LISTEN TO THE FULL PODCAST

1^st Timothy: An Inside Look at The Development of the First Christian Churches

As I urged you when I went into Macedonia, stay there in Ephesus so that you may command certain people not to teach false doctrines any longer

1^st Timothy 1:3

1^st Timothy is one of the three Pastoral Epistles in the New Testament, attributed to the Apostle Paul. The letter was written to Paul’s protégé, Timothy. Tradition states that this letter was written in the mid first century. Most scholars doubt that this is the case and assign it’s writing to the mid second century. As such, most scholars don’t believe Paul wrote this letter. I take a different view; I believe both tradition and the scholars are correct. My view is that it is likely that Paul originally wrote this letter, and that it was later heavily edited up until the mid-second century. My research and reasoning for this position explains the value of the letter. In other words, both points of view are right, and this combining of ideas that spans almost one hundred years, make this letter an extraordinary addition to our Bible.

1^st Timothy is about the standards of conduct for the early church. For both those who have oversight and for the attenders. The early church in Ephesus, which Timothy was placed in charge; is used as the example by Paul. Paul originally wrote this letter to his protégé, Timothy, to help him keep the church in Ephesus on track.  There are three important themes arise out of the letter;  to avoid false doctrine, the qualities needed for those who run the church and  godliness for all.

The value for us in the 21^st century, is that in this letter we get a first-hand look into the growing pains of the early church and the issues that these pioneers had to deal with in creating the church we know today.

Paul is traveling to Macedonia when he writes this letter and asks Timothy to stay in Ephesus to help the church with its growing pains. One of the issues the church was dealing with was false doctrine. Like any new organization that starts to grow quickly, the new arrivers begin to add their own ideas. Sometimes good and sometimes bad. Paul knew that getting this right at the start was important, both for the church to grow and to stay sustainable.

An example of this false doctrine was how to view the law and specifically the Ten Commandments. When taken very literally the law didn’t leave room for the spirit of the law and Faith. As such, could easily be manipulated. In Jesus’s Sermon on the Mount, Jesus is very specific that following the law without a spirit of loving God and your neighbor, the law will be of little value. Some from the Jewish background or newly minted Jewish Christians desired more emphasis on the law. In effect, bringing their comfortable background into the new church, but not really understanding the importance of the spirit of the law and Faith .

This directive is best summed up in 1:4, where Paul states; Not to devote themselves to myths and endless genealogies. Such things promote controversial speculations rather than advancing God’s work—which is by faith.

It isn’t that Paul didn’t believe in the law of Moses, it is the added emphasis of the spirit and faith that Paul sought.

Others from the Gentile world sought to bring previous pagan practices to the church. Keeping the purpose of Christ free from false doctrine, dominated the church for well over four hundred years. This letter provides a look into this struggle.

The letter also gives a strong message of the importance of the leader’s faithfulness. In 3:2 Paul states; Now the overseer is to be above reproach, faithful to his wife, temperate, self-controlled, respectable, hospitable, able to teach. Paul’s point here is to assign leadership to people who have the right attitude about how to live a Christian life. For even if leaders have strong organizational skills, without proper Christian conduct, they would weaken the church. Today, many ministers and priests are evaluated on these principles in 1^st Timothy.

One of the more interesting aspects of this letter is the use of the word godliness. Godliness only appears in the New Testament eighteen times and not one once is the four Gospels, Acts or any of Paul’s first letters. In 1^st Timothy Godliness appears twelve times. The reason I point this out is that Godliness is a critical theme to the book. As well as, it is one of the reasons scholars do not think this letter was written by Paul. For me, its inclusion is part of my support for why I believe the letter underwent heavy editing.

The Godliness concept applies both to the leaders of the new church and to the congregation. In the Bible; Godliness is mainly used to describe a positive way of life influenced by God, and inspired reflection in the tenets of the Christian faith. A person with Godliness was faithful, kind, generous, pious, and committed to Christ.  In 1^st Timothy, this standard is the aspirational goal for all Christians.

With these three themes in mind, I encourage all to read this book/letter. The total time to read is no more than fifteen minutes. In doing so, you will discover the issues that had to be resolved for the early church to grow. A wonderful gift for that helps us understand the struggles of the early church. A ministry centered on three things; adherence to the true message of Jesus, the right people to have in leadership and a commitment to godliness.

I also strongly believed that the basis of this letter was Paul, as tradition suggests. However, I understand why scholars don’t feel it was Paul. Examples include; the use of the word godliness, and there are another 353 words that Paul never used in his other writings. Also,   the literary flow is different than in other of Paul’s writings. I see these discrepancies as the editing from the first and second century’s church leaders to fully capture the struggles of the emerging church and not just the church in Ephesus. But I also strongly believe Paul was the original author

I believe this is part of the beauty of this letter. And the reason it is included as one of the twenty seven books of the New Testament. What was created from this one hundred year process of writing and editing is a capturing of how the early church struggled. The resolution of these issues are so skillfully captured in 1^st Timothy, we in the twenty-first century are given a ring side seat to the how the early church grew and emerged. And we also are provided a basis to evaluate ourselves and our own church.

We don’t have to overthink this message; only remember to stick with Jesus’s teachings, strive to be above reproach and focus on our personal Godliness. Three simple messages!

