Barnes' Notes on the Bible · 1 Timothy Chapter 3

本章の分析

この章、すなわち 1 Timothy 3 の目的は、クリスチャン教会の職務者たちの資格と義務に関する指示を与えることである。テモテが、エペソの教会のために適任な職務者たちを任じる仕事に部分的に従事することになっていたことは明らかであり、また、ここで言及されている種類の職務者たちが教会の中に恒久的に存続することになっていたので、それらの資格と義務に関する十分な言明が、霊感の影響の下で記録として残されることは重要であった。この章は、次の主題を含む。

I. 監督の資格(1 Timothy 3:1-7)。その資格の列挙に先立って、その職は名誉あるものであり、それを切に求める者は、それ自体として望ましいと見なされるべき務めを求めているのだ、という一般的な言明が置かれている(1 Timothy 3:1)。この職のために明示されている資格は、以下のとおりである。

(1) 個人的な人格の良い人でなければならない。クリスチャンの徳を所有し、それを生活において示す人、あるいは今日の私たちの言い方をすれば、正直な人でありクリスチャンの紳士であること(1 Timothy 3:2-3)。

(2) 自分の家をよく治める人でなければならない。そうすることによって、神の教会における第一の職務者として宰制する資格を備えていることを示すのである(1 Timothy 3:4-5)。

(3) 適切な年齢と経験を備えた人でなければならない。すなわち、青年のために仕掛けられる誘惑に陥る可能性の少ない人であること(1 Timothy 3:6)。

(4) クリスチャンでない人々の中でも良い評判を持つ人でなければならない。彼の伝道の影響が彼らにまで及ぶように意図されており、彼が誠実な人であると信じられないなら、彼らに善を行うことは不可能だからである(1 Timothy 3:7)。

II. 執事たちの資格(1 Timothy 3:8-10, 1 Timothy 3:12-13)。彼らは以下のような人々でなければならない。

(1) 良い人格を持つ人々——真面目で、節度があり、率直な人々(1 Timothy 3:8)。

(2) 清い良心をもって福音の教理を堅く保つ人々(1 Timothy 3:9)。

(3) 試みられた者であり、教会に仕える資格を備えていることを示した人々(1 Timothy 3:10)。

(4) その妻たちの人格が、共同の大義の促進に寄与するような人々(1 Timothy 3:11)。

(5) 一夫多妻に生きておらず、模範的な家庭統治を行っている人々(1 Timothy 3:12-13)。

III. パウロがテモテにこれらの指示を与えた理由(1 Timothy 3:14-15)。それは、彼が召されて占めることになっている重要な立場において、どのように身を処すべきかを知るためであった。パウロは、まもなく彼のところに行くことができ、エペソで始めた仕事を完成することができるようにと望んでいたが、その間、この書き記された勧めを彼に与えて、彼に要求されている義務を特に理解させるようにしたのである。

IV. この章は、彼が従事している務めの重要性をテモテの心に印象づけることを意図したかのような言明で閉じられる(1 Timothy 3:15-16)。その言明とは、教会は世界における真理の偉大な擁護者であるということ(1 Timothy 3:15)、そして教会が保持すべき真理は最も重要であるということである。それは神の御子の受肉と、彼が地上で成し遂げられた業——天において最も深い関心を呼び起こした業——に関わり、それに関する真の教理を人々の間に保持し続けることは極めて重要であった(1 Timothy 3:16)。この理由は、次の章においてさらに強く訴えられる。すなわち、サタンの影響の下でこれらの偉大な教理が否定され、真理が腐敗され、歪曲される時代が来ることを示すことによってである。

このことばは真実である——ギリシア語では「ことばは忠実である」となり、1 Timothy 1:15 で用いられたのとまったく同じ句である。その節の注解を参照せよ。ここでの考えは、それが信じるに値するものであり、疑われてはならない、ということである。

