corner graphic

Bible Commentaries

Vincent's Word Studies

1 Timothy Overview

 

 


The Pastoral Epistles

Introduction

The two Epistles to Timothy and the Epistle to Titus are called the Pastoral Epistles because they consist chiefly of instructions and admonitions to pastors. Their authenticity is disputed. The current of modern criticism is against their Pauline authorship, but it is supported by high authorities.

I. The three letters are closely allied, and stand or fall together. While each has its peculiarities, they contain considerable common matter; and their general situation and aim are substantially the same. They oppose heresies, seek to establish a definite church polity, and urge adherence to traditional doctrine. Their style is similar. Certain expressions which occur nowhere else in the N.T. are found in all three. Whole sentences are in almost verbal agreement.

II. They exhibit certain resemblances to the Pauline Epistles, notably to Romans. If the writer is not Paul, he is manifestly familiar with Paul's teachings.

III. As to the external evidence for these letters, there seems good reason to believe in the existence, at an early date, either of the letters in their present form, or of documents on which the letters were constructed later. Not much reliance can be placed on the traces which occur in Clement's Epistle to the Corinthians: perhaps a little more on those in the Ignatian Epistles, although many of these are merely analogies of expression which may have been accidental, or echoes of current religious phraseology. An unmistakable reminiscence appears in Polycarp's Epistle to the Philippians (Philip. iv.; 1 Timothy 6:7, 1 Timothy 6:10). There are no echoes in Hermas or in the Didache, and none of importance in Barnabas. Justin Martyr has a few characteristic expressions of the Pastorals, which may be only accidental coincidences. The Muratorian Canon enrolls the three as canonical, and expressly justifies their reception because, being private letters, their canonicity might be called in question. They are found in the Peshitto and Old Latin Versions, and are accepted and cited as Pauline by Clement of Alexandria, Irenaeus, and Tertullian. At the end of the second century they have a recognized place among the Pauline Epistles. It is, however, significant, that they were excluded from Marcion's Canon. It cannot be positively affirmed that Marcion knew them, although his acquaintance with them would seem to be implied by Tertullian (Adv. Marc. v., 21), who says that it was strange how Marcion could have accepted a letter written to one man (Philemon), and have rejected the two to Timothy and the one to Titus.

On the assumption that they were known to Marcion, it is said that he cut and carved the New Testament Scriptures to suit his own views, and that there was therefore nothing strange in his rejecting the Pastorals. But besides rejecting the whole of the New Testament with the exception of ten Epistles of Paul and the Gospel of Luke which he mutilated, Marcion applied the knife to the Pauline Epistles. In view of his reverence for Paul as the only true apostle and representative of Jesus Christ, and for Paul's Epistles as containing the only true gospel, - it is strange that, knowing the Pastorals as Pauline, he should have rejected them en masse, instead of merely altering or abridging them to suit himself. Tatian also rejected the two letters to Timothy, but accepted Titus, because it contained nothing adverse to ascetic practices.

IV. Chronological Considerations. - Was Paul released from his first imprisonment and imprisoned a second time? Can a place be found for the three letters in his recorded history?

It is claimed that Paul was released from prison after his first confinement at Rome (Acts 28:16-31) and that he then continued his missionary labors in Ephesus, Epirus, Macedonia, and Crete: that he was again arrested and imprisoned, and that the second imprisonment was terminated by his execution.

Of this there is no sound historical evidence whatever. The narrative of Acts leaves him in his first confinement. The ordinary course of argument forms a circle. The hypothesis of a second imprisonment can be sustained only by the Pastoral Epistles if they are authentic. Their authenticity can be shown only on that hypothesis. The only evidence adduced for the second imprisonment outside of these letters is, 1. A passage in Clement's Epistle to the Corinthians (v.), as follows: (Paul) “having preached the gospel both in the East; and in the West, received the glorious renown due to his faith, having taught righteousness to the whole world, and having come to the boundary of the West, and having born his testimony before the rulers. Thus he departed out of the world.” The main point is having come to the boundary of the West ( ἐπὶ τὸ τέρμα τῆς δύσεως ἐλθών ). It is claimed that this expression refers to Spain, and that Clement thus records the fulfillment of the apostle's intention stated in Romans 15:24, Romans 15:28. Others, however, hold that it refers to Rome. Apart from this difference, which it is impossible to settle, the whole statement is general, vague, and rhetorical, and has no historical value.

