{"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":3,"content":[{"type":"verse","number":1,"content":["This is a true saying - Πιστος ὁ λογος· This is a true doctrine. These words are joined to the last verse of the preceding chapter by several of the Greek fathers, and by them referred to the doctrine there stated.\nThe office of a bishop - Επισκοπης· The episcopacy, overseership or superintendency. The word ορεγεται, which we translate desire, signifies earnest, eager, passionate desire; and επιθυμει, which we translate desire, also signifies earnestly to desire or covet. It is strange that the episcopacy, in those times, should have been an object of intense desire to any man; when it was a place of danger, awl exposure to severe labor, want, persecution, and death, without any secular emolument whatsoever. On this ground I am led to think that the Spirit of God designed these words more for the ages that were to come, than for those which were then; and in reference to after ages the whole of what follows is chiefly to be understood.\nA good work - A work it then was; heavy, incessant, and painful. There were no unpreaching prelates in those days, and should be none now. Episcopacy in the Church of God is of Divine appointment, and should be maintained and respected. Under God, there should be supreme governors in the Church as well as in the state. The state has its monarch, the Church has its bishop; one should govern according to the laws of the land, the other according to the word of God.\nWhat a constitutional king should be, the principles of the constitution declare; what a bishop should be, the following verses particularly show. \n"]},{"type":"verse","number":2,"content":["A bishop then must be blameless - Our term bishop comes from the Anglo-Saxon, which is a mere corruption of the Greek επισκοπος, and the Latin episcopus; the former being compounded of επι, over, and σκεπτομαι, to look or inspect, signifies one who has the inspection or oversight of a place, persons, or business; what we commonly term a superintendent. The New Testament writers have borrowed the term from the Septuagint, it being the word by which they translate the פקיד pakid of the Hebrew text, which signifies a visiter, one that personally inspects the people or business over which he presides. It is given by St. Paul to the elders at Ephesus, who had the oversight of Christ's flock, Act 20:28; and to such like persons in other places, Phi 1:1; Ti1 3:2, the place in question; and Tit 1:7.\nLet us consider the qualifications of a Christian bishop, and then we shall soon discover who is fit for the office.\nFirst - is Christian bishop must be blameless; ανεπιληπτον, a person against whom no evil can be proved; one who is everywhere invulnerable; for the word is a metaphor, taken from the case of an expert and skillful pugilist, who so defends every part of his body that it is impossible for his antagonist to give one hit. So this Christian bishop is one that has so conducted himself, as to put it out of the reach of any person to prove that he is either unsound in a single article of the Christian faith, or deficient in the fulfillment of any duty incumbent on a Christian. He must be irreprehensible; for how can he reprove that in others which they can reprove in him?\nSecond - must be the husband of one wife. He should be a married man, but he should be no polygamist; and have only one wife, i.e. one at a time. It does not mean that, if he has been married, and his wife die, he should never marry another. Some have most foolishly spiritualized this, and say, that by one wife the Church is intended! This silly quibbling needs no refutation. The apostle's meaning appears to be this: that he should not be a man who has divorced his wife and married another; nor one that has two wives at a time. It does not appear to have been any part of the apostle's design to prohibit second marriages, of which some have made such a serious business. But it is natural for some men to tithe mint and cummin in religion, while they neglect the weightier matters of the law.\nThird - must be vigilant; νηφαλεον, from νη, not and πιω, to drink. Watchful; for as one who drinks is apt to sleep, so he who abstains from it is more likely to keep awake, and attend to his work and charge. A bishop has to watch over the Church, and watch for it; and this will require all his care and circumspection. Instead of νηφαλεον, many MSS. read νηφαλιον· this may be the better orthography, but makes no alteration in the sense.\nFourth - must be sober; σωφρονα, prudent or, according to the etymology of the word, from σως, sound, and φρην, mind, a man of a sound mind; having a good understanding, and the complete government of all his passions. A bishop should be a man of learning, of an extensive and well cultivated mind, dispassionate, prudent, and sedate.