul described his experience of this in Romans 7:13 -"Did that which is good, then, become death to me? By no means! But in order that sin might be recognized as sin, it produced death in me through what was good, so that through the commandment sin might become utterly sinful." The law hammered Paul down, so that he might see his own sin and open himself to the gospel. John Stott quotes Martin Luther in this respect:

It is a mighty "hammer" to crush the self-righteousness of human beings. For "it shows them their sin, so that by the recognition of sin they may be humbled, frightened, and worn down, and so may long for grace and for the Blessed Offspring [Christ]." It is in this sense that the law was our schoolmaster to bring us to Christ."

The third use, that of sanctifying, involves defining the parameters of a graced life. No one can live up to the law, but it does lay out God's mind as to our moral and ethical responsibilities toward God and man. We especially see its sanctifying work in Christ's enlightening teaching in the Sermon on the Mount about it (Matthew 5:17 ff). That sermon also shows the condemning use of the law, which demands perfection (cf. Matthew 5:48), and calls the Christian to depend fully on God's grace.

the law is good. In accord with the OT prophets and Jesus, the Messiah (Matt 5:17-20), Paul recognized the Law of Moses as God's Word and good gift (Rom 7:12-13, 16). In order to interpret and use it properly, however, the Law must be read in relation to the promise God made to Abraham before the Law, and Jesus's fulfillment of the law and promise after (cf. Gal 3:15-29; Rom 4:1-25)

In these verses Paul has particular use of the law in mind. Stott is very helpful here in revealing some of the history on the three uses of the law. He says:

We turn now from the wrong use of the law to its right use. The false teachers, who want to be teachers of the law . . . do not know what they are talking about or what they so confidently affirm (1 Tim 1:7 about which they are so dogmatic', REB). In contrast to their ignorance, however, Paul sets his knowledge. We know that the law is good if one uses it properly (1 Tim 1:8, nominos, 'lawfully'). We also know that law is made . . . for lawbreakers (1 Tim 1:9, anomois, 'for the lawless'). Putting together these two truths which, Paul says, we know, we reach the striking statement that the lawful use of the law is for the lawless. All law is designed for those whose natural tendency is not to keep it but to break it. 'Not the saint but the sinner is the law's target.'

It may be helpful to approach this question historically, for the Reformers struggled much over the true purpose of the law. Luther expressed his position in his Lectures on Galatians (15-35). 'The law was given for two uses,' he wrote. The first was 'political' or 'civil'; the law was a bridle 'for the restraint of the uncivilised'. The second and 'principal' purpose of the law was 'theological' or 'spiritual'. It is a mighty 'hammer' to crush the self-righteousness of human beings. For 'it shows them their sin, so that by the recognition of sin they may be humbled, frightened, and worn down, and so may long for grace and for the Blessed Offspring [sc. Christ]'. It is in this sense that 'the law was our schoolmaster to bring us to Christ'. Elsewhere Luther indicates that the law has a third use; we have 'to teach the law diligently and to impress it on the people', although he does not emphasize this.

The Formula of Concord (1577), however, which settled Lutheran doctrine in disputed areas after Luther's death, clearly specified in its sixth article a threefold use of the law. It is a means to the preservation of human society (Rom 13:1), a summons to repentance and faith (Gal 3:24) and a direction for the church (Rom 8:4; 13:8). These came to be called the uses politicus (to restrain evil), the uses pedagogus (to lead to Christ) and the uses normativus (to determine the conduct of believers).

Calvin agreed with these three functions of the law, but changed the order of the first two, and laid his emphasis on the third. Book II, chapter 7, of the Institutes is devoted to a consideration of why the law was given. First, it has a 'punitive' purpose, for it 'renders us inexcusable' and so drives us to despair. Then, 'naked and empty-handed', we 'flee to his [sc. God's] mercy, repose entirely in it, hide deep within it, and seize upon it alone for righteousness and merit' (J. Calvin, Institutes of the Christian Religion, translated by F. L. Battles (Collins, 1986), II.7.19).

Secondly, the law restrains evildoers, especially 'by fright and shame', from daring to do what they want to do, and so protects the community. In this sense the law acts as an external deterrent, while leaving the heart unchanged (Ibid., II.7.1011).

'The third and principal use' of the law, indeed its 'proper purpose', according to Calvin, is the one which Luther somewhat neglected, namely 'its place among believers in whose hearts the Spirit of God already lives and reigns'. The law is 'the best instrument' both to teach us the Lord's will and to exhort us to do it. For 'by frequent meditation upon it' believers will be aroused to obedience, be strengthened in it, and be drawn back from the slippery path of transgression' (Ibid., II.7.12). Indeed it is in this 'joyous obedience' that authentic 'Christian freedom' is to be found (Ibid., II.19.15).

Thus the law's three functions according to Calvin are punitive (to condemn sinners and drive them to Christ), deterrent (to restrain evildoers) and specially educative (to teach and exhort believers).

