{"commentary":{"id":"adam-clarke","name":"Adam Clarke Bible Commentary","website":"https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Adam_Clarke","licenseUrl":"https://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/mark/1.0/","licenseNotes":null,"licenseNotice":null,"englishName":"Adam Clarke Bible Commentary","language":"eng","textDirection":"rtl","sha256":"92e28c9363c876d215e296f2fe04abb3ab7e34a2aacebdf06bd62ae79c6e3dba","availableFormats":["json"],"listOfBooksApiLink":"/api/c/adam-clarke/books.json","listOfProfilesApiLink":"/api/c/adam-clarke/profiles.json","numberOfBooks":57,"totalNumberOfChapters":854,"totalNumberOfVerses":13318,"totalNumberOfProfiles":0,"languageName":"English","languageEnglishName":"English"},"book":{"id":"1TI","commentaryId":"adam-clarke","name":"1 Timothy","commonName":"1 Timothy","introduction":"Preface to the First Epistle of Paul the Apostle to Timothy In order to find out who this person was, it will be necessary to consult the Acts of the Apostles, where the first mention is made of him; and by collating what is there said with certain passages in the epistle, we shall find who he was, and the probable time in which the epistle was addressed to him. Paul and Barnabas, in the course of their first apostolic journey among the Gentiles, came to Lystra, a city of Lycaonia, where they preached the Gospel for some time, and, though persecuted, with considerable success. See Act 14:5, Act 14:6. It is very likely that here they converted to the Christian faith a Jewess named Lois, with her daughter Eunice, who had married a Gentile, by whom she had Timothy, and whose father was probably at this time dead; the grandmother, daughter, and son living together. Compare Act 16:1-3 with Ti2 1:5. It is likely that Timothy was the only child; and it appears that he had been brought up in the fear of God, and carefully instructed in the Jewish religion by means of the Holy Scriptures. Compare Ti2 1:5 with Ti2 3:15. It appears, also, that this young man drank into the apostle's spirit, became a thorough convert to the Christian faith, and that a very tender intimacy subsisted between St. Paul and him. When the apostle came from Antioch, in Syria, the second time to Lystra, he found Timothy a member of the Church, and so highly reputed and warmly recommended by the Church in that place, that St. Paul took him to be his companion in his travels. Act 16:1-3. From this place we learn that, although Timothy had been educated in the Jewish faith, he had not been circumcised, because his father, who was a Gentile, would not permit it. When the apostle had determined to take him with him, he found it necessary to have him circumcised, not from any supposition that circumcision was necessary to salvation, but because of the Jews, who would neither have heard him nor the apostle had not this been done: the Gospel testimony they would not have received from Timothy, because a heathen; and they would have considered the apostle in the same light, because he associated with such. See the notes on Act 16:3. It is pretty evident that Timothy had a special call of God to the work of an evangelist, which the elders of the Church at Lystra knowing, set him solemnly apart to the work by the imposition of hands; Ti1 4:14. And they were particularly led to this by several prophetic declarations relative to him, by which his Divine call was most clearly ascertained. See Ti1 1:18, and Ti1 3:14. Some think that, after this appointment by the elders, the apostle himself laid his hands on him, not for the purpose of his evangelical designation, but that he might receive those extraordinary gifts of the Holy Spirit so necessary in those primitive times to demonstrate the truth of the Gospel. See Ti2 1:6, Ti2 1:7. Yet, it is likely that Timothy had not two ordinations; one by the elders of Lystra, and another by the apostle; as it is most probable that St. Paul acted with that πρεσβυτεριον or eldership mentioned Ti1 4:14, among whom, in the imposition of hands, he would undoubtedly act as chief. Timothy, thus prepared to be the apostle's fellow laborer in the Gospel, accompanied him and Silas when they visited the Churches of Phrygia, and delivered to them the decrees of the apostles and elders at Jerusalem, freeing the Gentiles from the law of Moses, as a term of salvation. Having gone through these countries, they at length came to Troas, where Luke joined them; as appears from the phraseology of his history, Act 16:10, Act 16:11, etc. In Troas a vision appeared to Paul, directing them to go into Macedonia. Loosing therefore from Troas, they all passed over to Neapolis; and from thence went to Philippi, where they converted many, and planted a Christian Church. From Philippi they went to Thessalonica, leaving Luke at Philippi; as appears from his changing the phraseology of his history at Act 16:40. We may therefore suppose, that at their departing they committed the converted at Philippi to Luke's care. In Thessalonica they were opposed by the unbelieving Jews, and obliged to flee to Berea, whither the Jews from Thessalonica followed them. To elude their rage, Paul, who was most obnoxious to them, departed from Berea by night to go to Athens, leaving Silas and Timothy at Berea. At Athens, Timothy came to the apostle and gave him such an account of the afflicted state of the Thessalonian brethren, as induced him to send Timothy back to comfort them. After that Paul preached at Athens, hut with so little success that he judged it proper to leave Athens and go forward to Corinth, where Silas and Timothy came to him, and assisted in converting the Corinthians. And when he left Corinth they accompanied him, first to Ephesus, then to Jerusalem, and after that to Antioch, in Syria. Having spent some time in Antioch, Paul set out with Timothy on his third apostolical journey; in which, after visiting all the Churches of Galatia and Phrygia, in the order in which they had been planted, they came to Ephesus the second time, and there abode for a considerable time. In short, from the time Timothy first joined the apostle, as his assistant, he never left him except when sent by him on some special errand. And by his affection, fidelity, and zeal, he so recommended himself to all the