Posted by Peter Kirby at 12:34 AM | Permalink

Continuing the series on the Pastoral Epistles...

Pray for Everyone

2:1 I urge you therefore, first of all, that petitions, prayers, intercessions, and thanksgivings, be made for all people; 2:2 for kings and all that are in high place; that we may lead a tranquil and quiet life in all godliness and dignity. 2:3 This is good and acceptable in the sight of God our Savior; 2:4 who wills that all people be saved, and come to the knowledge of the truth. 2:5 For there is one God, one mediator also between God and humanity, himself human, Christ Jesus, 2:6 who gave himself as a ransom for all, testimony at the appropriate time; 2:7 whereunto I was appointed a preacher and an apostle (I speak the truth, I'm not lying), a teacher of the Gentiles in faith and truth.

1 Παρακαλῶ οὖν πρῶτον πάντων ποιεῖσθαι δεήσεις προσευχὰς ἐντεύξεις εὐχαριστίας ὑπὲρ πάντων ἀνθρώπων, 2 ὑπὲρ βασιλέων καὶ πάντων τῶν ἐν ὑπεροχῇ ὄντων, ἵνα ἤρεμον καὶ ἡσύχιον βίον διάγωμεν ἐν πάσῃ εὐσεβείᾳ καὶ σεμνότητι. 3 τοῦτο καλὸν καὶ ἀπόδεκτον ἐνώπιον τοῦ σωτῆρος ἡμῶν θεοῦ, 4 ὃς πάντας ἀνθρώπους θέλει σωθῆναι καὶ εἰς ἐπίγνωσιν ἀληθείας ἐλθεῖν. 5 εἷς γὰρ θεός, εἷς καὶ μεσίτης θεοῦ καὶ ἀνθρώπων, ἄνθρωπος Χριστὸς Ἰησοῦς, 6 ὁ δοὺς ἑαυτὸν ἀντίλυτρον ὑπὲρ πάντων, τὸ μαρτύριον καιροῖς ἰδίοις. 7 εἰς ὃ ἐτέθην ἐγὼ κῆρυξ καὶ ἀπόστολος, ἀλήθειαν λέγω οὐ ψεύδομαι, διδάσκαλος ἐθνῶν ἐν πίστει καὶ ἀληθείᾳ.

Notes

W. D. Mounce writes: "1 Tim 2:1–7 divides into two parts. (1) Paul urges Timothy and the Ephesian church not to exclude some people from church prayers and consequently the offer of salvation (v 1). He parenthetically specifies one group of people who especially should not be excluded: (secular) leaders (v 2). (2) Paul follows with three reasons why the Ephesian church should include all people in their prayers and the scope of salvation: (a) in general this is pleasing to God, who wishes all people to be saved (vv 3–4); (b) it is in line with the mediator’s work, which provided a ransom for all people (vv 5–6); and (c) excluding the Gentiles from the scope of salvation runs counter to Paul’s divinely appointed ministry (v 7)." (2002)

A. T. Hanson writes: "petitions, prayers, intercessions, and thanksgivings. It is a mistake to try to distinguish too clearly between these various forms of worship. It is quite possible that the author is quoting from a prayer himself. Verse 2 may also be a quotation from a prayer. In Clement's letter to the Corinthians, chap. 60, we have just such a prayer reproduced for us, including references to the duty of obedience to the rulers, and a petition for a quiet and orderly life for Christians." (1966: 32)

Raymond F. Collins writes, "The inferential oun, 'therefore,' and the Pastor's 'first of all' (prôton) suggest that if Timothy is to achieve the purpose for which he was to remain in Ephesus, primarily to stem the tide of false teaching in the community, he had to pray for the stability of the social order. The use of various synonyms from the lexicography of prayer is an example of the literary device of repetitio. These synonyms emphasize Timothy's obligation and suggest that Christian prayer includes a variety of forms. The primary import of the literary device lies in its cumulative effect. As a result, the individual prayer forms suggested by the Pastor's list are less important than the fact that the Pastor urges Timothy to pray in the best way possible. His prayer should include petitions (deêseis), prayers (proseuchas, the most common New Testament word for prayer), invocation (enteuxeis), and theanksgiving (eucharistias). In 4:4-5 the Pastor offers his audience some idea of how he understands the latter two forms." (2002: 52)