To which of these three purposes was Paul referring in his first letter to Timothy? Of which of them could it be said that 'the lawful use of the law is for the lawless'? Certainly the second, relating to the restraint of evildoers. Calvin wrote: 'The apostle seems specially to have alluded to this function of the law when he teaches "that the law is not laid down for the just but for the unjust and disobedient" . . . (1 Tim. 1:9, 10)' (Ibid., II.7.10).

In addition, Hendriksen says:

"Bearing this in mind, that not for a righteous man is law enacted."

That was the very point which these false teachers in Ephesus were forgetting. The reason why they wasted their time on all kinds of fanciful tales regarding ancestors was that they had never learned to know themselves as sinners before God. They were "puffed up," arrogant, boastful, haughty, self-righteous (see on 1 Tim 1:7 above; also on 1 Tim. 6:4, 20; 2 Tim. 3:2; and cf. Titus 1:10; 3:5). That was their big sin, as Paul points out repeatedly. They lacked humility, the consciousness of guilt.

These people could study God's holy law with its basic precepts and injunctions, and could remain very calm under it all, as if it did not touch them. They would simply read on (or go back) until they came to some proper name or perhaps some ceremonial detail. Then of a sudden they would become enthused! Now they could shine with their stories and spiritualizations.

Instead, they should have been crushed by the law, as was, for instance, Paul (1 TIm. 1:15; Rom 7). But these people considered themselves to be good by nature, not bad. They were "righteous" in their own eyes, just like the Pharisees, with reference to whom Jesus said, "I came not to call the righteous but sinners" (Matt. 9:13; and cf. Luke 15:7; 18:9). In fact, it is very well possible that the apostle had that Matt. 9:13 saying of the Savior in mind when he wrote as he did. (The actual date when the Gospels were written has nothing to do with this, of course.) This possible conclusion is strengthened somewhat by what he says in 1 Tim 1:15 of the present chapter:

"Reliable is the saying, and entitled to full acceptance, that Christ Jesus came into the world sinners to save, foremost of whom am I." Cf. also Titus 3:5.

Now it stands to reason that for "a righteous man law - any law, to be sure (that is, any law touching morals), but here with special reference to the Mosaic law - has not been enacted. If I am so good that I just naturally keep the law, then I do not need the law (whether it be a traffic law or the law of the ten commandments). One of the main purposes of the Mosaic law was to bring sinners to the point where they would feel utterly crushed under the load of their sins. But granted, for the sake of argument, that these Ephesian would-be leaders and those who cluster around them, are what, according to Paul's description, they consider themselves to be; granted that they are in themselves good and righteous, then surely law is wasted on them. How can it be a bridle (Mark 10:20; Psa. 19:13) for those who feel that they need no restraint? How can it be a dirt-revealing mirror (source of the knowledge of sin, Rom. 3:20; then Gal. 3:24) for those who think that they show no filthy specks that must be washed away? How can it be a guide (Ps. 119:105; 19:7, 8; cf. Rom. 7:22) to point out avenues of gratitude for deliverance from sin, for those who in their pride and arrogance (of which Paul speaks again and again) are convinced that they have not lost the way?

1 Timothy 1:9b-10. No, not for these people is law enacted, but for lawless and insubordinate, for impious and sinful, for unholy and profane men, for murderers of fathers and murderers of mothers, for those who kill their fellows, for immoral men, sodomites, kidnapers, liars, false swearers, and for whatever else is contrary to the sound doctrine.

It would seem that the apostle, in referring to people for whom law (here with particular reference to the divine moral law) was laid down, first describes them in general - as being lawless and insubordinate, impious and sinful - and then descends to particulars, more or less following the order of the ten commandments.

The Ephesian errorists should have asked themselves, "Does not this description fit us?" Paul admitted that it applied to himself. The teachers of false doctrine in the Ephesus region admitted nothing. That was the difference!

The first descriptive term which he uses is lawless. Lawless persons (pl. of anomos) are not here persons who are ignorant of the law but those who live as if there were no law (see 2 Thess. 2:3). They "live themselves out," doing as they please. They thus live apart from the law and contrary to its basic demand. Was Paul thinking at all of himself (as included in this group) and his own former life? (Cf. Rom. 7:9.) In order that the proper exegesis may be given to this portion, one must bear in mind that in the immediate sequel the apostle refers repeatedly to himself and his own sinful life (1 Tim 1:13, 15, 16). A text, after all, should be interpreted in the light of its context. Otherwise our interpretation lacks unity. - Now, lawless persons are, of course, also insubordinate. They refuse to range themselves under (note the word: pl. of anupotaktos) the rule of the God who laid down the law. In practical, every-day life, this means that such people are, negatively speaking, impious, irreverent, ungodly (pl. of asebes), a word which in Pauline usage applies even to the elect as long as (or to the extent in which) they are still living in harmony with the principle of unbelief. There are, accordingly "ungodly," though by God's sovereign grace they are (or sometime during their life are going to be) justified (Rom. 4:5; 5:6). Paul would certainly place himself among them. Positively speaking, such people are by nature sinners (pl. of amartolos), those who have missed the mark or goal of their existence, namely, the conscious glorification of God. Paul very definitely and explicitly tells us that he includes himself, note 1 Tim. 1:15 (which must already have been in the mind of the writer when he wrote 1 Tim 1:9): " . . . Christ Jesus came into the world sinners to save, foremost of whom am I."