2. The Muratorian Canon (about 170 a.d.) contains a passage apparently to the effect that Luke relates to Theophilus the things which fell under his own notice, and evidently declares as apart from his purpose the martyrdom of Peter; but the departure of Paul setting out from the city to Spain - here the text is mutilated. How the writer intended to complete it can only be guessed. The passage is worthless as evidence. 3. After these two we have nothing until the fourth century, when Eusebius says that there was a tradition that the apostle again set forth to the ministry of his preaching, and having a second time entered the same city of Rome, was perfected by his martyrdom before Nero. That in this imprisonment he wrote the second Epistle to Timothy (H. E. ii. 22,25). This is all. Jerome merely echoes Eusebius. Eusebius does not mention Spain. History does not show any apostolic foundation in Spain. Neither Irenaeus, Caius, Tertullian, nor Origen allude to such a mission; and although Irenaeus, Tertullian, and Origen mention the death of Paul at Rome, they say nothing of any journeys subsequent to his first arrival there. Dr. McGiffert remarks (note on Euseb. ii. 22,2): “The strongest argument against the visit to Spain is the absence of any trace of it in Spain itself. If any church there could have claimed the great apostle to the Gentiles as its founder, it seems that it must have asserted its claim, and the tradition have been preserved at least in that church.”

It is also said that 2 Timothy 4:16, 2 Timothy 4:17implies that Paul had had a hearing and been discharged and permitted to preach. The assumption is entirely gratuitous. The words may have referred to a hearing during his first captivity, when he was delivered from imminent danger, but not set at liberty.

In short, historical evidence for a release from the first Roman imprisonment, a subsequent missionary activity, and a second imprisonment, is utterly wanting. It seems hardly conceivable that no traces of a renewed ministry should be left in history except these instructions to friends and pupils. If Paul was liberated from his first imprisonment, it is singular that Luke should not have recorded the fact as a triumph of the gospel.

Such being the case, it remains only to find a place for these letters in the recorded ministry of Paul. This cannot be done. There is no period of that ministry, from Damascus to Rome, into which they will fit.

V. Style and Diction. - The most formidable objection to the Pauline authorship of these Epistles is furnished by their style and diction, which present a marked contrast with those of the Pauline letters. That the three Pastorals contain 148 words which appear nowhere else in the N.T., and 304 which are not found in Paul's writings, are facts which, by themselves, must not be allowed too much weight. Hapaxlegomena are numerous in the several Pauline Epistles. Second Corinthians has about 90: Romans and 1st Corinthians each over a hundred: Ephesians about 40. That words like πολυτελής and οἰκουργός appear in the Pastorals and not in Paul, counts for no more than that ὁλοτελής occurs only in 1st Thessalonians, and ἀβαρής only in 2nd Corinthians.

But we are not dealing with individual letters, but with a group of letters, nearly, if not absolutely, contemporaneous. It is a striking fact that this entire group, closely allied in all its three parts in vocabulary and style, presents, as a whole, such marked variations in these particulars from the accepted Pauline letters. In their lexical peculiarities the Pastorals form a class by themselves.