disciples, and acquired such authority over them, that Paul inserted his name in the inscription of several of the letters which he wrote to the Churches, to show that their doctrine was one and the same. His esteem and affection for Timothy the apostle expressed still more conspicuously, by writing to him those excellent letters in the canon which bear his name; and which have been of the greatest use to the ministers of the Gospel ever since their publication, by directing them to discharge all the duties of their function in a proper manner. The date of this epistle has been a subject of much controversy, some assigning it to the year 56, which is the common opinion; and others to 64 or 65. A great balance of probability appears to be in favor of this later date; and it appears to me that the arguments of Drs. Macknight and Paley are decisive in favor of the later date. The former, in his preface, gives a very clear view of the question. In the third verse of the first chapter of this epistle the apostle says: \"As I entreated thee to abide in Ephesus, when going into Macedonia, so do; that thou mayest charge some not to teach differently.\" From this it is plain, 1. That Timothy was in Ephesus when the apostle wrote his first letter to him; 2. That he had been left there by the apostle, who at parting with him entreated him to abide at Ephesus; 3. That this happened when Paul was going from Ephesus to Macedonia; and, 4. That he had entreated Timothy to abide in Ephesus, for the purpose of charging some teachers in that Church not to teach differently from the apostles. In the history of the Acts of the Apostles there is no mention of Paul's going from Ephesus to Macedonia but once; viz. after the riot of Demetrius, Act 20:1, for which reason Theodoret, among the ancients, and among the moderns, Estius, Baronius, Capellus, Grotius, Lightfoot, Salmasius, Hammond, Witsius, Lardner, Pearson, and others, have given it as their opinion, that the apostle speaks of that journey in his First Epistle to Timothy. Yet, if I am not mistaken, the following circumstance will show their opinion to be ill founded: - 1. When the apostle went from Ephesus to Macedonia, as related Act 20:1, Timothy was not in Ephesus, having gone from that city into Macedonia with Erastus by the apostle's direction; Act 19:22. And in the First Epistle to the Corinthians, which was written after Timothy's departure from Ephesus, we are informed that he was to go from Macedonia to Corinth. Co1 4:17 : \"I have sent to you Timothy.\" Co1 16:10, Co1 16:11 : \"If Timothy be come, take care that he be among you without fear. Send him forward in peace, that he may come to me, for I expect him with the brethren.\" But before Timothy returned from Corinth, the apostle left Ephesus and went into Macedonia, where the brethren above mentioned met him, Co2 2:12, Co2 2:13, having Timothy in their company; as is plain from his joining the apostle in his Second Epistle to the Corinthians, which all agree was written from Macedonia, immediately after the brethren from Corinth gave the apostle an account of the success of his first letter. Wherefore, since Timothy was not in Ephesus when the apostle left the city after the riot, it could not be the occasion on which the apostle said to him: \"As I entreated thee to abide in Ephesus, when going into Macedonia, so do.\" But the journey into Macedonia, of which he speaks, must have been some other journey not mentioned in the Acts. To remove this difficulty we are told that Timothy returned from Corinth to the apostle be lore his departure from Ephesus, and that he was left there after the riot; but that something happened, which occasioned him to follow the apostle into Macedonia; that there he joined him in writing his Second Epistle to the Corinthians; and, having finished his business in Macedonia, he returned to Ephesus and abode there, agreeably to the apostle's request. But as these suppositions are not warranted by the history of the Acts, Timothy's joining the apostle in his Second Epistle to the Corinthians may still be urged as a proof that he came with the brethren directly from Corinth to Macedonia. Farther, that Timothy did not go from Macedonia to Ephesus after joining the apostle in his Second Epistle to the Corinthians, but returned with him to Corinth to receive the collections, is, I think, plain from Act 20:4, where he is mentioned as one of those who accompanied Paul from Corinth to Jerusalem with the collections. 2. When the apostle wrote his First Epistle to Timothy, \"he hoped to come to him soon,\" Ti1 3:14; but from the history of the Acts it is certain that in no letter written to Timothy after the riot, till his first confinement in Rome, could the apostle say that he hoped to come to him soon. He could not say so in any letter written from Troas, the first place he stopped at after leaving Ephesus; for at that time he was going into Macedonia and Achaia to receive the collections for the poor from the Churches in these provinces. Neither could he say so after writing his Second Epistle to the Corinthians from Macedonia; for in that epistle he told the Corinthians he was coming to them with the Macedonian brethren, who were commissioned to attend him in his voyage to Jerusalem, with the collections, Co2 9:4, and that he meant to sail directly from Corinth to Judea, Co2 1:16. As little could he write to Timothy that he hoped to come to him soon, when he altered his resolution on the occasion of the lying in wait of the Jews, and returned into Macedonia, Act 20:3. For he was then in such haste to be in Jerusalem on the day of pentecost, that when he came to Miletus, instead of going to Ephesus, he sent for the elders of that Church to come to him, Act 20:16, Act 20:17. When he arrived in Judea, he could not write that he hoped to come to Ephesus soon, for he was imprisoned a few days after he went up to Jerusalem; and having continued two years in prison at Caesarea, he was sent bound to Rome, where likewise being confined, he could not, till towards the conclusion of that confinement, write to Timothy that he hoped to come to him soon. And even then he did not write his First Epistle to Timothy, for Timothy was with him at the conclusion of his confinement, Phi 2:19, Phi 2:23. 