The law, then, was laid down for lawless and insubordinate, for ungodly and sinful persons, in order that it might shake them to the very depths of their being, might frighten them out of whatever self-complacency remained in them. It was enacted to make the disturbed even more disturbed so that they would cry out in self-despair, "Wretched man that I am, who shall deliver me?" (Rom. 7:24, and cf. Rom. 3:20).

The apostle now gives a summary of the law of the Ten Commandments. That summary shows clearly that there is no room for anyone (least of all for the Ephesian errorist) to sit at ease in Zion, to be filled with a sense of security, so that with perfect composure he can now begin to use the law as a kind of crossword puzzle or as raw material for the fabrication of interesting stories about ancestors.

First, accordingly, the apostle states that law has been enacted anosiois kai bebelois - "for unholy and profane men."

The term unholy (anosios), in the New Testament occurring only here and in 2 Tim. 3:2, and linked here in 1 Tim 1:9 with profane, is very suitable in a context which describes those who are careless of their duties toward God. In his Gorgias (507 B) Plato represents Socrates as saying, "And again, when one is doing what is fitting with respect to men, he does things that are just (dikaia); (when he does what is fitting) with respect to the gods, (he does things that are) holy (asia). Similarly, in 2 Macc. 7:34 Antiochus Epiphanes, who tried his utmost to destroy the religion of Jehovah, is called an "unholy man."

What is stated negatively in the adjective "unholy" is expressed positively in the adjective profane (bebelos from baino, to walk, step, tread). That which is "profane" can be trodden. It is, as our English word implies, "in front of the temple," that is, "outside the temple" (pro = before or in front of; fane = temple, sanctuary). A profane person is one who does not refrain or hesitate to trample on that which is holy. The adjective is used with respect to things in 1 Tim. 4:7; 6:20; 2 Tim. 2:16 (see on these passages) and with respect to persons in our present passage and in Heb. 12:16. The latter passage mentions the typically profane person, namely, Esau, who for a single meal sold his birthright with its Messianic implications.

It is therefore altogether natural to suppose that when Paul mentions unholy and profane persons, he is thinking of those who ridicule the very idea that there is only one true God, and of those who deny that this God is the Spirit of infinite perfection, that his name, or the name of Christ, should be reverenced, and that his day should be observed. Those who are unholy and profane flout the four commandments of the first table of the law. Let no one say that Paul excluded himself (see 1 Tim 1:13, also Acts 26:11), or any other sinner.

Secondly, this law has been laid down "for murderers of fathers and murderers of mothers."

The sin here indicated is a flagrant violation of the next commandment of the Decalogue, "Honor your father and your mother, that your days may be long in the land which the Lord your God gives you" (Exod. 20:12). Moreover, the law specifically stated, "And he who strikes his father or his mother shall surely be put to death" (Exod. 21:15). Now if even the striking of one's father or one's mother incurred the death-penalty, how much more the smiting (striking with a destructive blow, murdering)! Yet the greater sin, in each instance, includes the lesser. Any failure to honor one's parents is here condemned. No sinner escapes.

Thirdly, this law was intended"for those who kill their fellows.

Literally, the original has here "for men-slayers." However, in English this term is rather ambiguous, and could be taken to refer exclusively to those who kill unintentionally though unlawfully (those guilty of "man-slaughter"). The original, however, refers to any one who wrongfully takes the life of another. It has reference to any and all homicides.

The commandment violated is the sixth, "You shall not kill" (Exod. 20:13). See Christ's interpretation, Matt. 5:2126. How it must have hurt Paul to write this. It brought back to his mind memories of the past, Paul's own past (Acts 9:1, 4, 5; 22:4, 7; 26:10).

Fourthly, this law was established "for immoral persons, sodomites."

This clearly refers to those who transgress the seventh commandment, "You shall not commit adultery" (Exod. 20:14).

Note that here also (just as in the phrases "for impious and sinful," "for unholy and profane") the negative description (immoral) precedes the positive (sodomites). The violation indicated is, first, very inclusive "fornication" or immorality; secondly, very flagrant, "sodomy." With respect to the first term (fornication), it is not true that this is always strictly confined to illicit sexual intercourse between unmarried persons. As is true with respect to our own word fornication, so also with respect to the Greek word, the sense, though restricted at first, gradually acquires a more inclusive meaning, so that in the present passage it is simply sexual immorality in whatever form it may occur. That it may even include adultery (illicit sexual intercourse between persons at least one of whom is married) is clear from Matt. 5:32; 19:9. In Eph. 5:5 the fornicator or immoral person is mentioned in one breath with the impure or unclean. Cf. also Heb. 13:4. According to Matt. 5:27, 28 every unclean thought is a form of adultery. What sinner is not guilty? A most gruesome instance of immorality is described by Paul in 1 Cor. 5:1. The heathen world was full of such vices, but the case mentioned in Corinthians is described as one "not found even among pagans."

