Original Meaning
VERSES 11–16 CONTAIN a series of important imperatives that summarize and enlarge on the preceding sections. Once again we are confronted by parangello (see comments on 1:3), whose classical meanings range from “give orders” to “exhort” to “cheer on.” Here, with the impersonal object “these things,” it means “to command.” Just as Paul commanded Timothy and authorized him to give commands in 1:3 and 5, so again in 4:11 Paul tells Timothy, “Command and teach these things.”
In 1:3 Timothy was to command certain individuals “not to teach false doctrines any longer.” Having issued a negative imperative regarding teaching falsehood, Paul now gives a positive imperative to Timothy to teach the truth about which he has been reading in this letter. Paul does not define “these things” clearly. The possibilities are: (1) the doctrinal statement at the end of verse 10, “who is the Savior of all men, and especially of those who believe”; (2) the content of the trustworthy saying (v. 9, probably referring to v. 8); (3) everything since the previous occurrence of “these things” (v. 6); (4) all of the doctrinal statements in the letter; or (5) everything in the letter that is applicable to the church at Ephesus. In view of the fact that “these things” appears repeatedly, 1 it is most likely that here and elsewhere it refers to (5). At the same time, the word was triggered by the immediately preceding statement(s), and thus (1) and (2) are certainly not excluded.
John Stott observes that verse 11 speaks of the responsibility for Timothy to pass on Paul’s instructions to the churches while verse 12 expresses his youthfulness. These two verses stand in “dramatic contrast,” in which Timothy is “called to Christian leadership beyond his years.”2 This contrast is not a passing phenomenon but expresses the heavy plot (if one can call it that in an letter) of gleaming truth opposing dark error with a relatively young warrior leading the charge, wielding a sword given him by the aging apostle.
The encouragement not to let people despise his youth (v. 12) raises the question of Timothy’s age. In the story of the rich young ruler the same word (neotes) refers to an earlier period in his life, though probably not as young as the word “boy” in some translations could imply (Luke 18:21, NIV). In Matthew the man is called a neaniskos, which can describe a man from his mid-twenties to his thirties (Matt. 19:20, 22). After giving examples of the age range described by the word in ancient literature, Knight makes the useful point that in Acts 7:58 Luke used the same word to describe Paul.3 If, as is probable, Timothy was in his thirties, words such as “young” and “youth” might give the contemporary reader the wrong impression, since we generally reserve these words for people in their teens and early twenties.
The pervading theme of the letters, which is the necessary blend of sound doctrine and godly living in the life of church leaders, reappears here. There is no single passage in the Pastorals where all of the requisite virtues (or doctrines, for that matter) occur together. In this passage the key word is “example” in five areas: speech, life, love, faith, and purity. These are specific enough but, taken together, they are also comprehensive enough to constitute an appropriate “example” (typos).
Lock understands typos to be “not so much ‘a model for the faithful to follow, '” on the analogy of 1 Thessalonians 1:7, as “a model of what the faithful are” (supported by Titus 2:7).4 Timothy’s lifestyle “will make its appeal to all men…and attract them to complete salvation.” He thinks that 1 Peter 5:3, “being examples to the flock,” is not a proper parallel to 1 Timothy 4:12, which he understands as being an example to outsiders. Knight takes the opposite position.5 While an exegetical choice must be made between these two, the ultimate outcome is the same, as exhibited in Paul’s desire for others to follow his example as he follows Christ (1 Cor. 11:1). Thus, if Timothy models Christian virtues to the Ephesian believers, they will become examples along with him to the unbelieving world. But at this stage, Timothy is to be an example to the believers. The preaching and teaching referred to in verse 13 is one way in which he can set an example in “speech.” Later Paul cautions Timothy against quarreling (6:3–5; 2 Tim. 2:14–16).
The word “life” (v. 12) translates anastrophe, which can describe one’s conduct or behavior in a particular circumstance (Gal. 1:13) or a way of life (Eph. 4:22). Here it means the latter, in conjunction with the traits of character expressed in love, faith, and purity. This is a reprise of 1:4–5.
“Until I come” (v. 13) is a “real time” reference and therefore serves both to support genuine Pauline authorship of the letter and to place Timothy’s commission in context. His duties are not those of a pastor as we conceive of that ministry today, since the word “until” introduces the idea of a limited or uncertain duration in Timothy’s ministry, dependent on the time of Paul’s return. In that connection the text does not give any indication that the reading, preaching, and teaching of Scripture is the whole, or even the main, duty of a pastor. It is, however, the main duty of Timothy as he represented Paul in the doctrinal conflict at Ephesus.