Blessings, until next time,
Bruce L. Hartman

Photo by John Cafazza on Unsplash

LISTEN TO THE FULL PODCAST

To Kneel Or Not To Kneel: A Very Personal Decision

He withdrew about a stone’s throw beyond them, knelt down and prayed,

Luke [22:41] 

When my daughters were in grade school, I volunteered to be their soccer coach. One of my duties was to not only coach the basics of soccer but also to ensure they knew the appropriate behavior on the field. One of these items was for them to take a knee or kneel when a player became injured. And they would ask, why are we supposed to that?

My reply to them had two reasons. The first, to ensure that there was room for the injured player to receive help from the coaches and any medical staff. The second was that it was a sign of respect for the injured player. Once explained, the players always followed the rule.

When you look up the history of kneeling and its definition, you come up with two standard definitions. The first is kneeling in prayer, as Jesus did in the Garden of Gethsemane when praying about the events that would occur on Good Friday, which is described in today’s verse. A respectful position when talking with God. The second, is a position of submission, as would occur with a prisoner or someone being attacked. Kneeling became a word sometime before the 12^th century.

Today, kneeling has become a flashpoint of debate, especially in professional sports. Some players kneel and others don’t. On one side it is a call for improvements in social justice. On the other side is not kneeling during the playing of the national anthem, but standing, which is seen as a patriotic sign of respect for our country. As well as, respect for those who served to protect our country. Both sides will claim they are right and unfortunately kneeling during the national anthem has become a subject of much debate.

Before the Boston Red Sox opening day baseball game this year, their outfielder, Jackie Bradley, opted to kneel. This was a hard decision for Bradley, an unusually quiet and respectful person. He explained his decision as follows; I think about struggle, a lot of pain that a lot of people have been through, and I just think about the next generation behind me as well. We want things to be better and we want more love.

A little background on Bradley, as a Red Sox he has always carried himself with a quiet respectful air. When he makes a great catch, and as one the league’s best defensive outfielders he makes them a lot, there is no showboating. He simply throws the ball back to the infield and acknowledges politely the cheers. He is a good clubhouse person and always the one to lead with a thoughtful remark. Jackie has only played for the Red Sox and has won two World Series.

Bradley is also a good local citizen and contributes his time and money to the local community. So is Bradley showing disrespect? I don’t think so. Rather, I think he is making a statement politely that he wants our country to love all people better. There is nothing in his background to make us fans think otherwise, but he has experienced and seen racism.

Mookie Betts a former Red Sox and now with the Dodgers, also knelt and had another point of view, similar to Jackie, but slightly different. His point of view is; I wasn’t educated. That’s my fault. I need to be educated on the situation. I know my dad served and I’ll never disrespect the flag, but there’s also gotta be change in the world, and kneeling has nothing to do with those who served our country.”

Betts like Bradley is a wonderful young man, whose standard facial expression is a smile. When one of his teammates hits a home run. He is the first to greet them on their way back to the dugout. Despite being one of baseball’s great stars, he takes their bat and helmet and then puts both away in the racks that line the dugout. Betts, like Bradley, doesn’t get into prolonged arguments with umpires, and very seldom do you see anything but a smile.

Betts’s kneel was a statement of support for social justice. A decision that was very hard for him because of his dad. He doesn’t mean disrespect. And most of the time he will stand to honor those like his dad, who served.

Stephon Truitt the star defensive end for the Pittsburgh Steelers, will not kneel during the playing of the national anthem. He states that he is, a proud American and he will always stand. He explains his position based on his grandmother’s life, by saying; My grandmother was an immigrant from the Caribbean and . . . worked her butt off to bring 20 people over the right way. She had no money and educated herself to be a nurse. She is living well now.”

Truitt is a no-nonsense leader, who follows his own mind and isn’t easily swayed by arguments that are fashionable. This is what he believes and is willing to go against the grain.

All three of these athletes have well thought out positions. Each position deeply personal and developed through critical thinking. All three are African Americans.

Three different points of view about kneeling, and for these individuals, very personal decisions. None desire that their actions be taken by others personally. It’s their life experiences and it is how they feel. These three men are not limelight pursuers. They are humble men with conviction.

And that is the point, it is not about taking sides, but knowing the hearts of the people that have taken their individual positions. This kneeling question has no universal answer because it is a reflection of life experiences. Some of us feel very strongly about the value of our flag and what it represents. Others want our country to see that not all are afforded equality of opportunity.

It seems to me both positions have value. We do live in a great country and are surrounded by many who prize and fought for our freedom. As well, our country should constantly strive to do better in providing equality of opportunity. Because we are Americans, both opinions should and can be expressed. This isn’t an issue that can be defined with absolute certainty of correctness. Rather it is an issue that has many facets and listening is more important than taking a side.

For me, I will always stand. The flag represents the opportunities that I inherited by being American. But I also know, others haven’t had the same access to a life of unlimited opportunities. When those who are limited kneel, it makes me want to work harder to fight for their equality of opportunity.

Jesus kneeled in the garden, out of respect for God, and showed his submission. He spoke his famous words in this position; not my will but yours be done. Kneeling is a sacred act when done with an honest and pure heart. And over these many centuries, many have assumed this position to seek the truth and express their desires. And many more will in the future. In each individual case kneeling is a very personal individual decision.

Like many issues, kneeling isn’t an issue with which to take sides. Rather it is one with which praying will help us understand, perhaps kneeling while we do.

Blessings, until next time,
Bruce L. Hartman

Photo by Aaron Burden on Unsplash