もし人が望むなら——伝道の務めに置かれることを望む者たちがいるであろうことを含意している。主は、疑いなく、ご自身の御霊によって、福音を宣べ伝えたいという真剣で抑えがたい願いをしばしば起こされる。その願いは、それを持つ者が他のどの召しにおいても満足し得ないほどに強い。そのような場合、それはこの務めへの召しの一つの証拠と見なされるべきである。しかし使徒は、続く言明によって、この願いが存在するところではどこでも、その職の本質について正しい見解を持つことが極めて重要であり、また福音を宣べ伝えたいという単なる願い以外の資格が伝道の務めのために必要であることを示唆する。そこで彼はそれらの資格を述べていく。そして伝道の職を「望む」者は、これらの資格が実質的に自分の中に見いだされない限り、自分がその職に召されていると結論してはならない。ここで「望む」と訳されている語(ὀρέγω oregō)は、本来「伸ばす」「差し出す」を意味し、そこから、何かを得ようとして手を伸ばす、切望する、得ようと努める、という意味になった(Hebrews 11:16)。

監督の職——ここのギリシア語は一語、すなわち ἐπισκοπῆς episkopēs である。ἐπισκοπή episkopē——「エピスコペー」。ここから「監督制」を意味する語が派生する——は、新約聖書にわずか四回出てくる。Luke 19:44 と 1 Peter 2:12 では「おとずれ」と訳され、Acts 1:20 では「職分」と訳され、ここでは「監督の職」と訳されている。ここから派生する動詞(ἐπισκοπέω episkopeō)は、二回しか出てこない。Hebrews 12:15 では「注意を払いながら」と訳され、1 Peter 5:2 では「監督して」と訳されている。「監督」と訳される名詞は、Acts 20:28; Philippians 1:1; 1 Timothy 3:2; Titus 1:7; 1 Peter 2:25 に出てくる。この動詞は本来、見る、注視する、検査する、目を配る、世話をする、注意を払うことを意味し、名詞は監督し、検査し、目を配る職を表す。それは病人の世話を表すのにも用いられる(クセノフォン『家政論』15巻9節。パソウと比較せよ)。また、それはきわめて一般的な性格を持つので、監督や配慮のいかなる職をも表し得る。この語自体には、それを伝道のいずれかの階級や等級に限定するものは何もなく、実際、新約聖書では教会のほとんどすべての職務者たちに適用されており、さらに進んで、「いかなる」職にも就いていないクリスチャンたちにまで適用されている。すなわち、次のように適用される。

(a) 一般の信者たちに。「神の恵みから落ちる者が誰もないように、注意を払いなさい」と命じるとき(Hebrews 12:15)。

(b) エペソの教会の長老たちに。「聖霊があなたがたを群れの監督者に任じられた」と言うとき(Acts 20:28)。

(c) 1 Peter 5:2 の教会の長老たち、すなわちプレスビテロスに。「あなたがたのうちにいる神の群れを牧しなさい。それを監督して」。

(d) ピリピの教会の職務者たちに。彼らは、その教会の唯一の職務者たちとして執事たちとともに言及されている。「ピリピにいるすべての聖徒たち、また監督たちと執事たちへ」(Philippians 1:1)。

(e) 背教者ユダに(Acts 1:20)。

(f) 教会の偉大な頭である主イエス・キリストに。「あなたがたのたましいの牧者また監督者」(1 Peter 2:25)。

この語のこのような使用から、次のことが帰結する。

(1) この語は、使徒職の「独自性」を示すため、あるいは使徒たちに特別に適用され得るような仕方で用いられたことは、決してない。実際、「監督」という語は、新約聖書では使徒たちのうちのだれにも決して適用されていない。また、この語のいかなる形態も、Acts 1:20 の「ユダ」というただ一つの場合を除いては、彼らに関して用いられたことがない。

(2) この語は、新約聖書において、長老たちより上位の人々の階級——長老たちとは異なる機能を持つ、あるいは何らかの意味で使徒たちの「後継者」であるような階級——を表すためには、決して用いられていない。今日、監督制の擁護者たちはそのように用いるが、これは新約聖書にはまったく知られていない用法である。この名が、新約聖書の中で今日「監督」と呼ばれている人々に決して与えられていないことは、あまりに否定し難いので、監督派の人々自身もそれを認めている。こうして、オンダードンク博士(『監督制論』12ページ)はこう述べている。「新約聖書で『監督たち』について読むことはみな、『中間の等級』に属するもの、すなわち今日『司祭』と見なされている人々に属するものと見なされるべきである」。これは、上で述べた、いわゆる「中間の等級」に関する注記から明らかなように、厳密には正しくない。しかし、それが高位聖職者たちには「決して」適用されないと断言する限りにおいては、厳密に正しい。