3. From the first epistle we learn that the following were the errors Timothy was left in Ephesus to oppose: 1. Fables invented by the Jewish doctors to recommend the observance of the law of Moses as necessary to salvation. 2. Uncertain genealogies, by which individuals endeavored to trace their descent from Abraham, in the persuasion that they would be saved, merely because they had Abraham for their father. 3. Intricate questions and strifes about some words in the law; perverse disputings of men of corrupt minds, who reckoned that which produced most gain to be the best kind of godliness. 4. Oppositions of knowledge, falsely so named. But these errors had not taken place in the Ephesian Church before the apostle's departure; for in his charge to the Ephesian elders at Miletus, he foretold that the false teachers were to enter in among them after his departing. Act 20:29, Act 20:30 : \"I know that after my departing, shall grievous wolves enter in among you, not sparing the flock. Also of your own selves shall men arise, speaking perverse things to draw away disciples after them.\" The same thing appears from the two epistles which the apostle wrote to the Corinthians; the one from Ephesus before the riot of Demetrius, the other from Macedonia after that event; and from the epistle which he wrote to the Ephesians themselves from Rome, during his confinement there. For in none of these letters is there any notice taken of the above mentioned errors, as subsisting among the Ephesians at the time they were written; which cannot be accounted for on supposition that they were prevalent in Ephesus when the apostle went into Macedonia after the riot. I am therefore of opinion that the first to Timothy, in which the apostle desired him to abide in Ephesus for the purpose of opposing the Judaizers and their errors, could not be written either from Troas or from Macedonia after the riot, as those who contend for the early date of the epistle suppose; but it must have been written some time after the apostle's release from confinement in Rome, when no doubt he visited the Church at Ephesus, and found the Judaizing teachers there busily employed in spreading their pernicious errors. 4. In the first Epistle to Timothy the same sort of persons, doctrines, and practices, are reprobated, which are condemned in the second. Compare Ti1 4:1-6 with Ti2 3:1-5; and Ti1 6:20 with Ti2 2:14; and Ti1 6:4 with Ti2 2:16. The same commands, instructions, and encouragements are given to Timothy in the first epistle as in the second. Compare Ti1 6:13, Ti1 6:14, with Ti2 4:1-5. The same remedies for the corruptions which had taken place among the Ephesians are prescribed in the first epistle as in the second. Compare Ti1 4:14 with Ti2 1:6, Ti2 1:7; and as in the second epistle, so in the first, every thing is addressed to Timothy as superintendent both of the teachers and of the laity in the Church at Ephesus; all which, I think, imply that the state of things among the Ephesians was the same when the two epistles were written; consequently that the first epistle was written only a few months before the second, and not long before the apostle's death. These arguments appeared so convincing to Pearson, Le Clerc, L'Enfant, Cave, Fabricius, Mill, Whitby, and others, that they were unanimously of opinion Timothy was left by the apostle in Ephesus as he went into Macedonia, not after the riot of Demetrius, but after he was released from his first confinement at Rome. And from that circumstance they infer that he did not write his first epistle till some time in the end of the year 64, or in the beginning of 65. I think it was written from Nicopolis. To the late date of this first epistle, there are three plausible objections which must not be overlooked: - 1. It is thought that, if the First Epistle to Timothy was written after the apostle's release, he could not with any propriety have said to Timothy, Ti1 4:12 : \"Let no man despise thy youth;\" but it is replied: That Servius Tullius, in classing the Roman people, as Aulus Gellius relates, lib. x. c. 28, divided their age into three periods: Childhood he limited to the age of seventeen; youth, from that to forty-six; and old age, from that to the end of life. Now, supposing Timothy to have been eighteen years old, a.d. 50, when he became Paul's assistant, he would be no more than 32, a.d. 64, two years after the apostle's release, when it is supposed this epistle was written. Wherefore, being then in the period of life which, by the Greeks as well as the Roman, was considered as youth, the apostle with propriety might say to him, Let no man despise thy youth. 2. When the apostle touched at Miletus, in his voyage to Jerusalem with the collections, the Church at Ephesus had a number of elders, that is, of bishops and deacons, who came to him at Miletus, Act 20:17. It is therefore asked: What occasion was there in an epistle written after the apostle's release, to give Timothy directions concerning the ordination of bishops and deacons, in a Church where there were so many elders already? The answer is: The elders who came to the apostle at Miletus in the year 58 may have been too few for the Church at Ephesus, in her increased state, in the year 65. Besides, false teachers had then entered, to oppose whom more bishops and deacons might be needed than were necessary in the year 58; not to mention that some of the first elders having died, others were wanted to supply their places. 3. Because the apostle wrote to Timothy that \"he hoped to come to him soon,\" Ti1 3:14, it is argued that the letter in which this is said must have been written before the apostle said to the Ephesian elders, Act 20:25 : \"I know that ye all, among whom I have gone preaching the kingdom of God, shall see my face no more.