Craig S. Keener writes: "The Romans permitted subject peoples to worship their own gods, but they had to show their loyalty to Rome by also worshiping the goddess Roma and the spirit of the emperor. Because Jewish people worshiped one God to the exclusion of all others, Rome allowed them to pray and sacrifice for the emperor’s health without praying and sacrificing to him. Prayers were offered for him regularly in the synagogues, showing the loyalty of these Jewish institutions to the Roman state. When the Zealots decided to throw off the Roman yoke “for God,” however, they abolished the sacrifices in the temple. This act in a.d. 66 constituted a virtual declaration of war against Rome, several years after Paul wrote this letter. Christian public prayers for the emperor and provincial and local officials showed Christians as good citizens of the society in which they lived (Jer 29:7). Paul’s motive is more than keeping peace (1 Tim 2:2); it is also to proclaim the gospel (2:3–4)." (1993) Jouette M. Bassler adds, "Prayers for political authorities had been part of Jewish synagogue liturgy for some time (see Jer 29:7; Ezra 6:10; Bar 1:10-14; 1 Macc 7:3). Though mentioned only here in the New Testament (cf. Rom 13:1-7; 1 Pet 2:13-17; Titus 3:1), noncanonical Christian examples abound (see, e.g., Pol. Phil. 12.3; 1 Clement 60-61), indicating that such prayers formed an important part of early Christian liturgy as well." (1996: 50)

Dibelius and Conzelmann write: "'King' (βασιλεὺς) was, in the East, the title of the Roman emperor. It is tempting to take the plural 'kings' (βασιλεῖς) as including the co-ruler [as in the parallel in Justin, Apol. 1.14.4], which would enable us to date the time of the composition of the epistle after 137 A.D." (1972: 36) However, as they continue to explain, this interepretation is not demanded, as can be seen from the parallel in Pol. Phil. 12.3, "Pray also for kings and potentates and rulers," which might also refer to the minor kings in the East.

A. T. Hanson writes: "The two Greek words used here for religion and morality are eusebeia and semnotês, both favourite words with the author, and neither found in the genuine letters of Paul. eusebeia means 'piety'. It is interesting that the word occurs no less than 47 times in 4 Maccabees, a Jewish sermon on the subject of the men who died in the persecution of Antiochus Epiphanes in 170-164 B.C. It was probably composed about fifty years before the Pastorals were written; as we shall be seeing, this book, and the other Books of the Maccabees, were favourite reading with the author. It is impossible not to detect a contrast between this ideal of a quiet, pious citizenship and Paul's picture of the strenuous Christian life (compare 2 Cor. 6:3-10)." (1966: 32-33)

George W. Knight writes, "What does 'all people' (πάντες ἄνθρωποι, Acts 22:15; Rom. 5:12a, 18a, b; 12:17, 18; 1 Cor. 7:7; 15:19; 2 Cor. 3:2; Phil. 4:5; 1 Thes. 2:15; 1 Tim. 2:4; 4:10; Tit. 2:11; 3:2) mean? The repitition of ὑπὲρ and further specification, as a subgroup, of civil rulers (v. 2) points in the directino of it meaning all kinds of people. This meaning would fit in the other occurences of the phrase in 1 Timothy and Titus (especially Tit. 3:2) and would appear to be the understanding of the term when it was first presented to Paul as the perspective for his ministry (Acts 22:15)." (2001: 115)