(3) この語は、新約聖書において、等級や地位にかかわりなく、教会たちの世話また監督を担った福音の伝道者たちを表すために用いられている。

(4) この語は、今日監督派の人々が用いている意味においては、新約聖書がまったく認めていない意味——実際、そこでの用法とまったく相容れない意味——を持つに至っている。偽りの上位聖職者階級を示し、その特殊な職務を表すためにこの語を適用することは、聖書においてこの語が現れる用法から完全に離れることである。

(5) この語が聖書において「高位聖職者たち」に関して決して用いられていないのであるから、この語は「牧者たち」、すなわち教会の他の職務者たちに関して用いられるべきである。そして、キリストの群れの「牧者」または「監督者」であることは、聖書的な監督であると見なされるべきである。

彼は良いわざを望んでいる——名誉ある職、人が望むことが正しい職であるという意味である。生涯には、決して望まれるべきでない立場もいくつかある。しかし、しかるべき資格を持つ者であるなら、監督の職を望むことはだれにとっても適切である。Romans 11:13 の注解と比較せよ。

監督は——前述の考察に従えば、あるクリスチャン教会の世話また監督を担う宗教の伝道者を指す。ここで言及されているのは、疑いなく、教会の統治を託された者(1 Timothy 3:4-5)であり、かつ福音の説教者でもあった者である。

非難されるところがなくなければならない——これは、Luke 1:6; Philippians 2:15; Philippians 3:6 で「非のうちどころのない」と訳されている語(ἄμεμπτος amemptos)とは別の語(ἀνεπίλημπτον anepilēmpton)である(ただし、Luke 1:6 の注解、Philippians 3:6 の注解と比較せよ)。ここで用いられている語は、職の必要な資格として監督が「完全」でなければならないことを意味するのではなく、不道徳の非難、あるいは偽りの教理を抱いているという非難が、彼に向けられていない者でなければならないことを意味する。彼の行いは、責められることも非難されることもないものであるべきである。疑いなくこれは、道徳的な歪みを含意する「いかなる」非難も彼に向けられ得るなら、彼はその職にふさわしくない、ということを意味する。彼は、真実、正直、純潔、全般的な正しさにおいて、非難することのできない人格の持ち主でなければならない。

一人の妻の夫であり——これは、第四世紀のバルセロナ教会の長老ウィギランティウスが考えたように、監督が「結婚している者でなければならない」ことを要求すると理解する必要はない。福音の伝道者が結婚していることが一般的に望ましいとしても、である。しかしこの解釈が誤りとして明白に排除されるべきである一方、この箇所が、伝道者が同時に一人より多くの妻を持ってはならないことを意味するのか、それとも最初の妻の死後に二人目の妻との結婚を禁じるのかという問題については、意見の相違が大きかった。この問題については、ブルームフィールド、ドッドリッジ、マックナイトの注解を参照することができる。前者が正しい見解であることは、次の考察から明らかであると思われる。

(1) それはこの言葉の最も明白な意味であり、これが語りかけられた相手たちも、疑いなくそのように理解したであろう。一夫多妻がまれでなかった時代に、人が「ただ一人の妻のみを持つべきだ」と言えば、それは当然、一夫多妻を禁じるものとして理解されたであろう。

(2) 最初の妻の死後に二人目の妻と結婚することは、聖書のどこにおいても悪いこととしては語られていない。やもめが二人目の夫と結婚することは、正当であると明示的に宣言されている(1 Corinthians 7:39)。そしてこの許容から、男性が二度目の結婚をすることも同じように合法で正当であると推論することは、不当ではない。もしそれがいかなる人にも合法であるなら、福音の伝道者にも正当である。彼の場合にそのような結婚に反対して挙げられうる理由は、他のどんな人の場合にも同じように有効なものであろう。結婚は、他のいかなる人にとってと同じように、福音の伝道者にとっても尊い(Hebrews 13:4 の注解と比較せよ)。また、ドッドリッジが適切に述べたように、「事情がうまく調整されれば、二度目の結婚にも最初の結婚と同じほどの理由があり得るし、いかなる種類の不都合もほとんど伴わないことがあり得る」。