\" But if, by this, the First Epistle to Timothy is proved to have been written before the apostle's interview with the elders at Miletus, his Epistles to the Philippians, to the Hebrews, and to Philemon, in which he promised to visit them, must likewise have been written before the interview; in regard, his declaration respected the Philippians, the Hebrews, and Philemon, as well as the Ephesians; for they certainly were persons among whom the apostle had gone preaching the kingdom of God. Yet no commentator ever thought the epistles above mentioned were written to them before the apostle's interview with the Ephesian elders; on the contrary, it is universally acknowledged that these epistles were written four years after the interview; namely, during the apostle's first imprisonment at Rome. Wherefore, when he told the Ephesian elders that they, and his other converts, among whom he had gone preaching the kingdom of God, should see his face no more, as it was no point either of faith or practice which he spake, he may well be supposed to have declared nothing but his own opinion, resulting from his fears. He had lately escaped the rage of the Jews, who laid wait for him in Cenchrea to kill him, Act 20:3. This, with their fury on former occasions, filled him with such anxiety that, in writing to the Romans from Corinth; he requested them \"to strive together with him in their prayers that he might be delivered from the unbelieving in Judea;\" Rom 15:30, Rom 15:31. Farther, that in his own speech to the Ephesian elders the apostle only declared his own persuasion, dictated by his fears, and not any suggestion of the Spirit, I think plain from what he had said immediately before, Act 20:22, Act 20:23 : \"Behold, I go bound in the spirit to Jerusalem, not knowing the things that shall befall me there: save that the Holy Ghost witnesseth in every city, saying that bonds and afflictions abide me.\" Wherefore, although his fears were happily disappointed, and he actually visited the Ephesians after his release; his character as an inspired apostle is not hurt in the least, if, in saying he knew they should see his face no more, he declared, as I have said, his own persuasion only, and no dictate of the Holy Ghost. Dr. Paley's arguments are the same in substance; but he does not mention Dr. Macknight, who wrote before him, and whose work he must have seen. The principal difficulty in this opinion is, that it necessarily implies that St. Paul visited Ephesus after his liberation at Rome; which appears so contrary to what he said to the Ephesian Church, that they should see his face no more. Dr. Paley, however, finds some farther presumptive evidences that the apostle must have visited Ephesus. The Epistles to the Philippians and to Philemon were written while the apostle was a prisoner at Rome; to the former he says: \"I trust in the Lord, that I also myself shall come shortly;\" and to the latter, who was a Colossian, he gives this direction: \"But withal, prepare me also a lodging, for I trust that through your prayers I shall be given unto you.\" An inspection of the map will show us that Colosse was a city of Asia Minor, lying eastward, and at no great distance from Ephesus; Philippi was on the other, i.e. the western, side of the Aegean Sea. Now if the apostle executed his purpose, and came to Philemon at Colosse soon after his liberation, it cannot be supposed that he would omit to visit Ephesus, which lay so near it, and where he had spent three years of his ministry. As he was also under a promise to visit the Church at Philippi shortly, if he passed from Colosse to Philippi he could hardly avoid taking Ephesus in his way. See Paley's Horae Paulinae, page 293. This, taken in connection with the preceding arguments, can leave little doubt that the date of this epistle must be referred to a time subsequent to St. Paul's liberation from Rome, and consequently to the end of the year 64, or the beginning of the year 65.","order":54,"numberOfChapters":6,"sha256":"a2b2cd49573f6c94ed01e15406e5facd887c55421885bb23eb47671275cf2684","firstChapterNumber":1,"firstChapterApiLink":"/api/c/adam-clarke/1TI/1.json","firstChapterReference":{"commentaryId":"adam-clarke","book":"1TI","chapter":1},"lastChapterNumber":6,"lastChapterApiLink":"/api/c/adam-clarke/1TI/6.json","lastChapterReference":{"commentaryId":"adam-clarke","book":"1TI","chapter":6},"totalNumberOfVerses":112},"chapter":{"number":2,"content":[{"type":"verse","number":1,"content":["I exhort - that, first of all - Prayer for the pardon of sin, and for obtaining necessary supplies of grace, and continual protection from God, with gratitude and thanksgiving for mercies already received, are duties which our sinful and dependent state renders absolutely necessary; and which should be chief in our view, and first of all performed. It is difficult to know the precise difference between the four words used here by the apostle. They are sometimes distinguished thus: - \nSupplications - Δεησεις· Prayers for averting evils of every kind.\nPrayers - Προσευχας· Prayers for obtaining the good things, spiritual and temporal, which ourselves need.\nIntercessions - Εντευξεις· Prayers in behalf of others.\nGiving of thanks - Ευχαριστιας· Praises to God, as the parent of all good, for all the blessings which we and others have received. It is probable that the apostle gives directions here for public worship; and that the words may be thus paraphrased: \"Now, I exhort first of all that, in the public assemblies, deprecations of evils, and supplications for such good things as are necessary, and intercessions for their conversion, and thanksgiving for mercies, be offered in behalf of all men - for heathens as well as for Christians, and for enemies as well as for friends.\" See Macknight. \n"]},{"type":"verse","number":2,"content":["For kings - As it is a positive maxim of Christianity to pray for all secular governors, so it has ever been the practice of Christians. When St. Cyprian defended himself before the Roman proconsul, he said: Hunc (Deum) deprecamur-pro nobis et pro omnibus hominibus; et pro incolumitate ipsorum Imperatorum. \"We pray to God, not only for ourselves, but for all mankind, and particularly for the emperors.\" Tertullian, in his Apology, is more particular: Oramus pro omnibus Imperatoribus, vitam illis prolixam, imperium securum, domum tutam, exercitus fortes, senatum fidelem, populum probum, orbem quietum, et quaecunque hominis et Caesaris vota sunt. Apol., cap. 30. \"We pray for all the emperors, that God may grant them long life, a secure government, a prosperous family, vigorous troops, a faithful senate, an obedient people; that the whole world may be in peace; and that God may grant, both to Caesar and to every man, the accomplishment of their just desires.