1 Timothy 5:17-25
Doctrine
The word “doctrine” appears often in the pastoral epistles, in particular in 1 Timothy. The Greek word for “doctrine” is διδασκαλία (did-as-kal-ee’-ah), which means “properly applied teaching” or “teaching as it applies to lifestyle [1].” This short passage (1 Timothy 5:17-25) is filled with doctrine concerning older men.
Context
In 1 Timothy 5:1-2 Paul commanded Timothy (and by extension all Christians) to not harshly “strike” other Christians, but to properly exhort them. Therein, Paul expressed specific concern for the spiritually mature and immature, and by inference all in between these poles. The Greek root word used to describe the spiritually mature man (presbyteros) and woman (presbyteras) in those verses is identical to that often translated as elder (e.g., 1 Timothy 5:17); it can also be translated as older man or older woman, respectively. For details see Wag More, Bark Less. Thus, it seems that these two verses are an introduction to the following sections in the epistle, in which Paul focused on doctrine concerning:
• Spiritually mature and immature women (1 Timothy 5:3-16); and
• Spiritually mature men (1 Timothy 5:17-25).
For a review of Paul’s instructions to Timothy regarding spiritually and immature women, see:
• Doctrine Concerning Widows (Part 1); and
• Doctrine Concerning Widows (Part 2).
For a review of Paul’s instructions to Timothy regarding spiritually mature men, read on!
Scripture
17 Let the elders who rule well be counted worthy of double honor, especially those who labor in the word and doctrine.18 For the Scripture says, “You shall not muzzle an ox while it treads out the grain,” and, “The laborer is worthy of his wages.” 19 Do not receive an accusation against an elder except from two or three witnesses. 20 Those who are sinning rebuke in the presence of all, that the rest also may fear. 21 I charge you before God and the Lord Jesus Christ and the elect angels that you observe these things without prejudice, doing nothing with partiality. 22 Do not lay hands on anyone hastily, nor share in other people’s sins; keep yourself pure. 23 No longer drink only water, but use a little wine for your stomach’s sake and your frequent infirmities. 24 Some men’s sins are clearly evident, preceding them to judgment, but those of some men follow later. 25 Likewise, the good works of some are clearly evident, and those that are otherwise cannot be hidden.
Let the elders who rule well be counted worthy of double honor, especially those who labor in the word and doctrine.
The elders
The Greek root word for elders in this verse — πρεσβύτερος (pres-boo’-ter-os) — means “a mature man having seasoned judgment” [2]. While πρεσβύτερος (pres-boo’-ter-os) can refer to a man who holds the office of elder, it can also simply refer to an older, relatively mature man, or in some cases just to an older man. In 1 Timothy 5:1, it seems that Paul used πρεσβύτερος (pres-boo’-ter-os) to refer to spiritually mature men (see Wag More, Bark Less).
Double honor
The Greek root word for the noun honor in this verses — τιμή (tee-may’) — is related to the verb honor in 1 Timothy 5:3 [3]. It means in context both to esteem and to be worthy of financial support (see Doctrine Concerning Widows (Part 1)). Double honor simply means “twice as much” or “double the amount of” honor.
Rule well
This expression, with identical Greek root words, is used in 1 Timothy 3:4-5 to describe a qualification of a bishop (episkopos) in the church. It is better translated as “exercise influence through both …character and lifestyle in a manner that is noble, right, honorable, well-perceived, and winsomely attractive” [see Qualifications of Elders (Part 3) and the references therein].
How did Paul differentiate πρεσβύτερος (pres-boo’-ter-os) in this verse?
Explicitly, some “rule well.” Therefore, by implication, some didn’t “rule well.” In addition, explicitly, some “labor in the word and doctrine.” Therefore, by implication, some didn’t “labor in the word and doctrine.”
What are the possible implications of this differentiation?
Two qualifications of a bishop (episkopos) are that he (1) rule well (1 Timothy 3:4-5), and (2) be able to teach (1 Timothy 3:2). Therefore, if there were some mature men (presbyteros) in the church in Ephesus who neither ruled well nor taught doctrine, then either:
• Not every mature man (presbyteros) held the office of bishop (episkopos); and/or
• Not all bishops in the church in Ephesus were qualified to be a bishop; and/or
• Not all bishops in the church in Ephesus labored in the word and doctrine.
Not every mature man (presbyteros) held the office of bishop (episkopos)?
From this perspective, Paul didn’t use the words presbyteros and episkopos as synonyms in this letter. This would imply that while an episkopos was also a presbyteros, every presbyteros was not an episkopos. That is entirely reasonable.
Not all bishops in the church in Ephesus were qualified to be a bishop?
From this perspective, Paul did use the words presbyteros and episkopos as synonyms in this letter. If so, then this was a fact in Ephesus! Some were teaching “fables and endless genealogies” (1 Timothy 1:4), and some had apparently already been excommunicated from the church by Paul (1 Timothy 1:18-20), such that Paul charged Timothy with clear instructions for discerning who is qualified to serve as bishop (1 Timothy 3:1-7). Perhaps more pruning of the bishops in Ephesus was needed! This is also entirely reasonable.