(3) これを一夫多妻の禁止と理解するなら、この禁止には特別な適切さがあった。それが広く行われ、不法とは見なされていなかったことは知られている。しかし福音の一つの目的は、結婚関係をその原始的な状態に回復することであった。教会に入ってくるすべての者に、もし一人より多くの妻があればその妻たちと離婚するよう求めることが、絶対的に必要であるとは思われなかったかもしれないが、この不規則な慣行に烙印を押すために、福音の伝道者にはただ一人の妻のみを持つことが求められるのが望ましいと考えられたかもしれない。こうして一夫多妻の慣行は次第に不名誉で不適切なものと見なされるようになり、伝道職の模範と影響力は、この関係の本質に関する正しい見解を導き入れる傾向を持ったであろう。この箇所から明らかな一つのことは、聖職者の独身に関する教皇主義者たちの見解が聖書と直接矛盾する、ということである。Hebrews 13:4 におけるパウロの宣言は「結婚はすべての人に尊い」であり、ここでは、伝道者が結婚することが正当であることが含意されている。もしそうでなければ、なぜパウロはこれを全面的に禁じなかったのか。監督が一人より多くの妻を持つことが不適切だと言う代わりに、なぜ彼がまったく結婚することが不適切だと言わなかったのか。今日のローマ主義者なら、そう言うのではないか。

節制し——この語(νηφάλεος nēphaleos)は、ここおよび 1 Timothy 3:11; Titus 2:2 にのみ出てくる。本来は「しらふで、節制し、禁欲的」——特にぶどう酒に関して——を意味し、次に「落ち着いた心で、注意深く、慎重である」を意味する(ロビンソン)。伝道者は、自分の行いに対して注意深い配慮を持つべきである。彼は、いかなる形の罪に対しても警戒しなければならない。

慎み深く——σώφρονα sōphrona。本来は「健全な心」を持つ者、すなわち健全な理性に従い、情念の支配の下にない者を意味する。ここでの考えは、彼の欲望と情念がよく規制されているべきだ、ということである。おそらく「慎重な」という語が、私たちの持つどの単語よりも使徒の意味に近いであろう。

品行がよく——欄外注は「しとやか」。コーバデール訳はこれを「礼儀正しく」としている。現代の言語使用に従えば、最も正確な訳は、彼が「紳士」であるべきだということであろう。彼は、外見がだらしなかったり、態度が粗野で無作法であったりしてはならない。洗練された会話の慣習を乱暴に破ってはならず、最も洗練された社交界において体裁よく見えるのに適さないような者であってはならない。個人の身だしなみと、洗練された交際を規制する規則への無関心は、才能も学識も宗教も示すものではない。それらは時に——しばしばではないが——才能、学識、宗教と結びつくことがあるとはいえ、決してそのいずれの実でもなく、そのような無礼と粗野を示す人々にとって常に恥である。そのような人々は「もっと」分かっているべきであるから。福音の伝道者は、態度において完成された紳士であるべきであり、そうでないなら弁解の余地がない。もし彼に宗教があるなら、その宗教は彼をそのような者とするのに適している。彼は通常、そのような者にするはずの教育を受けており、あらゆる場合にそのような訓練を受けている「べき」であった。彼は最良の社交界に受け入れられ、洗練された会話の法則に熟達する機会を持つ。彼は、人類の福祉を促進するすべてのことにおいて模範とならなければならない。そして、態度の洗練と上品さほど容易に習得でき、かつこの目的に適したものは少ない。洗練された交際の規則を無視して、全体として、あるいは「長い目で見て」善を行いうる者はいない。他の条件が等しいなら、伝道職にある洗練された、丁寧で、礼儀正しい紳士は、良い作法の規則を軽んじる者よりも常に多くの善を行うであろう。

客好きであり——これは、宗教の務めとして、すべてのクリスチャンにしばしば命じられている。その理由とこの務めの性質については、Romans 12:13 の注解と Hebrews 13:2 の注解を参照せよ。それは、あらゆるクリスチャンの徳の模範となるべきであった宗教の伝道者たちの特別な務めであった。