One who is thoroughly steeped in Paul's style and diction, and who reads these letters out of hand, is at once impressed with the difference from Paul. He feels that he is in a strange rhetorical atmosphere. The sentences have not the familiar ring. The thought does not move with the accustomed rush. The verve of Corinthians and Galatians, the dialectic vigor of Romans, the majesty of Ephesians, are alike wanting. The association of ideas is loose, the construction is not compact, the movement is slow and clumsy. We miss the heavily freighted utterance of Paul. The thought is scanty in proportion to the volume of words; as Holtzmann says: “We miss those characteristic dam-breakings which the construction suffers from the swelling fullness of thought.” We miss the frequent anacolutha, the unclosed parentheses, the sudden digressions, the obscurities arising from the headlong impetus of thought and feeling. The construction of sentences is simple, the thoughts are expressed without adornment, everything is according to rule and easy, but without momentum or color. Strange compounds, great, swelling words, start up in our path: a Pauline thought appears in a strange dress: the voice is the voice of Jacob, but the hands are the hands of Esau.

Some of these unusual compounds, for which the writer has a great liking, occur neither in the N.T. nor in profane Greek, High-sounding words are chosen where simpler terms would have suited the thought better. It seems, occasionally, as if the diction were being employed to pad the meagerness of the thought. A class of words which occur principally in the Pauline letters is wanting, as ἄδικος, ἀκαθαρσία, ἀκροβυστία, γνωρίζειν, διαθήκη, περιπατεῖν, χρηστός and σῶμα which, in the four principal Epistles alone, Paul uses 71 times. We miss entire families of Pauline words, as ἐλεύθερος, φρονεῖν, πράσσειν, τέλειος, ἐνεργεῖν, περισσός , and the numerous derivatives and compounds growing out of these.

Again, we look in vain for certain expressions most characteristic of the Pauline vocabulary, as ὑπακούειν, ἀποκαλύπτειν, καυχᾶσθαι , and their kindred words. Still more significant is the fact that the article, which is freely used by Paul before entire sentences, adverbs, interjections, numerals, and especially before the infinitive, is never so employed in the Pastorals. Τοῦ with the infinitive disappears. The prepositions, the conjunctions, and especially the particles are quite differently handled. The lively γὰρ appears oftener in the Epistle to the Galatians than in all the three Pastorals. The movement of the Pauline thought indicated by ἄρα and ἄρα οὖν is lacking. Ἁντὶ, ἄχρι, διὸ, διότι, ἔμπροσθεν, ἕνεκεν, ἔπειτα, ἔτι, ἴδε, ἰδού, μήπως, ὅπως, οὐκέτι, οὔπω, οὔτε, πάλιν, παρὰ with the accusative, ἐν παντί, πότε, ποῦ, σύν, ὥσπερ - none of these appear. There is no trace of Paul's habit of applying different prepositions to the same object in one sentence, for the purpose of sharper definition. See Galatians 1:1; Romans 1:17.

Similar ideas are differently expressed by Paul and in the Pastorals. Comp. 1 Timothy 1:3and 2 Corinthians 11:4; Galatians 1:6: 1 Timothy 1:9and Galatians 5:18, Galatians 5:23; Romans 6:14: 1 Timothy 1:12and 1 Corinthians 12:28. For Paul's ἐπιθυμεῖν or ἐπιποθεῖν the Pastorals give ὀρέγεσθαι . For Paul's ἄμωμος , ἄμεμπτος , ἀνέγκλητος , the Pastorals give ἀνεπίλημπτος (not elsewhere in N.T.). For ἐπιπλήσσω (not elsewhere in N.T.) Paul has ἐλέγχω though ἐλέγχω occurs several times in the Pastorals. For ἀμοιβή (not elsewhere in N.T.) Paul has ἀντιμισθία or ἀνταπόδοσις . Paul uses ὄντως only adverbially (see 1 Corinthians 14:25; Galatians 3:21): in the Pastorals it is prefixed to a substantive, and converted into an adjective by means of an article, and is used only in this way, a construction unknown to Paul (see 1 Timothy 5:3, 1 Timothy 5:5, 1 Timothy 5:16; 1 Timothy 6:19).