\nFifth - must be of good behavior; κοσμιον, orderly, decent, grave, and correct in the whole of his appearance, carriage, and conduct. The preceding term, σωφρονα, refers to the mind; this latter, κοσμιον, to the external manners. A clownish, rude, or boorish man should never have the rule of the Church of God; the sour, the sullen, and the boisterous should never be invested with a dignity which they would most infallibly disgrace.\nSixth - must be given to hospitality; φιλοξενον, literally, a lover of strangers; one who is ready to receive into his house and relieve every necessitous stranger. Hospitality, in those primitive times, was a great and necessary virtue; then there were few inns, or places of public entertainment; to those who were noted for benevolence the necessitous stranger had recourse. A Christian bishop, professing love to God and all mankind, preaching a religion, one half of the morality of which was included in, Thou shalt love thy neighbor as thyself, would naturally be sought to by those who were in distress and destitute of friends. To enable them to entertain such, the Church over which they presided must have furnished them with the means. Such a bishop as St. Paul, who was often obliged to labor with his hands for his own support, could have little to give away. But there is a considerable difference between an apostolical bishop and an ecclesiastical bishop: the one was generally itinerant, the other comparatively local; the former had neither house nor home, the latter had both; the apostolical bishop had charge of the Church of Christ universally, the ecclesiastical bishop of the Churches in a particular district. Such should be addicted to hospitality, or works of charity; especially in these modern times, in which, besides the spiritualities, they possess the temporalities, of the Church.\nSeventh - should be apt to teach; διδακτικον, one capable of teaching; not only wise himself, but ready to communicate his wisdom to others. One whose delight is, to instruct the ignorant and those who are out of the way. He must be a preacher; an able, zealous, fervent, and assiduous preacher.\nHe is no bishop who has health and strength, and yet seldom or never preaches; i.e. if he can preach - if he have the necessary gifts for the office.\nIn former times bishops wrote much and preached much; and their labors were greatly owned of God. No Church since the apostle's days has been more honored in this way than the British Church. And although bishops are here, as elsewhere, appointed by the state, yet we cannot help adoring the good providence of God, that, taken as a body, they have been an honor to their function; and that, since the reformation of religion in these lands, the bishops have in general been men of great learning and probity, and the ablest advocates of the Christian system, both as to its authenticity, and the purity and excellence of its doctrines and morality.\nChaucer's character of the Clerke of Oxenford is a good paraphrase on St. Paul's character of a primitive bishop: - \nOf studie tookin he moste cure and hede,\nNought oo word spak he more than there was nede,\nAnd that was selde in forme and and reverence,\nAnd short, and quick, and full of high sentence;\nSowning in moral vertue was speche,\nAnd gladly wolde he lerne, and gladly teache. \n"]},{"type":"verse","number":3,"content":["An eighth article in his character is, he must not be given to wine; μη παροινον. This word not only signifies one who is inordinately attached to wine, a winebibber or tippler, but also one who is imperious, abusive, insolent, whether through wine or otherwise. Kypke contends for this latter acceptation here. See his proofs and examples.\nNinth - He must be no striker; μη πληκτην, not quarrelsome; not ready to strike a person who may displease him; no persecutor of those who may differ from him; not prone, as one wittily said,\n\"To prove his doctrine orthodox\nBy apostolic blows and knocks.\"\nIt is said of Bishop Bonner, of infamous memory, that, when examining the poor Protestants whom he termed heretics, when worsted by them in argument he was used to smite them with his fists, and sometimes scourge and whip them. But though he was a most ignorant and consummate savage, yet from such a scripture as this he might have seen the necessity of surrendering his mitre.