教える能力があり——ギリシア語では「教えることができる」。すなわち、教える能力がある、あるいは宗教の教師の職に適している、ということである。福音の説教者の主要な仕事は「教えること」、すなわち同胞の人間に真理の知識を伝えることであるから、この資格の必要性は明白である。宗教の教理と務めに関して他の人々に「教え」を与える資格のない者は、伝道職に入ることを許されるべきではない。また、他の人々を教える資格を備えるために、知識において絶えず「増し加わる」よう努めるほどの勤勉さと自己否認と学問への愛を持たない者は、自分が伝道職に留まるべきだと感じてはならない。民を「教えよう」とする者は、教えようとする主題において、民より先に進んでいなければならない。

酒を好む者ではなく——欄外注は「酒に酔った者のように、争いを仕掛け、害を及ぼす心構えのない者と」。ギリシア語(πάροινος paroinos)は、新約聖書ではここと Titus 1:7 にのみ出てくる。本来「酒のそばに」の意で、酒宴や酒の歌など、酒「によって」あるいは酒を「前にして」起こる事柄について語る。次に、ここでのように、酒「のそばに」座る者、すなわちそれを飲む習慣のある者を表すようになった。ここでのこの語の使用から、ぶどう酒が絶対的かつ全面的に禁じられていたと推論することはできない。この語は本来、そのような考えを表さないからである。それは、ぶどう酒を飲む習慣のある者、あるいはそれにふける者たちと共に座るのに慣れた者が、伝道職に受け入れられてはならない、という意味である。使徒がここでこの主題に言及する仕方は、彼がいかなる意味においてもその使用を推奨しようとせず、その使用を危険なものと見なし、宗教の伝道者たちにはそれを完全に避けることを望んだ、と公平に想定させる。聖餐における使用あるいは薬としての使用を除き、その使用一般に関して言えば、伝道者がそれを完全に断っても、自分にも他人にも何の害も及ばない。しかし、それにふけるなら害を及ぼしうる。いかなる人も、礼儀やクリスチャンの務めのゆえに、それを使用する「義務」の下にあるわけではない。何千人もの福音の伝道者たちが、その使用によって自分自身に破滅をもたらし、伝道職に恥をもたらしてきた(Matthew 11:9 の注解、および 1 Timothy 5:23 の注解と比較せよ)。

打つ者ではなく——彼は、争い好きな者ではなく、平和を好む者でなければならない。これはぶどう酒の使用に関する警告と結びついているが、おそらくそれは、酒が通常、争いと紛争の霊を生み出すものと見いだされるからであろう。

卑しい利得を貪る者ではなく——争いを好まず、貪欲でない者でなければならない。ギリシア語では「卑しい利得を望まない」という意味である。これを望むことは新約聖書のどこにおいても断罪されているが、福音の伝道者がこれから自由であることは、特にその務めである。彼は支えられる権利を持つ(1 Corinthians 9 の注解を参照せよ)。しかし、金銭愛ほど確実に福音の伝道者の有用性を麻痺させるものはない。人間の胸には、そのような者がより高貴でより純粋な原則によって動かされるべきだという本能的な感覚がある。そのうえ、貪欲は世界の大いなる罪——他のすべての罪を合わせたものよりも多くの心を支配し、福音の前進をより妨げる罪——であるから、宗教の伝道者が、人々が「あるべき」姿の模範となり、その全生涯をもって、自分が宣べ伝えるよう任じられた福音の前進に対する主要な妨害に反対の意を示すことが、この上なく重要である。

寛容であり——謙虚で、穏やかで、優しいことを意味する。Philippians 4:5; Titus 3:2; James 3:17、また 1 Peter 2:18 において、この語(ギリシア語)が「優しい」と訳されているのを参照せよ。この語は、福音の伝道者が、その主人であられる方のような、穏やかで親切な態度の人であるべきことを意味する。

争う者ではなく——2 Timothy 2:24 と比較せよ。すなわち、彼は争いにふける者、あるいは口論を起こしやすい者であってはならない。ギリシア語は文字どおり「戦おうとしない気質の者」である。

金銭を愛さず——ギリシア語では「銀を愛さない」、すなわち金銭を愛さない、ということである。金銭を愛することがその人柄となっている者を、伝道職に任じてはならない。そのような者は、どんな才能を持っていようとも、その職にふさわしい資格を全く持たず、善よりも多くの害をなすであろう。