Immediately after "immoral persons" Paul mentions "sodomites." The word employed in the original is composed of two parts: male and bed (particularly, marriage-bed). The reference is, therefore, directly to male homosexuals, in other words to sodomites (cf. Gen. 19:5), "abusers of themselves with men" (Rom. 1:27; 1 Cor. 6:9); indirectly, the reference is to all homosexuals, male and female.

Fifthly, the law was instituted "for kidnapers."

In the New Testament the word (andrapodistes) occurs only here. Its origin is rather uncertain, though in view of its component elements some derive it from the verbal idea "to catch a man by the foot." But whatever be its origin, it clearly refers primarily to "slave-dealers" (the word andrapodon means slave) and then, by extension, to all "men-stealers" or "kidnapers." The apostle has in mind a gross violation of the eighth commandment, "You shall not steal" (Exod. 20:15; on stealing men see Exod. 21:16; Deut. 24:7). Certainly also those who enter into the homes of Christians, dragging out those who are of "The Way," whether they be men or women, are included, in spite of the fact they may carry with them letters from the high-priest (cf. Acts 9:1, 2)! Yes, men-stealers of every hue or color are meant. Paul is included, and by a legitimate extension of the idea so is every one who has ever infringed on the rights or liberties of his fellowmen. What sinner goes free?

Sixthly, this law was made "for liars, false swearers."

The apostle certainly has in mind the ninth commandment, "You shall not bear false witness against your neighbor" (Exod. 20:16). As Paul sees it, however, not only are the Cretans liars (Titus 1:12) but by nature every man is a liar (Rom. 3:4). The liar, according to the scriptural usage of the term, is not only the person who actually tells an untruth, but also he whose actions and attitudes are out of harmony with his confession (1 John 2:4; 4:20). The arch-liar of all is the devil (see John 8:44, 55). His most ardent disciple, antichrist, naturally is also a liar (1 John 2:22; 2 Thess. 2:9, 10).

"False swearers" are those who are guilty of solemnly (by my name, Lev. 19:2) asserting that which is false, with the intention of hurting their neighbor; or those who, while making a solemn vow, do not intend to keep it. This is a most shocking form of the sin against the ninth commandment, just like kidnaping is a most shameful manifestation of the sin against the eighth, and sodomy a gross example of sin against the seventh commandment. Of course, as in the case of the preceding violations against the moral law, so here: the sin mentioned includes the sins which lead to it and all kindred sins. The selfish design of the Pharisees to restrict the meaning of the evil so that only those would be accounted guilty of perjury who failed to keep that promise in connection with which the name of God had been literally taken upon the lips, was exposed by the Lord (Matt. 5:33-37).

If we bear in mind that the sin of swearing falsely was sometimes committed with a view to obtaining possession of the neighbor's property, it becomes clear that the theory is not too far-fetched that in making mention of this particular violation of the moral law Paul is thinking not only of sin against the ninth but also of sin against the tenth commandment, "You shall not covet your neighbor's house . . . or anything that is your neighbor's (Exod. 20:17). False swearing often (perhaps we can even say always) has as its root covetousness.

Having now given both a general and a more detailed description of those people for whom the law was intended, the apostle adds "and for whatever else is contrary to the sound doctrine." No sinner and no sin can escape, least of all the errorists at Ephesus, as God saw them! The only one for whom the law was not laid down was the righteous person, the errorist as he sees himself! See on 1 Tim 1:9a. For the rest, the law condemns each and all, causing its sentence of condemnation to be felt! It is laid down (keitai) for whatever is laid against (antikeitai) the sound doctrine. This doctrine touches both theory and practice. Hence, every sin is a sin against sound doctrine. And this doctrine is called sound (hugainouse, whence we have our word "hygienic") because it promotes spiritual health. See also 2 Tim. 4:3; Titus 1:9; 2:1; then Titus 1:13; lastly 1 Tim. 6:3; 2 Tim. 1:13.

for a lawless and rebellious people. The Law of Moses had at least three uses. Constructively, it served as a compass to guide the covenant community into righteous practices that maintained a loving fidelity to God and to neighbors. For "lawbreakers and rebels," the Law was a search light that exposed their wrong-doing, and a fence to restrain the damage their misdeeds caused in the community (cf. Gal 3:19; Rom 4:15). Because misreadings of the Law were the root of the problem in Ephesus, Paul needed to communicate that while the Law remained relevant, it needed to be used as a light and fence to correct those who were disrupting the church. Paul also corrected misreadings with proper readings of the Law about marriage, sexuality, the treatment of widows, and community leadership.

Mounce states:

Paul's teaching, which recognizes the limitations of the law and produces spiritual health, is in conformity with the gospel. The message of the opponents does not recognize the limitations and is not consistent with the gospel.