\nTenth - He must not be greedy of filthy lucre; μη αισχροκερδη, not desirous of base gain; not using base and unjustifiable methods to raise and increase his revenues; not trading or trafficking; for what would be honorable in a secular character, would be base and dishonorable in a bishop. Though such a trait should never appear in the character of a Christian prelate, yet there is much reason to suspect that the words above are not authentic; they are omitted by ADFG, many others, the Syriac, all the Arabic, Coptic, (and Sahidic), Ethiopic, Armenian, later Syriac, (but it appears in the margin), the Vulgate and Itala, and by most of the Greek fathers. Griesbach has left it out of the text, in which it does not appear that it ever had a legitimate place. The word covetous, which we have below, expresses all the meaning of this; and it is not likely that the apostle would insert in the same sentence two words of the same meaning, because they were different in sound. It appears to have been borrowed from Ti1 3:8.\nEleventh - He must be patient; επιεικη, meek, gentle; the opposite to πληκτην, a quarrelsome person, which it immediately follows when the spurious word αισχροκερδη is removed. Where meekness and patience do not reign, gravity cannot exist, and the love of God cannot dwell.\nTwelfth - He must not be a brawler; αμαχον, not contentious or litigious, but quiet and peaceable.\nThirteenth - He must not be covetous; αφιλαργυρον, not a lover of money; not desiring the office for the sake of its emoluments. He who loves money will stick at nothing in order to get it. Fair and foul methods are to him alike, provided they may be equally productive. For the sake of reputation he may wish to get all honourably; but if that cannot be, he will not scruple to adopt other methods. A brother heathen gives him this counsel: \"Get money if thou canst by fair means; if not, get it by hook and by crook.\" \n"]},{"type":"verse","number":4,"content":["The fourteenth qualification of a Christian bishop is, that he ruleth well his own house; του ιδιου οικου καλως προΐσταμενον, one who properly presides over and governs his own family. One who has the command, of his own house, not by sternness, severity, and tyranny, but with all gravity; governing his household by rule, every one knowing his own place, and each doing his own work, and each work having the proper time assigned for its beginning and end. This is a maxim of common sense; no family can be prosperous that is not under subjection, and no person can govern a family but the head of it, the husband, who is, both by nature and the appointment of God, the head or governor of his own house. See the note on Eph 5:22. \n"]},{"type":"verse","number":5,"content":["For if a man know not - Method is a matter of great importance in all the affairs of life. It is a true saying, He that does little with his head must do much with his hands; and even then the business is not half done for want of method. Now, he who has a proper method of doing business will show it in every affair of life, even the least. He who has a disorderly family has no government of that family; he probably has none because he has no method, no plan, of presiding. It was natural for the apostle to say, If a man know not how to rule his own house, how shall he take care of the Church of God? Look at a man's domestic arrangements; if they be not good, he should not be trusted with any branch of government, whether ecclesiastical or civil. \n"]},{"type":"verse","number":6,"content":["Fifteenth - It is required that he be not a novice - Νεοφυτον· Not a young plant, not recently ingrafted, that is, one not newly converted to the faith; (old MS. Bible); one who has been of considerable standing in the Christian Church, if he have the preceding qualifications, may be safely trusted with the government of that Church. It is impossible that one who is not long and deeply experienced in the ways of God can guide others in the way of life. Hence presbyters or elders were generally appointed to have the oversight of the rest, and hence presbyter and bishop seem to have been two names for the same office; yet all presbyters or elders certainly were not bishops, because all presbyters had not the qualifications marked above. But the apostle gives another reason: Lest being lifted up with pride he fall into the condemnation of the devil. It is natural for man to think himself of more importance than his fellows when they are intrusted to his government. The apostle's term τυφωθεις, puffed up, inflated, is a metaphor taken from a bladder when filled with air or wind. It is a substance, has a certain size, is light, can be the sport of the wind, but has nothing in it but air. Such is the classical coxcomb; a mere puffball, a disgrace to his function, and despised by every intelligent man. Should we not say to those whom it may concern,\n\"From such apostles, O ye mitred heads,\nPreserve the Church; and lay not careless hands\nOn skulls that cannot teach, and will not learn.\"\nFrom these words of the apostle we are led to infer that pride or self-conceit was the cause of the devil's downfall. In Ecclus. 10 there are some excellent sayings concerning pride: \"Pride is hurtful before God and man.