Not all bishops in the church in Ephesus labored in the word and doctrine?
It seems possible that some bishops had an administrative or executive function, some had a pastoral function, while others had a teaching function. However, this type of differentiation, or division of responsibilities, was highly unlikely in the first century, and seems more of a contemporary Western prochronism and thus, an imposition on the text. That is, all bishops were shepherds, all had to be “able to teach,” and all had to “rule well.” Therefore, this option seems less reasonable.
Two Suggested Applications in this Verse
1. Honor (esteem and financially support if warranted) all spiritually mature men (presbyteros).
2. Provide double honor to each presbyteros who serves as a bishop (elder) in the local church.
The first suggested application seems equitable, in particular when considering Paul’s instructions regarding widows. That is, while all spiritually mature widows who were truly alone were to be esteemed and financially supported by the church, spiritually immature widows were not to be supported (1 Timothy 5:3-16). Thus, Paul’s instructions seem clear: honor both spiritually mature women and men in the Church, including materially and financially if necessary.
The second suggested application appears to smack of favoritism. So, why suggest it?
For the Scripture says, “You shall not muzzle an ox while it treads out the grain,” and, “The laborer is worthy of his wages.”
What was Paul’s main point?
Simply that bishops (elders) are worthy of material and financial support from the Christians whom they serve. In other words, a presbyteros who actively served the Church as an episkopos was worthy of twice as much esteem, material and financial support as a presbyteros who did not actively serve the church as an episkopos.
What did Paul recognize as Scripture?
The first quotation is from Deuteronomy 25:4, and the second quotation is from Luke 10:7. The implication is that Luke, who was a companion of Paul (as evidenced by the content of Acts), wrote the Gospel of Luke before ca. 63 A.D., which is approximately when Paul wrote this epistle to Timothy. Therefore, Paul recognized not only the Torah (the Old Testament), but also the Gospel of Luke, as Scripture. And how did Paul view Scripture? He later wrote that (2 Timothy 3:15-16):
“All Scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness, that the man of God may be complete, thoroughly equipped for every good work.”
Do not receive an accusation against an elder except from two or three witnesses.
As Peter once wrote (1 Peter 5:8):
“Be sober, be vigilant; because your adversary the devil walks about like a roaring lion, seeking whom he may devour.”
One way in which the Enemy seeks to devour Christians, in particular those Christian who are recognized as spiritually mature, is through false accusation. He is of course “the accuser of the brethren (Revelation 12:10).” Therefore, Paul instructed Timothy (and by extension instructs Christians today) to follow that which is prescribed in Scripture: do not pay any attention whatsoever to an accusation against a presbyteros in the church unless it can be independently corroborated by more than one witness. As it is written (Deuteronomy 19:15):
“One witness shall not rise against a man concerning any iniquity or any sin that he commits; by the mouth of two or three witnesses the matter shall be established.”
Those who are sinning rebuke in the presence of all, that the rest also may fear.
Those who are sinning?
Presumably, if an accusation is made against a presbyteros by two or three witnesses and determined to be valid by the episkopos in the church, and said presbyteros not only refuses to confess his sin and repent, but continues “sinning,” then said presbyteros needs to be rebuked by the episkopos “in the presence of all, that the rest also may fear.”
Of all?
The Greek word for all used here — πᾶς (pas) — means each and every part of a totality [4]. The implication is that it includes the whole local church. This would thus harmonize Paul’s instructions with that taught by Jesus Himself (Matthew 18:15-17):
“Moreover if your brother sins against you, go and tell him his fault between you and him alone. If he hears you, you have gained your brother. But if he will not hear, take with you one or two more, that ‘by the mouth of two or three witnesses every word may be established.’ And if he refuses to hear them, tell it to the church. But if he refuses even to hear the church, let him be to you like a heathen and a tax collector.”
Rebuke? Wait! Is Paul contradicting himself?
In 1 Timothy 5:1, Paul wrote “Do not rebuke an older man (presbyteros).” However, in 1 Timothy 5:20a, Paul wrote:
“Those (presbyteroi) who are sinning rebuke in the presence of all.”
This sure seems like a contradiction: do not rebuke, but make sure that you rebuke! However, it only appears that way in English translations. For some reason, most English translations fail to take into account that Paul used quite different Greek words in verses 5:1 (epipléssó) and 5:20 (elegchó). The Greek word ἐλέγχω (elegchó) means “to convince with solid, compelling evidence, especially to expose [5].” Therefore, Paul instructs Christians (1) to not rebuke (verbally strike) a presbyteros, but (2) to rebuke (convince with compelling evidence to expose sin) a presbyteros, when he is unrepentant.
I charge you before God and the Lord Jesus Christ and the elect angels that you observe these things without prejudice, doing nothing with partiality.
What’s the implication?
Truth be told, humans are biased, and we show favoritism, including with regards to exposure and punishment of sin. However, showing favoritism in matters of church discipline is a sin unto itself! Quite possibly Paul wrote this charge to Timothy because Timothy had previously shown (or demonstrated an inclination to show) favoritism in some matters of church discipline.