Guthrie adds:

This verse sums up the section from 1 Tim 1:8 onwards. Paul has not been speaking about the law according to his own opinion but about what conforms to the glorious gospel.

The good news of what God has done in Christ is the standard by which doctrine as well as one's understanding of the law is judged to be sound. True doctrine will conform to the gospel (see below), to the "whole counsel of God" (Acts 20:27).

faithful instruction. "Healthy teaching" is an alternate translation of "sound doctrine" (Gk. hugiainousē didaskalia) that brings out the strong connection Paul made between teaching and social practice. The glorious gospel not only narrates the good news about Jesus Christ it also reconciles people to God and to each other in righteousness, that is, in right relationship.

In 1 Timothy 1:12-20, Paul encourages Timothy to resist this false teaching as he ministers in Ephesus. He introduces Timothy's covenant responsibility by recalling his own experience of God's mercy and based his exhortation on personal experience.

Paul's experience of the gospel of God's grace. "As an example" (1:16) to Timothy and the Ephesian church, Paul narrated his own transformative experience of God's mercy in Christ (cf. 1 Cor 15:9-11; Gal 1:13-16; Eph 3:7-9; Phil 3:4b-11). His testimony is rooted deeply in God's own testimony or "trustworthy saying" that "Christ came into the world to save sinners" (v15). Because gifts were only given to the worthy or those capable of some form of repayment in the Roman patronage system, Paul's description of himself as "the worst of sinners" (v16) in receipt of "the grace of our Lord" (v14) was jarring, counter-cultural and note-worthy.

his service. A common short-hand summary of his commission, Paul used this term (Gk. diakonia) to highlight that his message and authority were not self-generated. Nor was Paul some sort of secondary emissary of the other apostles. Rather, Paul's message and authority came directly from Christ to authorize him as an emissary alongside the other apostles

Paul makes a definitive statement that he was a depraved sinner (see "Saul: Total Depravity - Acts 9:1-2" below) and that his salvation was by grace alone and not by works. See "Faith and Works: Do I Have to Do Good Works to Be Saved?" and "Justification and Merit: Why Does God Count Me as Righteous?" below.

As to his total depravity, as an example he mentions his pre-conversion opposition to the Church and to Christ himself (Acts 8:3; 9:1-5; 22:4-5; 26:9-11; Gal 1:13; Phil. 3:6). Paul's view was not that his ignorance and unbelief were the grounds of God's mercy. Rather, he understood that God granted him what he needed, not what he deserved (cf. Acts 3:17-20). See WCF 15.5; BC 7. Hendriksen states:

Paul acknowledges his gratitude to Christ for three closely related benefits: a. for having imparted strength to him (he calls Christ his Enabler or Qualifier), b. for having judged him to be trustworthy or reliable, and c. for having "appointed" - this combines destination and duty (cf. N.T.C. on 1 Thess. 5:9) - him to the "ministry" (of the apostleship), a service rendered to the Lord in the spirit of love and personal devotion (for that is the meaning of the word diakonia; see Eph. 4:12; Col. 4:17; Heb. 1:14; on 1 Thess. 3:2. For the technical sense see on 1 Tim. 3:10). Of course, these three ideas blend into one. It may be paraphrased as follows, "I thank him, Christ Jesus our Lord, my Strength-Imparter (cf. 2 Cor. 12:9; Phil. 4:13; 2 Tim. 4:17), who in his sovereign mercy considered me trustworthy - looking not at what I was in myself but at what his grace was doing within me (cf. 1 Cor. 4:7; Eph. 2:8), and accordingly for his own purpose appointed me to the ministry of the apostolic office." The enabling, the favorable judging, and the appointing were simultaneous. They all occurred when Paul was converted on the way to Damascus. See his own vivid account in Acts 9:15, 16; 22:1-21; 26:16-18; cf. Acts 13:1-4; 1 Thess. 2:4.

a blasphemer and a persecutor and a violent man. Along with Luke (cf. Acts 9:1-19; 22:3-16; 26:9-20), Paul narrated the story of his encounter with Christ (see note 1:12-17) as a demonstration of the gospel's transformative power. Paul's pre-conversion persecution of the church was rooted in his readings and practice of the Law. His experience of mercy and forgiveness apart from the Law revolutionized his readings and practice. I received mercy. Paul's testimony about the grace and mercy he received from Christ stood in stark contrast to the false teachers of Ephesus, who placed confidence for character reform in law-keeping, which conformed to their readings and practice (see also 1:16).

This sentence is a classic Pauline summary of the gospel containing two of his signature phrases, the grace of our Lord and in Christ Jesus. Grace, gift or favor was a common term in the Roman economy which described a material exchange or a service provided to someone worthy of honor or someone who could repay. The scandal of Paul's gospel summary is that Christ's gift of salvation is given to the unworthy, the dishonorable, to those incapable of repay-ment. The classic Pauline prepositional phrase "in Christ" is rooted in Israel's Scriptures. Abraham and David, in particular, stand as covenant mediators for "the nations" in relation to Israel's God. It is only "in Abraham" (Gen 12:3), "in David" (Ps 72:11, 17) and "in Christ" (Rom 8:1, 38; 1 Cor 1:2; 15:58; 2 Cor 5:2, 17; 12:2; Gal 2:4; Eph 2:13; 4:32; Phil 1:1; 3:14, etc.) that the nations can experience covenantal intimacy with Israel's God.