\" \"Why is earth and ashes proud?\" \"The beginning of pride is when one departeth from God.\" \"For pride is the beginning of sin; and he that hath it shall pour out abomination.\" \"Pride was not made for Men.\" See verses 7, 9, 12, 13, and 18, of the above chapter. \n"]},{"type":"verse","number":7,"content":["The sixteenth requisite is, that he should have a good report of them which are without - That he should be one who had not been previously a profligate, or scandalous in his life. Such a person, when converted, may be a worthy private member of religious society; but I believe God rarely calls such to the work of the ministry, and never to the episcopate. Them that are without are the Jews, Gentiles, and the unconverted of all kinds. For the meaning of this term see the note on Col 4:5.\nLest he fall into reproach - For his former scandalous life.\nAnd the snare of the devil - Snares and temptations, such as he fell in and fell by before. This is called the snare of the devil; for, as he well knows the constitution of such persons, and what is most likely to prevail, he infers that what was effectual before to their transgressing may be so still; therefore on all suitable occasions he tempts them to their old sins. Backsliders in general fall by those sins to which they were addicted previously to their conversion. Former inveterate habits will revive in him who does not continue to deny himself, and watch unto prayer.\nThe snare of the devil. - Some would translate παγιδα του διαβολου, the snare of the accuser; and they give the same meaning to the word in Ti1 3:6, because it is evident that διαβολους has that meaning, Ti1 3:11, and our translators render it slanderers. Now, though διαβολος signifies an accuser, yet I do not see that it can, with any propriety, be restrained to this meaning in the texts in question, and especially as the word is emphatically applied to Satan himself; for he who, in Rev 12:10, is called the accuser of the brethren, is, in Rev 12:9, called the great dragon, the old serpent, the Devil, διαβολος, and Satan. \n"]},{"type":"verse","number":8,"content":["Likewise must the deacons - The term deacon, διακονος, simply signifies a regular or stated servant: from δια, through or emphatic, and κονεω, to minister or serve. See it explained in the note on Mat 20:26. As nearly the same qualifications were required in the deacons as in the bishops, the reader may consult what is said on the preceding verses.\nGrave - Of a sedate and dignified carriage and conduct.\nNot double-tongued - Speaking one thing to one person, and another thing to another, on the same subject. This is hypocrisy and deceit. This word might also be translated liars.\nNot given to much wine - Neither a drunkard, tippler, nor what is called a jovial companion. All this would be inconsistent with gravity.\nNot greedy of filthy lucre - See on Ti1 3:3 (note). \n"]},{"type":"verse","number":9,"content":["Holding the mystery of the faith - Instead of της πιστεως, the faith, one MS. (the readings of which are found in the margin of a copy of Mill's Greek text in the Bodleian library, and which is marked 61 in Griesbach) reads αναστασεως, of the resurrection. This reading, like many others in this MS., is found nowhere else; and is worthy of little regard, but as expressing what appeared to the writer to be the apostle's meaning. One of the greatest mysteries of the faith was undoubtedly the resurrection of the dead; and this was held in a pure conscience when the person so exercised himself as to have a conscience void of offense towards God and towards men. See Act 24:16. What has been since called Antinomianism, that is, making void the moral law, by a pretended faith in the righteousness of Christ, is that which the apostle has here particularly in view. \n"]},{"type":"verse","number":10,"content":["Let these - be proved - Let them not be young converts, or persons lately brought to the knowledge of the truth. This is the same in spirit with what is required of the bishops, Ti1 3:6.\nLet no man be put into an office in the Church till he has given full proof of his sincerity and steadiness, by having been for a considerable time a consistent private member of the Church.\nBeing found blameless - Ανεγκλητοι οντες· Being irreproachable; persons against whom no evil can be proved. The same as in Ti1 3:2, though a different word is used. See the note on Ti1 3:2. \n"]},{"type":"verse","number":11,"content":["Even so must their wives be grave - I believe the apostle does not mean here the wives either of the bishops or deacons in particular, but the Christian women in general. The original is simply: Γυναικας ὡσαυτως σεμνας· Let the women likewise be grave. Whatever is spoken here becomes women in general; but if the apostle had those termed deaconesses in his eye, which is quite possible, the words are peculiarly suitable to them. That there was such an order in the apostolic and primitive Church, and that they were appointed to their office by the imposition of hands, has already been noticed on Rom 16:1 (note). Possibly, therefore, the apostle may have had this order of deaconesses in view, to whom it was as necessary to give counsels and cautions as to the deacons themselves; and to prescribe their qualifications, lest improper persons should insinuate themselves into that office.