W. D. Mounce states, "This universal thrust is typical of the Pastoral Epistles (cf. especially Marshall, 'Universal Grace'). God’s will is the basis of salvation and that which enables salvation (so Oberlinner, 72), but the text does not move into universalism. In the Pastoral Epistles, salvation is by grace only for those who believe (cf. Introduction, 'Themes in the Pastoral Epistles'). Roloff stresses that the universal emphasis relates only to the scope of God’s plan; salvation is only for those who have come to the knowledge of truth, heard the gospel, and received it (119–20). Some interpret Paul to mean that the offer of salvation is to be made to all people (cf. Grudem, Systematic Theology, 594–603). Others (e.g., Calvin, Knight) claim that Paul means all groups or all kinds, including rulers and authorities (1 Tim 2:1) and Gentiles (1 Tim 2:7), although textually (i.e., not theologically) it is extremely difficult to read 'all groups' into 1 Tim 4:11 and Titus 2:11. The force of the statement is directed toward the opponents' sectarian theology. As Jeremias (20) points out, this statement stands in firm opposition to the synagogue’s belief that God hates the sinner and wishes to save only the righteous and to the gnostic belief that salvation is only for those 'in the know' (Wissenden)." (2002)

J. L. Houlden writes: "all men to be saved: if the ideal of life is to exist in 'all piety and moral seriousness', as v. 2 says, it is fair to ask whether the salvation here desired for all men is quite as radical as other New Testament writings and general Christian usage would suggest. We have little hint here of man's predicament, as in the grip of sin and death (e.g. Rom. 6:20; 7:24), little sense of his transformation by God. Does the writer envisage instead for all men their avoidance of the gross evils listed in 1:9f. and their acceptance of his scheme of values (together no doubt with his impressive but somewhat flat and unelaborated doctrinal statements), and is that what he sees as their way to salvation? That is to ask the question sharply. But if this at all represents the direction of his mind, the relevance of our passage to the general Christian discussion of the question of universalism, often cast in the mould of a strongly Pauline dynamic, is softened. Again putting it over-sharply, his hope is for an increasingly moral and tranquil society, living contendly under God, rather than the renewal of all things (Rom. 8:18 ff.)." (1976: 66-67)

Dibelius and Conzelmann write: "'Recognition of the truth' (ἐπίγνωσις ἀληθείας) in the Pastorals is a formula for Christianity, viz., conversion to the Christian faith. It is not explained nor more closely defined but rather presupposed as a phrase that has this explicit meaning. In Tit 1:1 it is thus parallel to and has the same weight as 'faith,' whereas in 2 Tim 2:25 and 3:7 it serves as a paraphrase for the state of salvation attained. The origin of the expression is not to be sought in the terminology of mysticism, but rather in Hellenistic Judaism's rich store of Greek rational terminology, which now undergoes a characteristic transformation. Regarding the content which these terms now describe, the supernatural element is strongly accentuated, but their usage is 'rational,' insofar as they are employed as criteria of knowledge in combatting misunderstanding and misuse. Since the 'recognition of the truth' should be accessible to everyone, it is in precisely this connection that the mission of the Christian message is emphasized as applying to all men. It is not a question of 'reconciliation of the All.' 'Recognition (ἐπίγνωσις) designates not only rational comprehension but also acknowledgment, just as 'truth' (ἀληθείᾳ) is not merely a fact to be grasped theoretically, but also a state of affairs to be actualized. The phrase as a whole is a technical term for conversion." (1972: 41)

A. T. Hanson writes: "The word mediator is only used elsewhere in the New Testament in Gal. 3:19-20 and three times in Hebrews. In Galatians it refers to Moses as the mediator of the old covenant on Sinai, and in Hebrews to Jesus as the mediator of the new covenant. Nowhere else is Jesus called a mediator between God and man. The word signifies an arbitrator who tries to bring together two contending parties. This is the sense in which it is used in the Greek translation of Job 9. ... It seems likely that the formula in 1 Tim. 2:5 is based on this passage in Job, and that this is where the phrase himself man comes from. God has now granted to mankind the human mediator for which Job prayed. If so, the formula is very un-Pauline, for the mediator to whom Job prayed was to stand outside both parties, being neither God nor man. Paul thinks of Jesus as one who comes from the side of God to rescue man, not as an arbitrator who mediates between the two." (1966: 33-34)