To these should be added expressions in all the three Epistles which indicate a peculiar mode of thought and of literary expression on the part of the writer. Such are εὐσεβῶς tolive godly; διώκειν δικαιοσύνην topursue righteousness; φυλάσσειν τὴν παραθήκην toguard the deposit; παρακολουθεῖν tofollow the teaching; τὸν καλὸν ἀγῶνα ἀγωνίζεσθαι tofight the good fight. Also designations like ἄνθρωποι κατεφθαρμένοι corruptmen; ἄνθρωπος θεοῦ manof God; constructions like διαβεβαιοῦσθαι περὶ τινος toaffirm concerning something; and the introduction of examples by ὧν ἐστίν ofwhom are.

Many more might be added to these, but these are amply sufficient to show the wide gulf which separates the vocabulary and style of these letters from those of Paul.

By way of explaining away these facts we are reminded that these are private letters; but even in his private letters a man does not so entirely abjure his literary peculiarities, and the letter to Philemon exhibits no lack of distinctive Pauline characteristics. It is further urged that Paul's style had developed, and that, in his advanced age, he had lost the vivacity once peculiar to him. One is tempted to smile at the suggestion of a development of style in the easy commonplaces of these Epistles over the nervous vigor of Romans, the racy incisiveness of Galatians and 2nd Corinthians, and the majestic richness of Ephesians. As to a decline on account of age, Paul, on this showing, must have aged very rapidly. He styles himself “the aged” in Philemon 1:9. Colossians was written at the same time with Philemon, and Philippians and Ephesians shortly before or after. The Pastorals (assuming Paul's authorship) cannot have been written more than three or four years later than these; but the Epistles of the Captivity certainly betray no lack of vigor, and exhibit no signs of senility; and the differences between these and the Pastorals are far greater than between the former and Paul's earliest letters, written ten years before. The production of an old man may indeed exhibit a lack of energy or a carelessness of style, but an old writer does not abandon his favorite words or his characteristic turns of expression. After following Paul for a dozen years through ten Epistles, all marked by the essential features of his style, one finds it hard to believe that he should suddenly become a writer of an entirely different type, ignoring his own characteristic and favorite modes of expression. Surely the themes treated in the Pastorals would have furnished abundant occasion for υἱὸς, θεοῦ, ἀπολύτρωσις, υἱοθεσία, δικαιοσύνη θεοῦ , and δικαιόω , which occurs only twice, and in one of these instances is applied to Christ.

VI. As to the character of the teaching, it is possible that the divergence of the teaching and of the Christian ideal of the Pastorals from those of the Pauline Epistles may have been somewhat exaggerated. On a fair construction, the Pastorals may be said to contain the essentials of the Pauline teaching, expressed or implied. More exaggerated, however, is the claim of Godet and Findlay, that the Pastorals represent an advanced and rounded expression of Pauline teaching, “bringing the doctrines of grace to a rounded fullness and chastened ripeness of expression that warrants us in seeing in them the authentic conclusion of the Pauline gospel of salvation in the mind which first conceived it” (Findlay).

No special pleading can get round the clear difference between the types of Christianity and of Christian teaching as set forth in the Pastorals and in the Pauline Epistles; between the modes of presenting the doctrine of salvation and the relative emphasis on its great factors.

The death and resurrection of Christ are matters of allusion rather than central truths. As regards resurrection, the Pastorals resemble the Epistle to the Hebrews. The vital union of the believer with Christ, which is the essence of Paul's Christian ideal, may possibly be implied, but is not emphasized, and certainly does not underlie the Pastoral teaching. The conception of Justification is not sharply defined. Δικαιοῦν occurs but twice, and in one of the cases is predicated of Christ (1 Timothy 3:16). The teaching is predominantly ethical. Its two key-notes are practical piety and sound doctrine. Ἑυσέβεια pietyor godliness plays the part which is born by πίστις faithin the Paulines. Πίστις does not occupy the commanding and central position which it does in Paul's teaching. Only in 1 Timothy 1:16; 2 Timothy 3:15, does faith clearly appear as the means of the subjective appropriation of salvation. In Titus 3:5, just where we should expect it, we do not find faith set sharply over against righteousness by works. Faith is emphasized as confiding acknowledgment of the truth, and sometimes as the virtue of fidelity. See 1 Timothy 5:12; Titus 2:10. It appears either as one of the cardinal virtues following in the train of εὐσέβεια , or as the acknowledgment of the teaching in which εὐσέβεια finds expression.