自分の家をよく治める者——これは、福音の伝道者が結婚している者であり、またそうあるべきことを含意する。新約聖書のどこにおいても、彼は生活のあらゆる関係において模範となりうる者であると想定されている。彼が教会において占める位置は、父がその家庭に対して持つ関係に強い類似を持つ。それゆえ、家族をよく治める資格は、教会において適切に宰制する資格の証拠となろう。初期のクリスチャン教会では、伝道者たちは、成熟した人生に達した者たち、また当時家族のかしらであった者たちの中から選ばれることが少なくなかった可能性が高い。当然、そのような者たちは、この職のためのこの資格を自分が持っていることを示す機会をすでに持っていた者たちであろう。しかし、これを今日、職の「事前の」資格として強く主張することはできないにせよ、彼に家族があるなら、それは依然として必要な資格であり、伝道職にある人は自分の家をよく治める者「であるべき」ことは、今もなお真実である。これが欠けているなら、常に広範な有用性への妨げとなるであろう。

すべての威厳をもって自分の子どもたちを従順にさせる者——これは、彼の「子どもたち」が威厳を示すべきだという意味ではない。その点について何が真であろうと、である。むしろ、それは「父」を指す。彼は家族の中で、威厳のある、真剣な人であるべきである。子どもたちとの会話において、軽薄な性格から、浮わつきと気まぐれから自由な人であるべきである。これは、彼が厳格で、冷酷で、陰鬱であるべきだという意味ではない。そのような特性はしばしば威厳と取り違えられるが、態度の軽薄さと同じように、父の本来の霊にそぐわないものである。むしろ彼は、真剣で慎み深い心の人であるべきである。彼はしかるべき「威厳」(σεμνότης semnotēs)を保つべきである。彼は自尊を保ち、その品行は、他の人々が彼に敬意を抱くように促すものであるべきである。

For if a man know not how to rule - This is a beautiful and striking argument. A church resembles a family. It is, indeed, larger, and there is a greater variety of dispositions in it than there is in a family. The authority of a minister of the gospel in a church is also less absolute than that of a father. But still there is a striking resemblance. The church is made up of an assemblage of brothers and sisters. They are banded together for the same purposes, and have a common object to aim at. They have common feelings and common needs. They have sympathy, like a family, with each other in their distresses and afflictions. The government of the church also is designed to be "paternal." It should be felt that he who presides over it has the feelings of a father; that he loves all the members of the great family; that he has no prejudices, no partialities, no selfish aims to gratify.

Now, if a man cannot govern his own family well; if he is severe, partial, neglectful, or tyrannical at home, how can he be expected to take charge of the more numerous "household of faith" with proper views and feelings? If, with all the natural and strong ties of affection which bind a father to his own children; if, when they are few comparatively in number, and where his eye is constantly upon them, he is unable to govern them aright, how can he be expected to preside in a proper manner over the larger household where he will be bound with comparatively feebler ties, and where he will be exposed more to the influence of passion, and where he will have a much less constant opportunity of supervision? Confucius, as quoted by Doddridge, has a sentiment strikingly resembling that before us: "It is impossible that he who knows not how to govern and reform his own family, should rightly govern and reform a people." We may remark, also, in this verse, a delicate and beautiful use of words by the apostle to prevent the possibility of misapprehension. While he institutes a comparison between the government of a family and that of the church, he guards against the possibility of its being supposed that he would countenance "arbitrary" authority in the church, even such authority as a father must of necessity employ in his own family. Hence, he uses different words. He speaks of the father as "ruling" over his own family, or "presiding over it" - προστῆναι prostēnai; he describes the minister of religion as "having a tender care for the church" - ἐπιμελὴσεται epimelēsetai.

Not a novice - Margin, "one newly come to the faith." The Greek word, which occurs nowhere else in the New Testament, means, properly, that which is "newly planted." Thus it would mean a plant that was not strong, or not fitted to bear the severity of storms; that had not as yet struck its roots deep, and could not resist the fierceness of a cold blast. Then the word comes to mean a new convert; one who has had little opportunity to test his own faith, or to give evidence to others that he would be faithful to the trust committed to him. The word does not refer so much to one who is young "in years," as one who is young "in faith." Still, all the reasons which apply against introducing a very recent convert into the ministry, will apply commonly with equal force against introducing one young in years.