\nNot slanderers - Μη διαβολους· Literally, not devils. See on Ti1 3:7 (note) This may be properly enough translated slanderers, backbiters, tale-bearers, etc., for all these are of their father, the devil, and his lusts they will do. Let all such, with the vast tribe of calumniators and dealers in scandal, remember that the apostle ranks them all with malicious, fallen spirits; a consideration which one would suppose might be sufficient to deter them from their injurious and abominable conduct.\nSober - See on Ti1 3:2 (note)\nFaithful in all things - The deaconesses had much to do among the poor, and especially among poor women, in dispensing the bounty of the Church. They were not only faithfully to expend all they had got, and for the purpose for which they got it; but they must do this with impartiality, showing no respect of persons, the degree of distress being the only rule by which the distribution was to be regulated. \n"]},{"type":"verse","number":12,"content":["Let the deacons be the husbands of one wife - This is the same that is required of the bishops. See on Ti1 3:2 (note) Ti1 3:4 (note), and Ti1 3:5 (note). \n"]},{"type":"verse","number":13,"content":["That have used the office of a deacon well - They who, having been tried or proved, Ti1 3:10, have shown by their steadiness, activity, and zeal, that they might be raised to a higher office, are here said to have purchased to themselves a good degree, βαθμον καλον· for, instead of having to administer to the bodies and bodily wants of the poor, the faithful deacons were raised to minister in holy things; and, instead of ministering the bread that perisheth, they were raised to the presbyterate or episcopate, to minister the bread of life to immortal souls. And hence the apostle adds; And great boldness in the faith; πολλην παρῥησιαν, great liberty of speech; i.e. in teaching the doctrines of Christianity, and in expounding the Scriptures, and preaching. It seems to have been a practice dictated by common sense, that the most grave and steady of the believers should be employed as deacons; the most experienced and zealous of the deacons should be raised to the rank of elders; and the most able and pious of the elders be consecrated bishops. As to a bishop of bishops, that age did not know such. The pope of Rome was the first who took this title. The same office, but not with the same powers nor abuse, is found in the patriarch of the Greek Church, and the archbishop of the Protestant Church. As the deacon had many private members under his care, so the presbyter or elder had several deacons under his care; the bishop, several presbyters; and the archbishop, several bishops. But I speak now more of the modern than of the ancient Church. The distinction in some of these offices is not so apparent in ancient times; and some of the offices themselves are modern, or comparatively so. But deacon, presbyter, and bishop, existed in the apostolic Church, and may therefore be considered of Divine origin. \n"]},{"type":"verse","number":14,"content":["These things write I - That is: I write only these things; because I hope to come unto thee shortly. \n"]},{"type":"verse","number":15,"content":["But if I tarry long - That is: Not withstanding I hope to come to thee shortly, and therefore do not feel the necessity of writing at large; yet, lest I should be delayed, I write what I judge necessary to direct thy conduct in the Church of God.\nThe house of God - This is spoken in allusion to the ancient tabernacle; which was God's house, and in which the symbol of the Divine Majesty dwelt. So the Christian Church is God's house, and every believer is a habitation of God through the Spirit.\nThe Church of the living God - The assembly in which God lives and works; each member of which is a living stone, all of whom, properly united among themselves, grow up unto a holy temple in the Lord.\nThe pillar and ground of the truth - Never was there a greater variety of opinions on any portion of the sacred Scripture than has been on this and the following verse. Commentators and critics have given senses and meanings till there is no meaning to be seen. It would be almost impossible, after reading all that has been said on this passage, for any man to make up his own mind. To what, or to whom, does the pillar and ground of the truth refer?