These Epistles deal much with the character and attributes of God, and exhibit them in terms which are mostly foreign to Paul, such as God our Savior. This, however, may have been partly due to the false representations of contemporary heresies. I cannot but feel that there is too much truth in the remark of Schenkel, that “the image of Christ presented in the Pastorals is indeed composed of Pauline formulas, but is lacking in the Pauline spirit and feeling, in the mystic inwardness, the religious depth and moral force, that live in the Christ of Paul.” Still, the Pauline conception appears in the emphasis upon the manhood of Christ (1 Timothy 2:5; 2 Timothy 2:8), and the clear implication of his preexistence (1 Timothy 1:15; 1 Timothy 3:16; 2 Timothy 1:10). In 1 Timothy 3:16the representation is nearer to that of John.

VII. The Writer's Allusions to Himself and His Companions. - Grave suspicions as to the Pauline authorship are awakened by the writer's mode of speaking of himself, and to intimate and trusted companions and disciples like Timothy and Titus. We know how near these two were to him, and how he confided in them (see Philemon 2:19-22). It is strange that in writing to them he should find it necessary to announce himself formally as an apostle of Jesus Christ (Comp. Philemon, δέσμιος prisoner), just as to the Galatians, who had impugned his apostolic authority, or to the Romans, to whom he was personally a stranger. Such an announcement is singularly out of place in a private letter, even though official. Equally strange is his assuring such friends that he is appointed of God to be a herald of the gospel; that he speaks the truth and does not lie; that he has served God from his fathers with a pure conscience. One might doubt his entire confidence in these trusted ministerial helpers and personal friends, when he feels it incumbent upon him to commend to them the most elementary and self-evident duties, as abstinence from youthful lusts. It is singular that he should exhort Timothy to let no man despise his youth, when Timothy had attended him for at least thirteen years, and must have been a mature man. And if Paul, before writing 1st Timothy and Titus, had recently been with them both (1 Timothy 1:3; Titus 1:5), and had given them their commissions by word of mouth, why does he do the same thing so soon after, especially when he is looking forward to a speedy reunion (1 Timothy 3:14; Titus 3:12)? Why does he picture the Cretans in such detail to Titus, who was in the midst of them, and who must have known their characteristics quite as well as himself?

VIII. The Heresies. - Before it can be decisively asserted that the heresies treated in these Epistles are later than Paul's time, it must be settled what these heresies were, and this, with our present knowledge, is impossible. There are almost as many different views as there are critics. In the Epistles themselves the statements regarding heresies are general and sweeping, and, taken together, do not point to any particular system. It would seem that the writer was assailing, not a particular form of heresy, but a tendency, of which he does not discuss the details. Indeed, the allusions to heresies appear intended principally to point the exhortations to hold fast sound teaching and the instructions concerning church polity, as safeguards against false teaching and immoral practice. The moral developments of the heresies, rather than their doctrinal errors, are treated. Their representatives are wicked men and impostors: they are deceiving and deceived: they are of corrupt mind, destitute of truth, with their consciences seared: they lead captive silly women, laden with sins, led away by divers lusts: they are greedy of gain. At the root of the moral errors there seem to be indicated Gnostic tendencies and Jewish corruptions, and traits akin to those which appear in the Colossian heresy. All of the writer's theology is anti-Gnostic. Individual features of Gnosticism can be recognized, but a consistent reference throughout to Gnosticism cannot be shown. In any case, it is noticeable how the treatment of heresies and false teachers differs from that of Paul. The treatment in the Pastorals is general, sweeping, vague, and mainly denunciatory. No vital differences between the forms of error and between their teachers are defined, but all are indiscriminately denounced as concerned with foolish and ignorant questioning, disputes about words, strifes about the law, fables, endless genealogies, and profane babblings. This is quite unlike the controversial method of Paul, who defines what he assails, demonstrates its unsoundness, and shows the bearing of the gospel upon it.