Lest being lifted up with pride - We are not to suppose that this is the only reason against introducing a recent convert into the ministry, but it is a sufficient reason. He would be likely to be elated by being entrusted at once with the highest office in the church, and by the commendations and flattery which he might receive. No condition is wholly proof against this; but he is much less likely to be injured who has had much experience of the depravity of his own heart, and whose mind has been deeply imbued with the spirit of the gospel.

He fall into the condemnation of the devil - That is, the same kind of condemnation which the devil fell into; to wit, condemnation on account of pride. It is here intimated that the cause of the apostasy of Satan was pride - a cause which is as likely to have been the true one as any other. Who can tell but it may have been produced by some new honor which was conferred on him in heaven, and that his virtue was not found sufficient for the untried circumstances in which he was placed? Much of the apostasy from eminent virtue in this world, arises from this cause; and possibly the case of Satan may have been the most signal instance of this kind which has occurred in the universe. The idea of Paul is, that a young convert should not suddenly be raised to an exalted station in the church. Who can doubt the wisdom of this direction? The word rendered "lifted up" (τυφωθὲις tuphōtheis), is from a verb which means to smoke, to fume, to surround with smoke; then to "inflate" - as a bladder is with air; and then to be conceited or proud; that is, to be "like" a bladder filled, not with a solid substance, but with air.

Moreover he must have a good report of them which are without - Who are without the church; that is, of those who are not Christians. This includes, of course, "all" classes of those who are not Christians - pagans, infidels, Jews, moral people, and scoffers. The idea is, that he must have a fair reputation with them for integrity of character. His life must be in their view upright. He must not be addicted to anything which they regard as inconsistent with good morals. His deportment must be such that they shall regard it as not inconsistent with his profession. He must be true and just and honest in his dealings with his fellow-men, and so live that they cannot say that he has wronged them. He must not give occasion for scandal or reproach in his contact with the other sex, but must be regarded as a man of a pure life and of a holy walk. The "reason" for this injunction is obvious.

It is his business to endeavor to do such people good, and to persuade them to become Christians. "But no minister of the gospel can possibly do such people good, unless they regard him as an upright and honest man." No matter how he preaches or prays; no matter how orthodox, learned, or apparently devout he may be, all his efforts will be in vain unless they regard him as a man of incorruptible integrity. If they hate religion themselves, they insist justly that since he has professed it he shall be governed by its principles; or if they feel its importance, they will not be influenced to embrace it by a man that they regard as hypocritical and impure. Go to a man whom you have defrauded, or who regards you as having done or attempted wrong to any other one, and talk to him about the necessity of religion, and he will instinctively say that he does not "want" a religion which will not make its professor true, honest, and pure. It is impossible, therefore, for a minister to over-estimate the importance of having a fair character in the view of the world, and no man should be introduced into the ministry, or sustained in it, who has not a fair reputation; compare Colossians 4:5 note; 1 Thessalonians 4:12 note.

Lest he fall into reproach - That is, in such a way as to bring dishonor on the ministerial character. His life will be such as to give people occasion to reproach the cause of religion.

And the snare of the devil - The snare which the devil lays to entrap and ruin the ministers of the gospel and all good people. The snare to which reference is here made, is that of "blasting the character and influence of the minister of the gospel." The idea is, that Satan lays this snare so to entangle him as to secure this object, and the means which he uses is the vigilance and suspicion of those who are out of the church. If there is anything of this kind in the life of a minister which they can make use of, they will be ready to do it. Hence, the necessity on his part of an upright and blameless life. Satan is constantly aiming at this thing; the world is watching for it, and if the minister has any "propensity" which is not in entire accordance with honesty, Satan will take advantage of it and lead him into the snare.

Likewise must the deacons - On the meaning of the word "deacons," see the notes on Philippians 1:1. On their appointment, see the notes, Acts 6:1. The word here evidently denotes those who had charge of the temporal affairs of the church, the poor, etc. No qualifications are mentioned, implying that they were to be preachers of the gospel. In most respects, except in regard to preaching, their qualifications were to be the same as those of the "bishops."

Be grave - Serious, sober-minded men. In Acts 6:3, it is said that they should be men "of honest report." On the meaning of the word "grave," see the notes on 1 Timothy 3:4. They should be men who by their serious deportment will inspire respect.