\"\nSo Origen: Ευχομεθα τους βασιλεις και αρχοντας μετα της βασιλικης δυναμεως και σωφρονα τον λογισμον εχοντας εὑρεθηναι. Cont. Cels., lib. viii. \"We pray for kings and rulers, that with their royal authority they may be found possessing a wise and prudent mind.\" Indeed they prayed even for those by whom they were persecuted. If the state be not in safety, the individual cannot be secure; self-preservation, therefore, should lead men to pray for the government under which they live. Rebellions and insurrections seldom terminate even in political good; and even where the government is radically bad, revolutions themselves are most precarious and hazardous. They who wish such commotions would not be quiet under the most mild and benevolent government.\nThat we may lead a quiet and peaceable life - We thus pray for the government that the public peace may be preserved. Good rulers have power to do much good; we pray that their authority may be ever preserved and well directed. Bad rulers have power to do much evil; we pray that they may be prevented from thus using their power. So that, whether the rulers be good or bad, prayer for them is the positive duty of all Christians; and the answer to their prayers, in either ease, will be the means of their being enabled to lead a quiet and peaceable life in all godliness and honesty. \n"]},{"type":"verse","number":3,"content":["This is good and acceptable - Prayer for all legally constituted authorities is good in itself, because useful to ourselves and to the public at large, and it is acceptable in the sight of God our Savior; and this is its highest sanction and its highest character: it is good; it is well pleasing to God. \n"]},{"type":"verse","number":4,"content":["Who will have all men to be saved - Because he wills the salvation of all men; therefore, he wills that all men should be prayed for. In the face of such a declaration, how can any Christian soul suppose that God ever unconditionally and eternally reprobated any man? Those who can believe so, one would suppose, can have little acquaintance either with the nature of God, or the bowels of Christ.\nAnd to come unto the knowledge of the truth - The truth - the Gospel of Christ, should be proclaimed to them; and it is the duty of all who know it, to diffuse it far and wide, and when it is made known, then it is the duty of those who hear it to acknowledge and receive it. This is the proper import of the original word, that they may come, εις επιγνωσιν αληθειας, to the acknowledgment of the truth - that they may receive it as the truth, and make it the rule of their faith, the model and director of their life and actions. \n"]},{"type":"verse","number":5,"content":["There is one God - Who is the maker, governor, and preserver of all men, of every condition, and of every nation, and equally wills the salvation of all.\nAnd one mediator - The word μεσιτης, mediator, signifies, literally, a middle person, one whose office it is to reconcile two parties at enmity; and hence Suidas explains it by ειρηνοποιος, a peace-maker. God was offended with the crimes of men; to restore them to his peace, Jesus Christ was incarnated; and being God and man, both God and men met in and were reconciled by him. But this reconciliation required a sacrifice on the part of the peace-maker or mediator; hence what follows. \n"]},{"type":"verse","number":6,"content":["Who gave himself a ransom - The word λυτρον signifies a ransom paid for the redemption of a captive; and αντιλυτρον, the word used here, and applied to the death of Christ, signifies that ransom which consists in the exchange of one person for another, or the redemption of life by life; or, as Schleusner has expressed it in his translation of these words, Qui morte sua omnes liberavit a vitiositatis vi et poenis, a servitute quassi et miseria peccatorum. \"He who by his death has redeemed all from the power and punishment of vice, from the slavery and misery of sinners.\" As God is the God and father of all, (for there is but one God, Ti1 2:5), and Jesus Christ the mediator of all, so he gave himself a ransom for all; i.e., for all that God made, consequently for every human soul; unless we could suppose that there are human souls of which God is not the Creator; for the argument of the apostle is plainly this:\n1. There is one God;\n2. This God is the Creator of all;\n3. He has made a revelation of his kindness to all;\n4. He will have all men to be saved, and come unto the knowledge of the truth; and\n5. He has provided a mediator for all, who has given himself a ransom for all. As surely as God has created all men, so surely has Jesus Christ died for all men. This is a truth which the nature and revelation of God unequivocally proclaim.\nTo be testified in due time - The original words, το μαρτυριον καιροις ιδιοις, are not very clear, and have been understood variously. The most authentic copies of the printed Vulgate have simply, Testimonium temporibus suis; which Calmet translates: Rendant ainsi temoignage au tems marqu; \"Thus rendering testimony at the appointed time.\" Dr. Macknight thus: Of which the testimony is in its proper season. Wakefield thus: \"That testimony reserved to its proper time\" Rosenmullen: Haec est doctrina, temporibus suis reservata. \"This is the doctrine which is reserved for its own times;\" that is, adds he, quoe suo tempore in omni terrarum orbe tradetur, \"the doctrine which in its own time shall be delivered to all the inhabitants of the earth.\" Here he translates μαρτυριον, doctrine; and contends that this, not testimony, is its meaning, not only in this passage, but in Co1 1:6; Co1 2:1, etc. Instead of μαρτυριον, testimony, one MS., Cod. Kk., vi. 4, in the public library, Cambridge, has, μυστηριον, mystery; but this is not acknowledged by any other MS., nor by any version. In D*FG the whole clause is read thus: οὑ το μαρτυριον καιροις ιδιοις εδοθη· The testimony of which was given in its own times. This is nearly the reading which was adopted in the first printed copies of the Vulgate. One of them now before me reads the passage thus: Cujus testimonium temporibus suis confirmatum est. \"The testimony of which is confirmed in its own times.