\n1. Some say to Timothy, who is called the pillar, etc., because left there to support and defend the truth of God against false doctrines and false teachers; and is so called for the same reason that Peter, James, and John, are said to be pillars, i.e. supporters of the truth of God. Gal 2:9.\n2. Others suppose that the pillar and ground of the truth is spoken of God; and that ὁς εστι, who is, should be supplied as referring immediately to Θεος, God, just before. By this mode of interpretation the passage will read thus: That thou mayest know how thou oughtest to behave thyself in the house of God, which is the Church of the living God, Who Is (ὁς εστι) the pillar and ground of the truth. How God may be fitly termed the pillar and ground of truth, requires no explanation.\n3. Others think that the words should be understood of the Church of the living God; and in this case the feminine relative ἡτις εστι, which is, must be repeated immediately after εκκλησια, the Church. The house of God is the Church of the living God; Which (Church) Is the pillar and ground of the truth. That is: The full revelation of God's truth is in the Christian Church. The great doctrines of that Church are the truth without error, metaphor, or figure. Formerly the truth was but partially revealed, much of it being shadowed with types, ceremonies, and comparatively dark prophecies; but now all is plain, and the full revelation given; and the foundation on which this truth rests are the grand facts detailed in the Gospel, especially those which concern the incarnation, miracles, passion, death, and resurrection of Christ, and the mission of the Holy Spirit.\n4. Lastly, others refer the whole to το της ευσεβειας μυστηριον, the mystery of godliness; and translate the clause thus: The mystery of godliness is the pillar and ground of the truth; and, without controversy, a great thing. This gives a very good sense, but it is not much favored by the arrangement of the words in the original. \n"]},{"type":"verse","number":16,"content":["And, without controversy - Και ὁμολογουμενες· And confessedly, by general consent, it is a thing which no man can or ought to dispute; any phrase of this kind expresses the meaning of the original.\nGod was manifest in the flesh - If we take in the whole of the 14th, 15th, and 16th verses, we may make a consistent translation in the following manner, and the whole paragraph will stand thus: Hoping to see thee shortly; but should I tarry long, these things I now write unto thee, that thou mayest know how thou oughtest to behave thyself in the house of God, which is the Church of the living God. The mystery of godliness, which is the pillar and ground of the truth, is, without controversy, a great thing. And then he proceeds to show what this mystery of godliness is, which he sums up in the six following particulars:\n1. God was manifest in the flesh;\n2. Justified in the Spirit;\n3. Seen of angels;\n4. Preached unto the Gentiles;\n5. Believed on in the world;\n6. Received up into glory.\nThough all this makes a very plain and consistent sense, yet we are perplexed by various readings on the first clause, Θεος εφανερωθη εν σαρκι, God was manifest in the flesh; for instead of Θεος, God, several MSS., versions, and fathers, have ὁς or ὁ, who or which. And this is generally referred to the word mystery; Great is the mystery of godliness, Which was manifest in the flesh.\nThe insertion of, Θεος for ὁς, or ὁς for Θεος, may be easily accounted for. In ancient times the Greek was all written in capitals, for the common Greek character is comparatively of modern date. In these early times words of frequent recurrence were written contractedly, thus: for πατηρ, πρ; Θεος, θς; Κυριος, κς· Ιησους, ιης, etc. This is very frequent in the oldest MSS., and is continually recurring in the Codex Bexae, and Codex Alexandrinus. If, therefore, the middle stroke of the Θ, in ΘΣ, happened to be faint, or obliterated, and the dash above not very apparent, both of which I have observed in ancient MSS., then ΘΣ, the contraction for Θεος, God, might be mistaken for ΟΣ, which or who; and vice versa. This appears to have been the case in the Codex Alexandrinus, in this passage. To me there is ample reason to believe that the Codex Alexandrinus originally read ΘΣ, God, in this place; but the stroke becoming faint by length of time and injudicious handling, of which the MS. in this place has had a large proportion, some person has supplied the place, most reprehensibly, with a thick black line. This has destroyed the evidence of this MS., as now it can neither be quoted pro or con, though it is very likely that the person who supplied the ink line, did it from a conscientious conviction that ΘΣ was the original reading of