Nevertheless, given the fact that the elders at Ephesus were instructed to guard against heresy (Acts 20:28–30) and that the foremost ministry of elders is preaching and teaching (1 Tim. 5:17), the teaching of God’s Word is clearly of utmost importance in the church, even if it is not the specific ministry of every shepherd or elder. Likewise it should be noted that this text does not imply that the reading, preaching, and teaching of Scripture is the main component of worship. Fee observes, “Although this certainly refers to what Timothy is to do in public worship, it is too narrow a view to see this as intending to provide a model.”6 He cites biblical references showing that “public worship included prayers (2:1–7; 1 Cor. 11:2–16), singing (Col. 3:16; 1 Cor. 14:26; cf. 1 Tim. 3:16), charismatic utterances (1 Thess. 5:19–22; 1 Cor. 11:2–16; 12–14), and the Lord’s supper (1 Cor. 11:17–34).”
Timothy’s reading of the biblical text with comments and homily reflects the use of Scripture in the early church as well as in the synagogue. In Luke 4:16–21 we have an example of the synagogue procedure, where Scripture was read and commented on. Exhortation was secondary to the Scripture itself. Acts 13:13–15 shows the difference even more clearly: “After the reading from the Law and the Prophets, the synagogue rulers sent word to [Paul and Barnabas], saying, ‘Brothers, if you have a message of encouragement for the people, please speak.'” Knight notes that the word for “encouragement” (paraklesis) is the same as that for “preaching” here in 1 Timothy 4:13.7
The word “Scripture” is not in the Greek of verse 13 but is implied, since the reading of Scripture was customary in worship services. The importance of the reading of sacred Scripture underlines the significance of Paul’s asking that the church at Colosse have his letter to them read in the church at Laodicea and that the letter to Laodicea be read in the Colossian church. Stott says, “These are extraordinary instructions. They indicate that the apostles put their writings on a level with the Old Testament Scriptures.”8
Verse 14 contains not only a urgent word to Timothy, but a message of affirmation to those in the Ephesian church who would also be hearing this letter, and a glimpse, for later readers like ourselves, of an important event in Timothy’s life. Paul refers here to Timothy’s “gift” (charisma, the same word as in 1 Cor. 12). We may assume that this gift, like those in that chapter, was an endowment by the Holy Spirit. We may also assume that it was a spiritual ability that one could fail to draw on, although going through the motions of ministry. To “neglect” it will hinder Timothy’s spiritual effectiveness.
Two visible actions took place when Timothy received his gift: the utterance of a divine prophetic word and the laying on of hands by the body of elders. The Greek prepositions indicate that the laying on of hands accompanied (Gk. meta, “with”) the bestowal of the spiritual gift, but that it was “through [dia] a prophetic message” that the gift was actually given. However, the fact that in 2 Timothy 1:6 Paul says that the gift was in Timothy “through [dia] the laying on of [his] hands” may mean that the distinction between prepositions does not exclude the laying on of hands along with the prophetic message as the channel through which the gift was given. What is most important to note is that the text does not say that the gift was the bestowal of some office.
It is common to call this action an ordination. Kelly even uses that term in his translation of the verse.9 Apart from issues of ecclesiology (the significance of ordination) and of church history (ordination as we know it was not practiced until two centuries later), there are two basic interpretive issues: the biblical significance of the laying on of hands and the Jewish practice of ordaining rabbis.
(1) In the Old and New Testament laying on of hands was more than symbolic. A simple placing of hands on a person might accompany a blessing or healing. A “laying on” or “imposition” of hands (the verb samak implies leaning and not merely touching) accompanied the appointment of Joshua as Moses’ successor (Num. 27:18, 23). According to Deuteronomy 34:9 he received an additional gift of the spirit of wisdom. In contrast, the installation of elders in Numbers 11:16–17, 24–25 did not include the laying on of hands. When the Levites were set apart to a special service (Num. 8:14, 19) and when Paul and Barnabas were set apart for a special work (Acts 13:2), there was an imposition of hands (Num. 8:10; Acts 13:3). In these cases the laying on of hands was done by peers, not predecessors or superiors.