"Here is a trustworthy saying that deserves full acceptance" is found only in Paul's epistles (1 Tim. 3:1; 4:9; 2 Tim. 2:11; Tit. 3:8). Paul reflects not only on his pre-Christian persecution of the church (1 Tim. 1:12; Acts 8:1; 9:1-2, 13; 1 Cor. 15:9-10), but also on the depth of sin and opposition to God from which God had saved him (Rom 1-3). Towner says:

God's redemptive plan is imperturbable, as Paul's own experience taught him. It reaches to the depths of depravity. Paul's self-confessed pre-Christian history (as the worst of sinners [1 Tim 1:15], a reference to his persecution of Christians [1 Tim 1:13; compare Gal 1:13]) made him, ironically, the perfect illustration of the effectiveness of the gospel, the boundless grace of God and the inexhaustible patience of Christ (1 Tim. 1:16).

Paul is a chief example of pure grace. Although he offered his pre-Christian sin as evidence of his sinfulness (1 Tim. 1:13), Paul viewed himself as the "worst" of sinners (present tense). Hughes says:

Also note that he did not say, "I was the worst of sinners, but "I am the worst." This is the thinking of a healthy regenerate heart. Saving Christianity never endows one with a sense of superiority. Paul knew what he had been and what he was and what he continued to be in himself. This knowledge even increased with the years, as he understood his heart even better than at first.

He understood that without the restraint and influence of the Holy Spirit, he would have returned to the same kinds of horrible, sinful atrocities that he had performed before his conversion. This self-evaluation stood in contrast with the legalistic teachers who apparently claimed the ability to attain righteousness through their own obedience to the law. See WCF 15.5; BC 21.

Do you ever think of yourself in the same shoes as Paul? That is, do think yourself as the worst, the chief, the prime example of all sinners, saved by the greatest of grace? If not, then you have not understood the true gospel, nor have you yet encountered the holiness of God. When the holiness of God is beheld (Isa 6:1-7), all true Christians see themselves as sinners - the chief of sinners!

Christ came into the world. He came from outside of it to inside of it. He came from outside of time into time (cf. Gal. 4:4). This implies his divinity. Jesus is the eternal Word of God who was with God, and is God from eternity, who created the world (John 1:1, 10). Jesus is God; very God of very God! What was Christ's task? He came "to save sinners." He did not come to merely make salvation a possibility, or to allow sinners to save themselves. No, he came to save even the chief of sinners - fully, actually, finally, and eternally - by his life, death, resurrection, ascension, and continual intercession. This is the believer's Savior, and this is his gospel (cf. Gal. 2:20).

According to Hendriksen:

In Paul's writings the expression to save means:

NEGATIVELY	POSITIVELY
to rescue men from sin's:	to bring men into the state of:
a. guilt (Eph. 1:7; Col. 1:14)	a. righteousness (Rom. 3:21-26; 5:1)
b. slavery (Rom. 7:24, 25; Gal. 5:1) and	b. freedom (Gal. 5:1; 2 Cor. 3:17) and
c. punishment:	c. blessedness:
(1) alienation from God (Eph. 2:12)	(1) fellowship with God (Eph. 2:13)
(2) the wrath of God (Eph. 2:3)	(2) the love of God "shed abroad" in the heart (Rom. 5:5)
(3) everlasting death (Eph. 2:5, 6)	(3) everlasting life (Eph. 2:1, 5; Col. 3:1-4).

Note that over against each evil stands a corresponding blessing. To be saved, then, means to be emancipated from the greatest evil, and to be placed in possession of the greatest good. The state of salvation is opposed to the state of "perishing" or being "lost." Cf. Luke 19:10; John 3:16.

This message is reliable and worthy of all acceptance. In the New Testament, this expression is found exclusively and repeatedly in the Pastoral Epistles to underscore the reliability of known, traditional sayings used in Christian worship (1 Tim 1:15; 2 Tim 2:11-13) or training (1 Tim 3:1; 4:8-9; Titus 3:4-8)

Although Paul knew he was bad to the bone and beyond (1 Tim. 1:15; see "Saul: Total Depravity - Acts 9:1-2" below), he also understood the gospel: God loved his elect before time (Eph. 1:3-6) and lavished upon them his love (1 John 3:1) and unlimited patience (1 Tim. 1:16). Christ displayed unending patience toward Paul, both before and after his conversion. As Hendriksen says, "Chief of sinners, nevertheless the recipient of infinite mercy!" Regarding Paul and grace, Lange remarks:

Paul stood before the eyes of all after generations as a witness to the power, the grace, and the love of the Lord; so that the greatest of sinners need not doubt that grace. The Lord had dealt with him as the king of a rebellious city, who should release at once the rebel chief; as a physician in an hospital, who should cure the most diseased; so that thenceforth no guilty, no sick, need doubt the possibility of grace and salvation.