\" This reading was adopted by Pope Sixtus V., in the famous edition published by him; but was corrected to the reading above, by Pope Clement VIII. And this was rendered literally by our first translator: Whos witnessinge is confermyd in his timis. This appears to be the apostle's meaning: Christ gave himself a ransom for all. This, in the times which seemed best to the Divine wisdom, was to be testified to every nation, and people, and tongue. The apostles had begun this testimony; and, in the course of the Divine economy, it has ever since been gradually promulgated; and at present runs with a more rapid course than ever. \n"]},{"type":"verse","number":7,"content":["I am ordained a preacher - I am set apart, ετεθην, appointed. The word does not imply any imposition of hands by either bishop or presbytery, as is vulgarly supposed.\nI speak the truth in Christ - As I have received my commission from him, so I testify his truth. I did not run before I was sent; and I speak nothing but what I have received.\nA teacher of the Gentiles - Being specially commissioned to preach the Gospel, not to the Jews, but to the nations of the world.\nIn faith and verity - Faithfully and truly; preaching the Truth, the whole Truth, and nothing but the Truth; and this fervently, affectionately, and perseveringly.\nInstead of εν πιστει, in faith, the Cod. Alexand. has εν πνευματι, in spirit. \"A teacher of the Gentiles in spirit and truth.\" \n"]},{"type":"verse","number":8,"content":["I will therefore - Seeing the apostle had his authority from Christ, and spoke nothing but what he received from him, his βουλομαι, I will, is equal to I command.\nThat men pray - That is, for the blessings promised in this testimony of God. For, although God has provided them, yet he will not give them to such as will not pray. See the note on Ti1 2:1, the subject of which is here resumed.\nEverywhere - Εν παντι τοπῳ· In every place. That they should always have a praying heart, and this will ever find a praying place. This may refer to a Jewish superstition. They thought, at first, that no prayer could be acceptable that was not offered at the temple at Jerusalem; afterward this was extended to the Holy Land; but, when they became dispersed among the nations, they built oratories or places of prayer, principally by rivers and by the seaside; and in these they were obliged to allow that public prayer might be legally offered, but nowhere else. In opposition to this, the apostle, by the authority of Christ, commands men to pray everywhere; that all places belong to God's dominions; and, as he fills every place, in every place he may be worshipped and glorified. As to ejaculatory prayer, they allowed that this might be performed standing, sitting, leaning, lying, walking by the way, and during their labor. Beracoth, fol. xi. 1. And yet in some other places they teach differently. See Schoettgen.\nLifting up holy hands - It was a common custom, not only among the Jews, but also among the heathens, to lift up or spread out their arms and hands in prayer. It is properly the action of entreaty and request; and seems to be an effort to embrace the assistance requested. But the apostle probably alludes to the Jewish custom of laying their hands on the head of the animal which they brought for a sin-offering, confessing their sins, and then giving up the life of the animal as an expiation for the sins thus confessed. And this very notion is conveyed in the original term επαιροντας, from αιρω to lift up, and επι, upon or over. This shows us how Christians should pray. They should come to the altar; set God before their eyes; humble themselves for their sins; bring as a sacrifice the Lamb of God; lay their hands on this sacrifice; and by faith offer it to God in their souls' behalf, expecting salvation through his meritorious death alone.\nWithout wrath - Having no vindictive feeling against any person; harbouring no unforgiving spirit, while they are imploring pardon for their own offenses.\nThe holy hands refer to the Jewish custom of washing their hands before prayer; this was done to signify that they had put away all sin, and purposed to live a holy life.\nAnd doubting - Διαλογισμου or διαλογισμων, as in many MSS., reasonings, dialogues. Such as are often felt by distressed penitents and timid believers; faith, hope, and unbelief appearing to hold a disputation and controversy in their own bosoms, in the issue of which unbelief ordinarily triumphs. The apostle therefore wills them to come, implicitly relying on the promises of God, and the sacrifice and mediation of Jesus Christ. \n"]},{"type":"verse","number":9,"content":["In like manner also - That is, he wills or commands what follows, as he had commanded what went before.\nThat women adorn themselves - Και τας γυναικας ες καταστολῃ κοσμιῳ. The apostle seems to refer here to different parts of the Grecian and Roman dress. The στολη, stola, seems to have been originally very simple. It was a long piece of cloth, doubled in the middle, and sewed up on both sides, leaving room only for the arms; at the top, a piece was cut out, or a slit made, through which the head passed. It hung down to the feet, both before and behind, and was girded with the zona round the body, just under the breasts. It was sometimes made with, sometimes without, sleeves; and, that it might sit the better, it was gathered on each shoulder with a band or buckle. Some of the Greek women wore them open on each side, from the bottom up above the knee, so as to discover a part of the thigh. These were termed φαινομηριδες, showers (discoverers) of the thigh; but it was, in general, only young girls or immodest women who wore them thus.\nThe καταστολη seems to have been the same as the pallium or mantle, which, being made nearly in the form of the stola, hung down to the waist, both in back and front, was gathered on the shoulder with a band or buckle, had a hole or slit at top for the head to pass through, and hung loosely over the stola, without being confined by the zona or girdle. Representations of these dresses may be seen in Lens' Costume des Peuples de l'Antiquit, fig. 11, 12, 13, and 16. A more modest and becoming dress than the Grecian was never invented; it was, in a great measure, revived in England about the year 1805, and in it, simplicity, decency, and elegance were united; but it soon gave place to another mode, in which frippery and nonsense once more prevailed. It was too rational to last long; and too much like religious simplicity to be suffered in a land of shadows, and a world of painted outsides.