Jouette M. Bassler writes: "The christological clause of the acclamation is developed in more detail. It mentions Christ's role as mediator and his humanity, but the key phrase for this author is the final one, 'Christ Jesus . . . who gave himself as a ransom for all.' The concept of Christ's death as a ransom (Gk. antilytron, literally a redemption or buying back, as from slavery or captivity) is widespread in the New Testament (see, e.g., Rom 3:24; Eph 1:7; Titus 2:14; Heb 9:15; 1 Pet 1:18) and the phrase in verse 6a seems to be a clear echo of Mark 10:45 (see also Matt 20:28). It states, however, more radically than that text, or any other New Testament text, the efficacy of Jesus' self-giving death for all humankind (cf. Gal 1:4; 2:20; Eph 5:20). It is this statement of the universal effect of Jesus' death, more than the reference to his role as mediator, that determines the author's interest in this liturgical fragment, for his argument in this portion of the letter turns on the concept of God's universal saving will." (1996: 52-53)

Dibelius and Conzelmann write: "'Ransom' (ἀντίλυτρον), an intensive form of 'price of release' (λύτρον), is attested in Orphica Lithica. This verse is hardly a quotation from Mk 10:45, but rather a Hellenistically colored variant of that word of Jesus. If we are dealing with a formula, it is pointlesss to ask to whom, in the author's opinion, the ransom is to be paid. There is no indication that the background for this idea is the lawsuit of God with Satan." (1972: 43)

L. T. Johnson writes: "The testimony was given at the right time: The phrase to martyrion kairois idiois is problematic with respect to both its meaning and its connection to the phrases before and after it. Variant readings in MSS show how scribes were moved to ingenuity by recognition of the same problems. The noun martyrion means 'that which stands as evidence or proof' (Herodotus, Persian War 2:22; 8:120; Plato, Laws 943C). It can, therefore, refer to a fact or a statement (Aristotle, Rhetoric 1376A). In the Gospels, for example, a healing 'stands as evidence' to the priests (Matt 8:4; Mark 1:44; Luke 5:14). In Paul, the term can be used loosely, as roughly equivalent to 'witness' (1 Cor 2:1 [variant reading]; 2 Cor 1:12; 2 Thess 1:10), and it is used in that way in 2 Tim 1:8, where Paul tells Timothy, 'Do not be ashamed of the martyrion of/to our Lord,' which means 'the witness given by our Lord.' The phrase kairois idiois is also difficult. The idiom chronis idiois appears in Diodorus Siculus with the meaning 'the proper time' (Roman History 1.50.7; see also Josephus, Antiquities 11:5). But how do the phrases go together and make sense in context? Scribes struggled with the lapidary and asyndetic construction. Codex Sinaiticus adds the word kai (and), which has the effect of making the witness part of what Christ gave. Other MSS add a relative pronoun and a verb to make a full clause that comments on Christ's giving of himself as a ransom: 'to which testimony was given at the proper time' (esp. the original hand of Bezae, F, and G). The scribal corrections indicate the sort of adjustments that must be made in order to make sense of the statement. Although I accept the shorter and harder reading adopted by Nestle-Aland, for example, my translation in effect approaches the solution offered by the textual variant: 'the testimony was given at the right time.' By no means, however, does this resolve the problem! The presence of the same imprecise signifcance remains ambiguous. Paul elsewhere uses the singular kairq idiq to mean 'in the appropriate season' (Gal 6:9). But what ''right time' does Paul mean? Does it point back to evidence provided by Jesus (the human person who is mesitês), or does it point to present evidence given by Paul (the human apostolos)?" (2001: 192-193)

Raymond F. Collins writes: "Paul occasionally uses asides to confirm the truth of his message. He calls on the experience of the community ('as you know' in 1 Thess. 2:2, 5) and the witness of God ('God is my witness' in 1 Thess. 2:5; see Rom. 1:9). Paul's oath in Rom. 9:1 appears to be echoed in 2:7. The Pastor's oath has a judicial tone, which focuses on 'the truth.' Emphasis is placed on 'the truth' by its mention as the first word of the oath, the explicit contrast between telling the truth and lying—an example of the rhetorical contradictio (see Rom. 9:1)—and the mention of 'truth' as the last word in the sentence. The judicial tone of the oath recalls the testimonial nature of Christ Jesus' ransom of all people (2:6b)." (2002: 62)