this MS. I examined this MS. about thirty years ago, and this was the conviction that rested then on my mind. I have seen the MS. several times since, and have not changed my opinion. The enemies of the Deity of Christ have been at as much pains to destroy the evidence afforded by the common reading in support of this doctrine as if this text were the only one by which it can be supported; they must be aware that Joh 1:1, and Joh 1:14, proclaim the same truth; and that in those verses there is no authority to doubt the genuineness of the reading. We read, therefore, God was manifested in the flesh, and I cannot see what good sense can be taken out of, the Gospel was manifested in the flesh; or, the mystery of godliness was manifested in the flesh. After seriously considering this subject in every point of light, I hold with the reading in the commonly received text.\nJustified in the Spirit - By the miracles which were wrought by the apostle in and through the name of Jesus; as well as by his resurrection from the dead, through the energy of the Holy Ghost, by which he was proved to be the Son of God with power. Christ was, justified from all the calumnies of the Jews, who crucified him as an impostor. All these miracles, being wrought by the power of God, were a full proof of his innocence; for, had he not been what he professed to be, God would not have borne such a decisive testimony to his Messiahship.\nSeen of angels - By αγγελοι here, some understand not those celestial or infernal beings commonly called angels, but apostles and other persons who became messengers, to carry far and wide and attest the truth of his resurrection from the dead. If, however, we take the word seen, in its Jewish acceptation, for made known, we may here retain the term angels in its common acceptation; for it is certain that previously to our Lord's ascension to heaven, these holy beings could have little knowledge of the necessity, reasons, and economy of human salvation; nor of the nature of Christ as God and man. St. Peter informs us that the angels desire to look into these things, Pe1 1:12. And St. Paul says the same thing, Eph 3:9, Eph 3:10, when speaking of the revelation of the Gospel plan of salvation, which he calls the mystery, which From the Beginning of the World had been Hid in God; and which was now published, that unto the Principalities and Powers in heavenly places might be Made Known, by the Church, the manifold wisdom of God. Even those angelic beings have got an accession to their blessedness, by an increase of knowledge in the things which concern Jesus Christ, and the whole scheme of human salvation, through his incarnation, passion, death, resurrection, ascension, and glorification.\nPreached unto the Gentiles - This was one grand part of the mystery which had been hidden in God, that the Gentiles should be made fellow heirs with the Jews, and be admitted into the kingdom of God. To the Gentiles, therefore, he was proclaimed as having pulled down the middle wall of partition between them and the Jews; that, through him, God had granted unto them repentance unto life; and that they also might have redemption in his blood, the forgiveness of sins.\nBelieved on in the world - Was received by mankind as the promised Messiah, the Anointed of God, and the only Savior of fallen man. This is a most striking part of the mystery of godliness, that one who was crucified as a malefactor, and whose kingdom is not of this world, and whose doctrines are opposed to all the sinful propensities of the human heart, should, wherever his Gospel is preached, be acknowledged as the only Savior of sinners, and the Judge of quick and dead! But some would restrict the meaning to the Jews, whose economy is often denominated עולם הזה olam hazzeh, this world, and which words both our Lord and the apostles often use in the same sense. Notwithstanding their prejudices, many even of the Jews believed on him; and a great company of the priests themselves, who were his crucifiers, became obedient to the faith. Act 6:7. This was an additional proof of Christ's innocence.\nReceived up into glory - Even that human nature which he took of the Virgin Mary was raised, not only from the grave, but taken up into glory, and this in the most visible and palpable manner. This is a part of the mystery of godliness which, while we have every reasonable evidence to believe, we have not powers to comprehend. His reception into glory is of the utmost consequence to the Christian faith; as, in consequence, Jesus Christ in his human nature ever appears before the throne as our sacrifice and as our Mediator.