IX. Church Polity. - The church polity of the Pastorals is of a later date than Paul. Within the circle of the Pauline Epistles there is no trace of formally constituted church officers. The greeting to Bishops and Deacons in Philippians is unique, but it does not imply a polity differing substantially from that exhibited in 1st Corinthians and 1st Thessalonians. The greeting is to the church first, and the special mention of Bishops and Deacons by way of appendage is explained by the fact that the letter was cancel out by the pecuniary contribution of the Philippian church to Paul, of the collection and sending of which these functionaries would naturally have charge. The names Bishop and Deacon designate functions and not official titles. In the formal list, in Ephesians 4:11, of those whom God has set in the church, neither Bishops, Elders, nor Deacons occur; and yet that Epistle was written within a short time of the writing of the Philippian letter. The offices in the Pauline church were charismatic. The warrant of leadership was a divine, spiritual endowment. Paul recognizes certain functions as of divine institution; and those functions are assumed in virtue of a special, divine gift in prophecy, speaking with tongues, teaching, healing, or helping, as the case may be (see 1 Corinthians 12). There is no recognition of official distinctions, or of formal appointment to definite offices, in the Pauline Epistles. Apostles, prophets, teachers, powers, helps, healings, kinds of tongues, do not represent offices resting on the appointment of the church. The Pastorals recognize Bishops, Deacons, and Presbyters. The recognition of three distinct orders is not as sharp and clear as in the Ignatian Epistles (100-118 a.d.), but the polity is in advance of that of the Pauline churches as set forth in the Epistles of Paul. The Pastorals seem to mark a transition point between the earlier republican simplicity and the later monarchical tendency. If these letters are the work of Paul before his first imprisonment, their notes of church polity do not consist with those of his other letters written during that period. If they were composed by Paul a few years after his first imprisonment, the period is too early for the change in polity which they indicate.

In view of all these facts, it seems unlikely that these Epistles are the work of Paul. The writer was probably a Pauline Christian in the early part of the second century, who, in view of the doctrinal errors and moral looseness of his age, desired to emphasize the orthodox doctrine of the church, to advocate a definite ecclesiastical polity as a permanent safeguard against error, and to enforce practical rules of conduct. These counsels and warnings he issued in the name of Paul, whose letters he evidently knew, whose character he revered, and whose language he tried to imitate. To this he was, perhaps, moved by the fact that contemporary heretics, in some cases, laid claim to the authority of Paul, and in other cases openly repudiated it. It is probable that he based these letters upon genuine Pauline material - despatches, or fragments of letters to Timothy and Titus, which had fallen into his hands. It may be conceded that the letters have a Pauline nucleus. The writer probably assumed that the addresses of his letters to Timothy and Titus would attract attention and carry weight, since these teachers were representatives of churches.

To stigmatize such a proceeding as forgery is to treat the conditions of that early time from the point of view of our own age. No literary fraud was contemplated by the writer or ascribed to him. The practice of issuing a work in the name of some distinguished person was common, and was recognized as legitimate. A whole class of writings, chiefly apocalyptical and known as pseudepigraphic or pseudonymous, appeared in the times immediately preceding and succeeding the beginning of the Christian era. Such were the Book of Enoch, the Sibylline Oracles, and the Psalter of Solomon. Precedent was furnished by the Old Testament writings. The Psalmists adopted the names of David, Asaph, and the Sons of Korah. Neither Samuel nor Ruth nor Esther were supposed to be the authors of the books which bore their names. Koheleth, in the Book of Ecclesiastes, impersonates Solomon, and the Proverbs and the Canticles both bear his name.