Stott adds:

Paul describes how he received mercy. Humanly speaking, there was no hope for someone as malicious and aggressive as he was. But he was not beyond the mercy of God. Twice he uses the same verb I was shown mercy (1 Tim 1:13b, 16a), or literally, as Thomas Goodwin the Puritan put it, 'I was bemercied'. To 'mercy' Paul now adds 'grace', having already bracketed them in his opening greeting (1 Tim 1:2). The grace of our Lord was poured out on me abundantly, along with the faith and love that are in Christ Jesus (1 Tim 1:14). That is, grace 'overflowed (NRSV) like a river in spate, which cannot be contained, but bursts its banks and carries everything before it, sweeping irresistibly on. What the river of grace brought with it, however, was not devastation but blessing, in particular the 'faith' and the 'love' to which Paul has already assigned a primacy (1 TIm. 1:4, 5). The Nile overflows; the crops abound. Grace overflowed, and faith and love sprang up. Grace flooded with faith a heart previously filled with unbelief, and flooded with love a heart previously polluted with hatred. It was, in the words of Bunyan's autobiography, Grace Abounding to the Chief of Sinners; he borrowed both parts of his title from 1 Tim 1:14, 15.

The legalistic pattern brought by the false teachers was contrary to the reality of the Christian life, which depends on the patience of Christ. God grants to all who believe in Christ "eternal life"; not just everlasting life, but life in all its fullness (1 Tim. 4:8; 6:12, 19; John 10:10, 28; 2 Tim. 1:1,10; Tit. 1:2; 3:7).

I was given mercy. See 1:13 above. Because of his violent persecution of the church before he submitted to Jesus as both Christ and Lord, Paul viewed himself as the worst of sinners (cf. 1 Cor 15:9; Gal 1:13, 23). His vision of the risen Christ illuminated his actions against Christ's followers as against Christ himself. The lavish extremity of Christ's mercy towards Paul demonstrated God's grace and love asan example for all who believe.

Stating his understanding of the greatness of his salvation (Heb. 2:3) leads Paul into an outburst of praise. See WCF 2.1. And the believer's salvation is secured by him who is "eternal, immortal, invisible, the only God." Hughes describes this in detail:

We see here four awesome designations for our great God.

• Paul calls him "the King eternal." God is the King of all ages who sovereignly governs every age before creation, after creation, to the final age, and on into eternity.
• Paul calls him "immortal." God is not subject to decay or destruction and therefore is in the most absolute sense "imperishable, incorruptible, and immortal."
• Paul calls him "invisible," for the physical eye cannot see him. He "lives in unapproachable light, whom no one has seen or can see" (1 Timothy 6:16). All that human beings have ever seen of him (other than the incarnate Christ) are glimpses of his glory.
• Paul calls him "the only God" (mono theo). He alone is what he is. Of himself God has declared, "I am the LORD, and there is no other" (Isaiah 45:18).

To this awesome God of grace, Paul invokes "honor and glory for ever and ever. Amen."

Thus we, his saints, along with Paul, realize that nothing, absolutely nothing "shall separate us from the love of Christ" ... neither "tribulation, or distress, or persecution, or famine, or nakedness, or danger, or sword" because of him "in all these things we are more than conquerors through him who loved us" and are "sure that neither death nor life, nor angels nor rulers, nor things present nor things to come, nor powers, nor height nor depth, nor anything else in all creation, will be able to separate us from the love of God in Christ Jesus our Lord" (Rom. 8:35-39).

Now, to the King of the ages . . . be honor and glory for ever and ever. Amen. Paul's confession of sin and testimony about Christ's mercy led him to praise and worship God. This doxology echoes Paul's opening benediction that "grace, mercy and peace come from God the Father and from Christ Jesus our Lord" (see note on 1:1-2).

Paul applied his own experience of God's grace to the issue of legalism in the Church (1 Tim. 1:3-7). He called Timothy to faithfulness to Christ - to fight the good fight - especially in contrast to two members (perhaps leaders) of the Church in Ephesus who had "shipwrecked their faith" (1 Tim. 1:19). See HC 32.

Because of whose we are (God's), what we are (Christians saved by grace alone), what we have been saved unto (eternal life, which has already begun and is secure in Christ), and the work we have been saved unto (God's ministry through us), that Christians should "fight the good fight."

Timothy's commission to confront false teachers with this gospel. Having described the merciful circumstances of his own commission from Christ, Paul passed on "this charge" to Timothy on the basis of "prophecies once made" about him, and Paul's own assessment that Timothy's fidelity was like that of a "genuine child." Timothy would need to draw strength from these confirmations of his calling which meant confronting false teachers at Ephesus.