\n1. The directions given in this chapter concerning bishops and deacons should be carefully weighed by every branch of the Christian Church. Not only the offices which are of Divine appointment, such as bishop, presbyter, and deacon, should be most religiously preserved in the Church; but, that they may have their full effect, the persons exercising them should be such as the apostle prescribes. Religion will surely suffer, when religious order is either contemned or neglected; and even the words of God will be treated with contempt, if ministered by unholy persons. Let order, therefore, be duly observed; and let those who fill these orders be not only wholly irreprehensible in their conduct, but also able ministers of the new covenant. A wicked man can neither have, nor communicate, authority to dispense heavenly mysteries; and a fool, or a blockhead, can never teach others the way of salvation. The highest abilities are not too great for a preacher of the Gospel; nor is it possible that he can have too much human learning. But all is nothing unless he can bring the grace and Spirit of God into all his ministrations; and these will never accompany him unless he live in the spirit of prayer and humility, fearing and loving God, and hating covetousness.\n2. It is well known that almost every Church supposes itself to be The true Church; and some consider themselves the only Church, and deny salvation to all who are not of their communion. To such a Church the two last verses in this chapter have been confidently self-applied, as being the pillar and ground of the truth - the possessor and dispenser of all the mysteries of God. But, supposing that the words in Ti1 3:15 are spoken of the Church, it is the Christian Church, as defined under article the third above, that must be meant; and we may see from this the vanity of applying the words to any particular Church, as if it had all the truth without error, and none else could pretend either to truth or ecclesiastical authority. The Christian Church is a widely different thing; it is the whole system of Christianity as laid down in the New Testament; it is built on the great foundation of prophets and apostles, Jesus Christ himself being the chief corner stone. It is composed of all who hold the doctrines of Christianity; who acknowledge Jesus as their Teacher, Redeemer, and only Advocate; of all who love God with all their heart, soul, mind, and strength, and their neighbor as themselves; or who are labouring after this conformity to the mind and command of their Creator. It is not known by any particular name; it is not distinguished by any particular form in its mode of worship; it is not exclusively here or there. It is the house of God - it is where God's Spirit dwells, where his precepts are obeyed, and where pure, unadulterated love to God and man prevails. It is not in the creed or religious confessions of any denomination of Christians; for, as all who hold the truth and live a holy life, acknowledging Jesus alone as the head of the Church and Savior of the world, are members of his mystical body; (and such may be found in all sects and parties); so the Church of Christ may be said to be everywhere, and to be confined nowhere; i.e. in whatever place Christianity is credited and acknowledged. The wicked of all sorts, no matter what their profession may be, and all persecutors of religious people, who differ from them, are without the pale of this Church. Essentially must their spirit and conduct be changed, before the living Head of this spiritual building can acknowledge them as members of the heavenly family.\nThis text, therefore, will never apply to the Romish Church, till that Church be, both in doctrine and discipline, what the Christian Church should be. When it is the established religion of any country it gives no toleration to those who differ from it; and in Protestant countries its cry for toleration and secular authority is loud and long. I wish its partisans the full and free exercise of their religion, even to its superstitions and nonsense; but how can they expect toleration who give none? The Protestant Church tolerates it fully; it persecutes the Protestants to bonds and death when it has power; which then is the true Church of Christ?\n\n"]}],"introduction":"Concerning bishops, their qualifications and work, Ti1 3:1-7. Of deacons, and how they should be proved, Ti1 3:8-10. Of their wives and children, and how they should be governed, Ti1 3:11-13. How Timothy should behave himself in the Church, Ti1 3:14, Ti1 3:15. The great mystery of godliness, Ti1 3:16. \n"},"thisChapterLink":"/api/c/adam-clarke/1TI/3.json","thisChapterReference":{"commentaryId":"adam-clarke","book":"1TI","chapter":3},"nextChapterApiLink":"/api/c/adam-clarke/1TI/4.json","nextChapterReference":{"commentaryId":"adam-clarke","book":"1TI","chapter":4},"previousChapterApiLink":"/api/c/adam-clarke/1TI/2.json","previousChapterReference":{"commentaryId":"adam-clarke","book":"1TI","chapter":2},"numberOfVerses":16}