(2) There is no evidence that in the time of Paul rabbis were ordained by the laying on of hands. This was done to admit people to the Sanhedrin (m. Sanh. 4:4), but such a practice was not equivalent to rabbinical ordination. While it was formerly thought that rabbinic ordination provided the background for 1 Timothy 4:14, more recent studies have shown that not only is there little if any evidence that the ordination of Jewish rabbis in Paul’s day employed the laying on of hands, there is actually some evidence to the contrary. Note also that the function to which rabbis were ordained was different from that of Timothy. What is most important in Timothy’s case is that he received a spiritual gift, of which a prophetic word and the laying of hands were visible affirmations.10
Verses 15–16 follow naturally on what preceded. The sacred endowment he received and the sacred task that lies before him requires wholehearted commitment, but it also requires that there be no inconsistency in his life. Paul does not hesitate to repeat the instruction that Timothy combine “life and doctrine.” He must watch these because others are looking on; they are to “see [his] progress.” In fact, it is for this very purpose (hina, “so that”) that he is to be so diligent.
The call to perseverance in verse 16 is in accordance with Paul’s words to others (Rom. 11:22; Col. 1:22–23; cf. Acts 13:43). What is surprising is not that Timothy will be saved if he perseveres (this thought is already in 1 Cor. 15:2) but that he can “save both [himself] and [his] hearers.” In the context of the Pastoral Letters, with their emphasis on the necessity of the Lord’s servant leading a godly life under the scrutiny of others, this verse can best be interpreted by stating it negatively: “If you do not combine godliness with proper doctrine in your life, you will give the lie to your own claim to salvation and be a hindrance to others who seek to be saved.”
Bridging Contexts
ON DOCTRINE AND LIFE. Ordination sermons and charges are often based on 2 Timothy 4:1–5, and they usually center on the duties of ministry, especially preaching. But this passage exhibits that blending of doctrine and life that is characteristic of the Pastoral Letters. The initial words in 1 Timothy 4:11 set forth the ministry of authoritative proclamation and teaching. While this is Timothy’s charge, it is also indirectly a charge to the congregation to obey the command and to learn the teachings. What follows, however, is specifically for Timothy, where there is a blend: verse 12 emphasizes life, verse 13 emphasizes ministry and the Scripture, and verse 14 emphasizes Timothy’s gift.
We are never told how old Timothy was at the time, but clearly he was young enough for some to have held back the respect he was due. As speech therapists can testify, preachers sometimes seek their help in an attempt to speak in a lower pitch than is normal for them so that they can achieve a sound of authority. Paul advocates nothing of that sort here. The attention and respect that Timothy should receive must come from the example of his life. The “speech” that is mentioned, far from being an artificial display of oratory in a stentorian voice, is to be gracious and worthy of a Christian. The word “life” has to do with general conduct, while the words “love…faith and…purity” represent specific areas of life.
Ministries of Christians will differ from situation to situation, and the qualities mentioned in verse 11 can be exercised in any ministry in any place at any time. The preaching ministry of verse 13, on the contrary, is specific and focused. Over the centuries in liturgical churches the Eucharist has been central, and in Calvinistic and other churches the preaching ministry has usually been the visible focal point. More recent emphasis on spiritual gifts in some churches and on seeker services in others has changed this perspective somewhat, but the proclamation of the word of truth will always have a prominent place. This is especially important wherever, as in Ephesus, there is error to be corrected with truth.
The “public reading” of Scripture may not seem as important with the wide availability of Bibles in the vernacular, but where the Scriptures are not available or where there is a high degree of illiteracy it is essential. This reading and the exposition of Scripture would have been new and fresh to the ears of many in Timothy’s congregation. A challenge to all preachers is to be sure that the Word is accessible, effective, and understandable, both publicly and privately. No congregation ever gets beyond the need for the exposition of the Word of God.11 If a church is doing its job in evangelism, it is a perpetual kindergarten. There will always be those who need the fundamentals. Paul’s charge to Timothy about the Scriptures will never need modification in essentials, even if the method and language of the reading, preaching, and teaching may vary.
The gift of God. To accomplish his task Timothy must depend on the gift that God gave him at the laying on of hands. While the nature of that gift is not defined, it was without question a supernatural endowment. Timothy received something he did not otherwise possess. It may have been new courage, confidence, or boldness. It may have been some specific ability. Whatever it was, that occasion marked a definite work of the Holy Spirit.
Likewise, the “prophetic message” was a work of the Holy Spirit. In accordance with the teaching about prophecy in Scripture, this was not merely some wise saying on the human level. Rather, God was speaking. Together this gift and this prophecy were God’s special way of enabling Timothy for his ministry and of showing those present that he was indeed a special minister of Christ Jesus. The primary function of the actual laying on of hands may have been to convey the spiritual gift, or it may have primarily expressed the confidence and commendation of the elders. If I may write personally, the recollection of having hands laid on me by respected elders and pastors has given me peace and assurance in times when I have had doubts about my calling and ministry.