The church of the second century thankfully accepted these three Epistles, and, inferior though they were in spiritual power and richness of idea to the genuine Pauline letters or the Epistle to the Hebrews, incorporated them with these among the New Testament writings. They are valuable in exhibiting to us certain features of post-Pauline Christianity. They testify to the energy and purity of the church's moral impulses as nourished by the religious principles of Christendom. They show us the causes out of which grew the increased emphasis upon authority and external regimen. By their strong attestation of the value of the inheritance from the apostolic age, by their high ethical character, based on religion and exhibiting the moral consequences of the Christian faith, by their emphasis upon the practical rather than the doctrinal edification of the church, upon the significance of the church, and upon the representation of Christianity by Christian personality - they justify their canonization.

Lists of Words Found Only in the Pastoral Epistles, and in the Pastoral Epistles and Not in Paul's Writings.

Pastorals Only

ἀγαθοεργέω

ἀγνεία

ἀγωγή

ἀδηλότης

ἀθλέω

αἰδώς

αἱρετικός

αἰσχροκερδής

ἀκαίρως

ἀκατάγνωστος

ἀκρατής

ἄλλως

ἄμαχος

ἀμοιβή

ἀναζωπυρέω

ἀνάλυσις

ἀνανήφω

ἀναψύχω

ἀνδραποδιστής

ἀνδροφόνος

ἀνεξίκακος

ἀνεπαίσχυντος

ἀνεπίλημπτος

ἀνήμερος

ἀνόσιος

ἀντιδιατίθεμαι

ἀντίθεσις

ἀντίθεσις

ἀντίλυτρον

ἀπαίδευτος

ἀπέραντος

ἀπόβλητος

ἀπόδεκτος

ἀποδοχή

ἀποθησαυρίζω

ἀποτρέπομαι

ἀπρόσιτος

ἄρτιος

ἄσπονδος

ἀστοχέω

αὐθοντέω

αὐτοκατάκριτος

ἀφθορία

ἀφιλάγαθος

ἀψευδής

βαθμός

βδελυκτός

βέλτιον

βλαβερός

γάγγραινα

γενεαλογία

γόης

γραώδης

γυμνασία

γυναικάριον

δειλία

διαβεβαιόομαι

διάβολος, as adj.

διάγω

διαπαρατριβή

διατροφή

διδακτικός

δίλογος

διώκτης

ἐγκρατής

ἑδραίωμα

ἔκγονος

ἔκδηλος

ἐκζήτησις

ἐκστρέφομαι

ἔλαττον, as adv.

ἐλεγμός

ἐνδύνω

ἔντευξις

ἐντρέφομαι

ἐπαγγέλλομαι in sense of professing

ἐπανόρθωσις

ἐπαρκέω

ἐπιδιορθόω

ἐπίορκος

ἐπιπλήσσω

ἐπιστομίζω

ἐπισωρεύω

ἑτεροδιδασκαλέω

εὐμετάδοτος

εὐσεβῶς

ἤρεμος

θεόπνευστος

θεοσέβεια

ἱεροπρεπής

Ἱουδαΐκός

καλοδιδάσκαλος

καταλέγομαι

κατάστημα

καταστολή

καταστρηνιάω

καταφθείρω

καυστηριάζομαι

κενοφωνία

κνήθω

κοινωνικός

κόσμιος

κοσμίως (alt. for κοσμίῳ )

λογομαχέω

λογομαχία

μάμμη

ματαιολογία

μααταιολόγος

μεμβράνα

μετάλημψις

μηδέποτε

μητρολῴης

μονόομαι

νεόφυτος

νεωτερικός

νηφάλιος

νομίμως

νοσέω

ξενοδοχέω

οἰκοδεσποτέω

οἰκουργός

ὁμολογουμένως

ὀργίλος

ὀρθοτομέν

παραθήκη

πάροινος

πατρολῴης

περιούσιος (citn.)