Paul addresses Timothy with a term of endearment, "my son." Timothy has received a specific charge or mandate (in military terms, a sense of urgent obligation), which was in keeping with the prophecies once made about him. These prophecies may refer to an event (cf. 1 Tim. 4:14; 2 Tim. 1:6 ff) in which a group of elders along with Paul had laid hands on Timothy, perhaps when Timothy was set apart for ministry. At that time, Timothy received a spiritual gift along with a word of prophecy anointing him to service (cf. Acts 13:1-3). Calvin comments:

Paul further encourages Timothy by reminding him about the witness God's Spirit had given to him. Timothy derived much comfort from knowing that his ministry had God's approval. He had been called by God's revelation, before people had cast their vote in his favor. It is as if Paul was saying, "While it may be terrible not to live up to human expectations, how much more shameful is it to ignore God's wishes!"

This was to aid Timothy in "warfare." Hendriksen says:

Timothy is viewed as a high-ranking officer, who has received his "orders," and is "warring his warfare" (see 1 Cor. 9:7; 2 Cor. 4:4; 9:3) against evil, particularly against the Satan-inspired perversion of doctrine described in 1 Tim 3-12 (cf. 1 Tim. 6:12; 2 Tim. 4:7; Eph. 6:10-20). In this warfare reflection on former prophecies can be very encouraging (see John 16:1, 4). They remind one of the fact that nothing happens contrary to the eternal decree of God, that one is engaged in a battle which is not merely his own but the Lord's, and that courage and faithfulness will certainly be rewarded.

the prophecies previously made about you. This is the first of three references Paul makes to Timothy's commissioning (or ordination) by a "council of elders" (4:14), who recognized Timothy's gifts and calling to Christ's service (see note on 1:12). This event included "prophecies" and the "laying on of hands" (cf. Acts 13:1-13; 1 Tim 4:14) by council members about the purpose(s) of Timothy's ministry. From 2 Timothy 1:6-7, we learn that Paul participated personally

For the Scripture says. Paul's instructions to Timothy continue to model readings from the Law based on Jesus' teaching. Here, Paul cites both Moses (Deuteronomy 25:4) and Jesus (as recorded in Luke 10:7), identifying both as 'Scripture.' As he also wrote in 1 Cor 9:9, Paul believed that someone who devotes the majority of their time to teaching the Scriptures should be supported financially by the church

Regarding 1 Timothy 1:19, Hendriksen says:

A Christian must be both a good soldier and a good sailor. Now a good sailor does not thrust away or discard the rudder of the ship. The good conscience - one that obeys the dictates of the Word as applied to the heart by the Holy Spirit - is the rudder, guiding the believer's vessel into the safe harbor of everlasting rest.

In 1 Timothy 1:20, two individuals are named: "Hymenaeus and Alexander." Hymenaeus is later mentioned as one who had "wandered away from the truth" (2 Tim. 2:17-18). Guthrie says, "Hymenaeus . . . and Alexander are cited as examples of shipwrecked believers." As to the identity of Alexander, the details available are insufficient to conclude that he is the same Alexander mentioned in Acts 19:33 and 2 Timothy 4:14. Whoever these men were, their case called for strong disciplinary action, figuratively described as "handed over to Satan," which is probably a reference to placing these two individuals outside the fellowship of the church (Matt. 18:15-18) and, hence, back into the world - the domain of Satan (John 12:31; 14:30; 16:11; 2 Cor. 4:4; Eph 2:2). See "Church Discipline and Excommunication: Who Should Be Disciplined? below. Paul used a similar expression in 1 Corinthians 5:5 (cf. Matt. 18:17).

The purpose of their excommunication was disciplinary. It's important to note the redemptive nature of church discipline in this case - "to be taught not to blaspheme." Paul hoped the two would recognize their errors and repent, which is a gift of true grace (2 Tim. 2:25-26; Tit. 3:10). Also, "blaspheme" implies speech and may point to false teaching. See WCF 30.3; BC 32.

holding faith and a good conscience. Specifically, Timothy was called to contend for the gospel against the confidence the false teachers at Ephesus were placing in law-keeping to cultivate "a good conscience." As Paul made clear by narrating his own experience of God's mercy, personal and communal transformation come by faith in Christ alone.

Hymenaeus and Alexander. Paul named two leaders in the community who had "ship-wrecked their faith." In 2 Tim 2:17-18, Hymenaeus (likely the same person) is described as one who "wandered away from the truth." Though we cannot be certain, Alexander, described as Paul's opponent in 2 Tim 4:14 and Acts 19:33-34, may be the man named here. I gave over to Satan. As in 1 Cor 5:5, where Paul used similar language, this probably refers to a form of excommunication or formal disciplinary action against these two men, that placed them outside the church in the domain of Satan (cf. Jn 12:31; 14:30; 16:11; 2 Cor 4:4; Eph 2:2; Tit 3:10-11). taught not to blaspheme. This disciplinary action against Hymenaeus and Alexander had a corrective purpose to restore them to "healthy teaching" and practices rooted in the gospel (cf. Gal 6:1; 2 Tim 2:24-26).