Contemporary Significance
THE LAYING ON
of hands. In applying verse 14 about the laying of hands on Timothy, we need to use care lest we read too much into it or not derive all we should. It is both less than and more than what is assumed in ordinations today, depending on the denominational theology of ministry. (1) In the sense that it is less, most ordination rites today are intended to convey an ecclesiastical status and privilege not given to Timothy. If what Timothy experienced was equivalent to ordination and a pattern for ordination today, we face several historical obstacles.
(a) There is no clear instance of ordination in the New Testament. Other instances of the laying on of hands were for different purposes. Paul and Barnabas had already been in Christian ministry when hands were laid on them in Acts 13, and the ministry for which they were set apart was not a lifetime ministry but was “completed” with the conclusion of their first missionary journey (Acts 14:26).
(b) Moreover, while the laying of hands on Timothy has been compared to rabbinic ordination, there is no rabbinic evidence that the latter was performed with the laying on of hands (see above).
(c) Furthermore, the nature of rabbinic service and authority was different from that of Christian ministers. The early church saw a development of practice, with changing patterns regarding the use of hands in what we would now call confirmation and then in what we know as ordination. The rite of ordination did not become firm until the third century. If in ordination we bestow a rank liturgical or privilege that the ordinand did not previously have, we are going beyond Timothy’s experience, at least as it is described in the Pastoral Letters.
(d) There is no evidence that Timothy—or anyone else in the early church as described in Acts and the New Testament letters—was given the exclusive right to preach, baptize, or preside at the Lord’s Table, as though these were rights that “laypeople” did not have.
(2) There is a sense in which the imposition of hands on Timothy was more than is usually attributed to ordination in many Protestant churches today. By and large in these churches ordination centers on what the participants are doing rather than on what God is doing. Charismatic churches would be an exception here, but there is usually little sense that God is giving the ordinand a spiritual gift at the time of the ordination. Nor is there any audible prophecy being mediated from God to the ordinand. What is typical is that as the ordinand kneels and receives the laying on of hands, prayer is offered up on his or her behalf. That such prayer is important hardly needs to be said, but it is an action of human beings reaching up to God rather than an action of God reaching down to the ordinand.
This does not mean that ordination should be discontinued, but rather that it should be reexamined as to its significance. Timothy’s experience may not be an exact model, but it does have valid elements and lessons, as does the setting apart of Paul and Barnabas in Acts 13. Those who serve God on special assignments and in special ministries ought to be so recognized, affirmed, and commissioned. Prayer is important, but hearts should be opened for God to respond in whatever way he chooses.
It should be recognized that this is not the elevation of a privileged cleric to a superior exclusive class (as was the Old Testament priesthood), but the acceptance of one whom God has given to his church to work not above, but among, the people of God. The commissioning of missionaries may perhaps be more closely compared to the laying of hands on Paul and Barnabas than on Timothy.
Timothy is told here not to neglect the gift he has thus received. God is honored and his work is forwarded not simply by the memory of our ordination but by allowing the spiritual gifts God has given to operate fully and powerfully through us. Whether this gift is the ability to preach and teach as Timothy was commanded to do here, or courage (as 2 Tim. 1:6–7 may imply), or if it is something else unexplained here and perhaps different for each of us, we are exhorted through this text to keep it in mind and in force.
1. See, e.g., 1 Tim. 3:14; 4:6, 11, 15; 5:7, 21; 6:2; 2 Tim. 2:2, 14; Titus 2:15; 3:8.
2. Stott, Guard the Truth, 119.
3. Knight, Pastoral Epistles, 205.
4. Lock, Pastoral Epistles, 52.
5. Knight, Pastoral Epistles, 205.
6. Fee, 1 and 2 Timothy, Titus, 107.
7. Knight, Pastoral Epistles, 207–8.
8. Stott, Guard the Truth, 121.
9. Kelly, Pastoral Epistles, 107.
10. On the laying on of hands, see Marjorie Warkentin, Ordination (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1982); Lawrence A. Hoffman, “Jewish Ordination on the Eve of Christianity,” Studia Liturgica 13 (1979): 11–41; Edward J. Kilmartin, “Ministry and Ordination in Early Christianity Against a Jewish Background,” Studia Liturgica 13 (1979): 42–69; Stephen Westerholm, Jesus and Scribal Authority, Coniectanea Biblica N.T. Series 10 (Lund: CWK Gleerup, 1978), 26–39; Everett Ferguson, “Laying on of Hands: Its Significance in Ordination,” JTS 26 (1975): 1–12; and David Daube, The New Testament and Rabbinic Judaism (London: Athlone, 1956), 224–46.
11. See W. Liefeld, New Testament Exposition (Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 1984) for methods of going from text to sermon.