Do not lay hands on anyone hastily, nor share in other people’s sins; … Some men’s sins are clearly evident, preceding them to judgment, but those of some men follow later. Likewise, the good works of some are clearly evident, and those that are otherwise cannot be hidden.
Lay hands?
Simply stated, “to lay hands upon someone is … to set them apart for ministry [6].” Paul here wrote of the ordination of a presbyteros into the office of episkopos.
Do not lay hands on anyone hastily?
There are many reasons, but let’s stick to the main one in this passage: it could cause a bishop to “share in other people’s sins.” That is, any man (including a presbyteros) with a serious habitual character flaw that prevented him from being “blameless” should not be ordained as a bishop in the body of Christ (see 1 Timothy 3:2 and Qualifications of an Elder (Part 1)). If one or more bishops were to lay hands on such a man, and his habitual sinful behavior were either known at the time or made known at a later date, it could appear that said bishops condoned, were indifferent about, or also engaged in said sinful behavior, thus causing all bishops in said body to fall into reproach. One such area of habitual sin is that of sexual immorality. That is, many Christians (such as myself) believe that sexual immorality is a permanent disqualifier from service as a bishop (elder), for though a man can be forgiven, his reproach is likely to remain as a stain throughout his life. As it is written (Proverbs 6:32-33):
“Whoever commits adultery with a woman lacks understanding; he who does so destroys his own soul. Wounds and dishonor he will get, and his reproach will not be wiped away.”
What is Paul’s advice about ordination of a prebyteros as an episkopos?
Simply stated, to wait and discern. That is, while someone may make an initially good, neutral or bad impression, his character will be more fully discerned (both with regards to habitual sin and good works) if he is properly examined for a sufficient period of time. That period of time isn’t specified explicitly in this epistle, but it seems reasonable to conclude that it’s a time period sufficient to repeatedly observe a presbyteros and his doctrine in a multitude of life circumstances, including the home, the marketplace, the church, while engaging in ministry to the saints and the lost, etc.
Keep yourself pure. No longer drink only water, but use a little wine for your stomach’s sake and your frequent infirmities.
Paul’s purpose for including these seemingly parenthetical comments to Timothy in the broader context of doctrine concerning spiritually mature men isn’t obvious. It is interesting to note that Timothy, by inference, was considered by Paul to be both a presbyteros and episkopos in the church in Ephesus. Perhaps in response to concerns about his relative youth from some in Ephesus (see 1 Timothy 4:12), Timothy had chosen a form of asceticism that he hoped would reduce concerns or even false accusations of spiritual immaturity or lack of purity. Regardless, in these words Paul made a few things absolutely clear:
1. A bishop / elder should be pure (i.e., “in a condition prepared for worship” [7]).
2. The consumption of wine, at least for medicinal purposes, does not make a bishop / elder “impure.” As Christ Himself has said, “’Do you not perceive that whatever enters a man from outside cannot defile him, because it does not enter his heart but his stomach, and is eliminated, thus purifying all foods?’ And He said, ‘What comes out of a man, that defiles a man’ (Mark 7:18b-20).”
3. Medical treatment is acceptable! Apparently in the first century Roman Empire, water wasn’t necessarily clean, such that gastro-intestinal issues were common. “Wine was widely recognized in the ancient world as having medicinal properties [8].” As such, Christians should not forsake appropriate medical treatment for ailments!
Application Questions
• To what extent do you show honor to spiritually mature men, in particular any bishops, in the body of Christ? Does anything need to change (e.g., increase of financial support)?
• Are you holding on to any accusations that have been made against any spiritually mature men in the body of Christ that haven’t come from more than one reputable source? If so, what should you do?
• Are you aware of any spiritually mature men in the body of Christ who need to be confronted about a habitual sin problem? If so, what should you do?
• Are you in a position to ordain a presbyteros as an episkopos? If so, what aspects of the process that you’re using can or should be changed to ensure that it’s sufficient to fully discern said man’s character and qualifications?
• What’s your perspective on contemporary medical practice and purity? Is the pendulum swung too far in one direction? If so, what needs to change?
End Notes
[1] http://biblesuite.com/greek/1319.htm
[2] http://biblehub.com/greek/4245.htm
[3] http://biblehub.com/greek/5092.htm
[4] http://biblehub.com/greek/3956.htm
[5] http://biblehub.com/greek/1651.htm
[6] MacArthur [ii], p.225.
[7] http://biblehub.com/greek/53.htm
[8] Stott [i], p.141.
Bibliography
[i] J.R.W.Stott, “The Message of 1 Timothy & Titus,” Inter-Varsity Press, Leicester, 1996.
[ii] J.MacArthur, “The New Testament Commentary : 1 Timothy,” Moody Press, Chicago, 1995.
[iii] A.Duane Liftin in J.F.Walvoord and R.B.Zuck (Editors), “The Bible Knowledge Commentary,”Chariot Victor Publishing, Colorado Springs, 1983.
Life 