\nWith shamefacedness and sobriety - The stola, catastola, girdle, etc., though simple in themselves, were often highly ornamented both with gold and precious stones; and, both among the Grecian and Roman women, the hair was often crisped and curled in the most variegated and complex manner. To this the apostle alludes when he says: Μη εν πλεγμασιν, η χρυσῳ, η μαργαριταις, η ἱματισμῳ πολυτελει· Not with plaited hair, or gold, or pearls, or costly raiment. The costly raiment might refer to the materials out of which the raiment was made, and to the workmanship; the gold and pearls, to the ornaments on the raiment.\nWith shame-facedness or modesty, μετα αιδους. This would lead them to avoid every thing unbecoming or meretricious in the mode or fashion of their dress.\nWith sobriety, μετα σωφροσυνης. Moderation would lead them to avoid all unnecessary expense. They might follow the custom or costume of the country as to the dress itself, for nothing was ever more becoming than the Grecian stola, catastola, and zona; but they must not imitate the extravagance of those who, through impurity or littleness of mind, decked themselves merely to attract the eye of admiration, or set in lying action the tongue of flattery. Woman has been invidiously defined: An animal fond of dress. How long will they permit themselves to be thus degraded?\nThose beautiful lines of Homer, in which he speaks of the death of Euphorbus, who was slain by Menelaus, show how anciently the Grecians plaited and adorned their hair: - \nΑντικρυ δ' απαλοιο δι' αυχενος ηλυθ' ακωκη·\nΔουπησεν δε πεσων, αραβησε δε τευχε' επ' αυτῳ.\nΑἱματι οἱ δευοντο κομαι, Χαριτεσσιν ὁμοιαι,\nΠλοχμοι θ' οἱ χρυσῳ τε και αργυρῳ εσφηκωντο.\nIl. xvii., ver. 49.\nWide through the neck appears the ghastly wound;\nProne sinks the warrior, and his arms rebound.\nThe shining circlets of his golden hair,\nWhich e'en the Graces might be proud to wear,\nInstarr'd with gems and gold bestrew the shore,\nWith dust dishonor'd, and deform'd with gore.\nPope.\nOr thus, more literally: - \nSounding he fell; loud rang his batter'd arms.\nHis locks, which e'en the Graces might have own'd,\nBlood sullied, and his ringlets wound about\nWith twine of gold and silver, swept the dust.\nCowper.\nThe extravagance to which the Grecian and Asiatic women went in their ornaments might well be a reason for the apostle's command.\nKypke, however, denies that any particular article of dress is intended here, and says that καταστολη is to be understood as coming from καταστελλω, to restrain, repress; and he refers it to that government of the mind, or moderation which women should exercise over their dress and demeanour in general, and every thing that may fall under the observation of the senses. All this, undoubtedly, the apostle had in view.\nWhen either women or men spend much time, cost, and attention on decorating their persons, it affords a painful proof that within there is little excellence, and that they are endeavoring to supply the want of mind and moral good by the feeble and silly aids of dress and ornament. Were religion out of the question, common sense would say in all these things: Be decent; but be moderate and modest. \n"]},{"type":"verse","number":10,"content":["But (which becometh, etc. - That is: Good works are the only ornaments with which women professing Christianity should seek to be adorned. The Jewish matrons were accustomed to cry to the bride: \"There is no need of paint, no need of antimony, no need of braided hair; she herself is most beautiful.\" The eastern women use a preparation of antimony, which they apply both to the eyes and eyelids, and by which the eye itself acquires a wonderful lustre. \n"]},{"type":"verse","number":11,"content":["Let the woman learn in silence - This is generally supposed to be a prohibition of women's preaching. I have already said what I judge necessary on this subject in the notes on Co1 11:5, etc., and Co1 14:34 (note), Co1 14:35 (note); to which places I beg leave to refer the reader. \n"]},{"type":"verse","number":12,"content":["Nor to usurp authority - A woman should attempt nothing, either in public or private, that belongs to man as his peculiar function. This was prohibited by the Roman laws: In multis juris nostri articulis deterior est conditio foeminarum quam masculorun,; l. 9, Pap. Lib. 31, Quaest. Foeminoe ab omnibus officiis civilibus vel publicis remotae sunt; et ideo nec judicis esse possunt, nec magistratum gerere, nec postulare, nec pro alio invenire, nec procuratores existere; l. 2, de Reg. Juris. Ulp. Lib. i. Ad Sab. - Vid. Poth. Pand. Justin., vol. i. p. 13.\n\"In our laws the condition of women is, in many respects, worse than that of men. Women are precluded from all public offices; therefore they cannot be judges, nor execute the function of magistrates; they cannot sue, plead, nor act in any case, as proxies.\" They were under many other disabilities, which may be seen in different places of the Pandects.\nBut to be in silence - It was lawful for men in public assemblies to ask questions, or even interrupt the speaker when there was any matter in his speech which they did not understand; but this liberty was not granted to women. See the note on Co1 14:34, Co1 14:35 (note). \n"]},{"type":"verse","number":13,"content":["For Adam was first formed, then Eve - And by this very act God designed that he should have the pre-eminence. God fitted man, by the robust construction of his body, to live a public life, to contend with difficulties, and to be capable of great exertions. The structure of woman's body plainly proves that she was never designed for those exertions required in public life. In this the chief part of the natural inferiority of woman is to be sought. \n"]},{"type":"verse","number":14,"content":["Adam was not deceived - It does not appear that Satan attempted the man; the woman said: The serpent beguiled me, and I did eat. Adam received the fruit from the hand of his wife; he knew he was transgressing, he was not deceived; however, she led the way, and in consequence of this she was subjected to the domination of her husband: Thy desire shall be to thy husband, and he shall rule over thee; Gen 3:16. There is a Greek verse, but it is not English law, that speaks a language nearly similar to that above: - \nΓυναικι δ' αρχειν ου διδωσιν ἡ φυσις.