περιπείρω

περιφρονέω

πιστόομαι

πλέγμα

πλήκτης

πορισμός

πραγματία

πραΰπαθία

πρεσβῦτις

πρόγονος

πρόκριμα

πρόσκλισις

ῥητῶς

σεμνότης

σκέπασμα

στόμαχος

στρατολογέω

στυγητός

συνκακοπαθέω

σωτήριος

σωφρονίζ

σωφρονισμός

σωφρόνως

σώφρων

τεκνογονέω

τεκνογονία

τεκνοτροφέω

τυφόομαι ὑγιαίνω , (metaphorical use of the participle as attributive)

ὑδροποτέω

ὐπερπλεονάζω

ὑπόνοια

ὑποτύπωσις

ὑψηλοφρονέω

φελόνης

φιλάγαθος

φίλανδρος

φιλαργυρία

φίλαυτος

φιλήδονος

φιλόθεος

φιλότεκνος

φλύαρος

φρεναπάτης

φροντίζω

χαλκεύς

χρήσιμος

ψευδολόγος

ψευδώνυμος

ὠφέλιμος

Pastorals and Not in Paul

αἰτία

ἀμελέω

ἀνατρέπω

ἄνοια

ἀντιλαμβάνομαι

ἀνυπότακτος

ἀνωφελής

ἀπόλαυσις

ἀποπλανάω

ἀργός

ἀργύρεος

ἀρνέομαι

ἄσπιλος

αὐθάδης

ἀφιλάργυρος

ἀχάριστος

βέβηλος

βίος

βλάσφημος

βραδύνω

βρέφος

βυθίζω

γεωργός

γυμνάζω

δεσπότης

διπλόος

δρόμος

δυνάστης

εἰσφέρω

ἐκτρέπομαι

ἐκφέρω

ἐμπίπτω

ἐμπλέκω

ἐξαρτίζω

ἑξήκοντα

ἐπακολουθέω

ἐπίθεσις

ἐπιλαμβάνομαι

ἐπιμελέομαι

ἐπισκοπή

ἐπίσταμαι

ἐπιτίθημι

ἐπιτιμάω

ἐπιφαίνω

εὐεργεσία

εὐκαίρως

εὐσέβεια

εὐσεβέω

ζήτησις

ζωγρέω

ζωογονέω

ἡδονή

ἡσύχιος

θηρίον

θνήσκω

ἱματισμος

κακοπαθέω

κακοῦργος

καταστροφή

κατηγορία

κῆρυξ

κοσμέω

κοσμικός

κριτής

κτιτής

κτίσμα

λαός (in Paul always in citn.)

λείπω

λέων

λίαν

λοιδορία

λυτρόομαι

μαργαρίτης

μαρτυρία

μάχομαι

μελετάω

μέντοι

μεταλαμβάνω

μήποτε

μιαίνω

μῦθος

νέστης

νίπτω

νομή

νομικός

νομοδιδάσκαλος

νοσφίζομαι

ξύλινος

ὀρέγομαι

ὅσιος

παλινγενεσία

παραδέχομαι

παραιτέομαι

παρακολουθέω

πειθαρχέω

περίεργος

περιέρχομαι

περιίστημι

περιποιέομαι

ποικίλος

πολυτελής

πρεσβυτέριον

πρεσβύτερος

προάγω

πρόδηλος

προδότης

προπετής

προσέρχομαι

προσέχω

προσμένω

πυκνός

σοφίζω

σπα

 


Copyright Statement
The text of this work is public domain.

Bibliography Information
Vincent, Marvin R. DD. "Commentary on 1 Timothy:4 Overview". "Vincent's Word Studies in the New Testament". http://odl.studylight.org/commentaries/vnt/1-timothy-0.html. Charles Schribner's Sons. New York, USA. 1887.

Commentary Navigator
Search This Commentary
Enter query in the box below
To report dead links, typos, or html errors or suggestions about making these resources more useful use our convenient contact form
Powered by Lightspeed Technology