\nFor nature suffers not a woman's rule.\nGod has not only rendered her unfit for it, but he has subjected her, expressly, to the government of the man. \n"]},{"type":"verse","number":15,"content":["She shalt be saved in child-bearing - Σωθησεται δε δια της τεκνογονιας· She shall be saved through child-bearing - she shall be saved by means, or through the instrumentality, of child-bearing or of bringing forth a child. Amidst the different opinions given of the meaning of this very singular text, that of Dr. Macknight appears to me the most probable, which I shall give in his paraphrase and note.\n\"However, though Eve was first in the transgression, and brought death on herself, her husband, and all her posterity, the female sex shall be saved (equally with the male) through child-bearing - through bringing forth the Savior, if they live in faith, and love, and chastity, with that sobriety which I have been recommending.\n\"The word σωθησεται, saved, in this verse refers to ἡ γυνη, the woman, in the foregoing verse, which is certainly Eve. But the apostle did not mean to say that she alone was to be saved through child-bearing, but that all her posterity, whether male or female, are to be saved through the child-bearing of a woman; as is evident from his adding, If they live in faith and love and holiness, with sobriety. For safety in child-bearing does not depend on that condition at all; since many pious women die in child-bearing, while others of a contrary character are preserved. The salvation of the human race, through child-bearing, was intimated in the sentence passed on the serpent, Gen 3:15 : I will put enmity between thee and the woman, and between thy seed and her seed. It shall bruise thy head. Accordingly, the Savior being conceived in the womb of his mother by the power of the Holy Ghost, he is truly the seed of the woman who was to bruise the head of the serpent; and a woman, by bringing him forth, has been the occasion of our salvation.\" This is the most consistent sense, for in the way in which it is commonly understood it does not apply. There are innumerable instances of women dying in child-bed who have lived in faith and charity and holiness, with sobriety; and equally numerous instances of worthless women, slaves to different kinds of vices, who have not only been saved in child-bearing, but have passed through their travail with comparatively little pain; hence that is not the sense in which we should understand the apostle. Yet it must be a matter of great consolation and support, to all pious women labouring of child, to consider that, by the holy virgin's child-bearing, salvation is provided for them and the whole human race; and that, whether they die or live, though their own child-bearing can contribute nothing to their salvation, yet he who was born of a woman has purchased them and the whole human race by his blood.\nIf they continue - Εαν μεινωσιν is rightly translated, if they live; for so it signifies in other passages, particularly Phi 1:25. The change in the number of the verb from the singular to the plural, which is introduced here, was designed by the apostle to show that he does not speak of Eve; nor of any particular woman, but of the whole sex. See Macknight.\nWithout faith it is impossible to please God, or to be saved; and without love it will be impossible to obey. Faith and Love are essentially necessary to holiness and sobriety; and unless both men and women live in these, they cannot, scripturally, expect to dwell with God for ever. Some foolish women have supposed, from this verse, that the very act of bringing forth children shall entitle them to salvation; and that all who die in childbed infallibly go to glory! Nothing can be more unfounded than this; faith, love, holiness, and sobriety, are as absolutely requisite for the salvation of every daughter of Eve, as they are for the salvation of every son of Adam. Pain and suffering neither purify nor make atonement. On the mercy of God, in Christ, dispensing remission of sins and holiness, both men and women may confidently rely for salvation; but on nothing else. Let her that readeth understand.\nOn the subject of dress I will conclude in the words of a late writer: \"What harm does it do to adorn ourselves with gold, or pearls, or costly array, suppose we can afford it? The first harm it does is, it engenders pride; and, where it is already, increases it. Nothing is more natural than to think ourselves better because we are dressed in better clothes. One of the old heathens was so well apprised of this, that when he had a spite to a poor man, and had a mind to turn his head; he made him a present of a suit of fine clothes.\nEutrapelus cuicunque nocere volebat,\nVestimenta dabat pretiosa.\nHe could not then but imagine himself to be as much better, as he was finer, than his neighbor; inferring the superior value of his person from the value of his clothes.\" - Rev. J. Wesley's Sermons.\n\n"]}],"introduction":"Prayer, supplication, and thanksgiving, must be made for all men; because God will that all should be saved, Ti1 2:1-4. There is but one God and one Mediator, Ti1 2:5-7. How men should pray, Ti1 2:8. How women should adorn themselves, Ti1 2:9, Ti1 2:10. They are not suffered to teach, nor to nor to usurp authority over men, Ti1 2:11-14. How they may expect to be saved in child-bearing, Ti1 2:15. \n"},"thisChapterLink":"/api/c/adam-clarke/1TI/2.json","thisChapterReference":{"commentaryId":"adam-clarke","book":"1TI","chapter":2},"nextChapterApiLink":"/api/c/adam-clarke/1TI/3.json","nextChapterReference":{"commentaryId":"adam-clarke","book":"1TI","chapter":3},"previousChapterApiLink":"/api/c/adam-clarke/1TI/1.json","previousChapterReference":{"commentaryId":"adam-clarke","book":"1TI","chapter":1},"numberOfVerses":15}