Not double-tongued - The word here used δίλογος dilogos - does not occur elsewhere in the New Testament. It means, properly, uttering the same thing twice (from δίς dis and λέγω legō), and then deceitful, or speaking one thing and meaning another. They should be men who can be relied on for the exact truth of what they say, and for the exact fulfillment of their promises.

Not given to much wine - see 1 Timothy 3:3. The word "much" is added here to what is said 1 Timothy 3:2 of the qualification of a bishop. It is not affirmed that it would be proper for the deacon, anymore than the bishop, to indulge in the use of wine in small quantities, but it "is" affirmed that a man who is much given to the use of wine ought not, on any consideration, to be a deacon. It may be remarked here, that this qualification was everywhere regarded as necessary for a minister of religion. Even the pagan priests, on entering a temple, did not drink wine. "Bloomfield." The use of wine, and of strong drinks of all kinds, was absolutely prohibited to the Jewish ministers of every rank when they were about to engage in the service of God; Leviticus 10:9. Why should it then be anymore proper for a Christian minister to drink wine than for a Jewish or a pagan priest? Shall a minister of the gospel be less holy than they? Shall he have a feebler sense of the purity of his vocation? Shall he be less careful lest he expose himself to the possibility of conducting the services of religion in an irreverent and silly manner? Shall he venture to approach the altar of God under the influence of intoxicating drinks, when a sense of propriety restrained the pagan priest, and a solemn statue of Yahweh restrained the Jewish priest from doing it?

Not greedy of filthy lucre - notes, 1 Timothy 3:3. The special reason why this qualification was important in the deacon was, that he would be entrusted with the funds of the church, and might be tempted to appropriate them to his own use instead of the charitable purposes for which they were designed; see this illustrated in the case of Judas, John 12:6.

Holding the mystery of the faith - On the word "mystery," see notes on 1 Corinthians 2:7. It means that which had been concealed, or hidden, but which was now revealed. The word "faith" here, is synonymous with "the gospel;" and the sense is, that he should hold firmly the great doctrines of the Christian religion which had been so long concealed from people, but which were now revealed. The reason is obvious. Though not a preacher, yet his influence and example would be great, and a man who held material error ought not to be in office.

In a pure conscience - A mere orthodox faith was not all that was necessary, for it was possible that a man might be professedly firm in the belief of the truths of revelation, and yet be corrupt at heart.

And let these also first be proved - That is, tried or tested in regard to the things which were the proper qualifications for the office. This does not mean that they were to be employed as "preachers," but that they were to undergo a proper trial in regard to their fitness for the office which they were to fill. They were not to be put into it without any opportunity of knowing what they were. It should be ascertained that they were grave, serious, temperate, trustworthy men; men who were sound in the faith, and who would not dishonor the office. It is not said here that there should be a "formal" trial, as if they were candidates for this office; but the meaning is, that they should have had an opportunity of making their character known, and should have gained such respect for their piety, and their other qualifications, that there would be reason to believe that they would perform the functions of the office well. Thus, in Acts 6:3, when deacons were first appointed, the church was directed to "look out seven men of honest report," who might be appointed to the office.

Then let them use the office of a deacon - Let them be appointed to this office, and fulfil its duties.

Being found blameless - If nothing can be alleged against their character see the notes on 1 Timothy 3:2.

Even so must their wives be grave - Chrysostom, Theophylact, Grotius, Bloomfield, and many others, suppose that by the word "wives," here, (γυνᾶικας gunaikas), the apostle means "deaconesses." Clarke supposes that it refers to women in general. The reason assigned for supposing that it does not refer to the wives of deacons, as such, is, that nothing is said of the qualifications of the wives of bishops - a matter of as much importance as that of the character of the wife of a deacon; and that it cannot be supposed that the apostle would specify the one without some allusion to the other. But that the common interpretation, which makes it refer to the wives of deacons, as such, is to be adhered to, seems to me to be clear. Because:

(1) it is the obvious and natural interpretation.

(2) the word here used - "wives" - is never used of itself to denote deaconesses.

(3) if the apostle had meant deaconesses, it would have been easy to express it without ambiguity; compare notes, Romans 16:1.

(4) what is here mentioned is important, whether the same thing is mentioned of bishops or not.

(5) in the qualifications of bishops, the apostle had made a statement respecting his family, which made any specification about the particular members of the family unnecessary. He was to be one who presided in a proper manner over his own house, or who had a well-regulated family; 1 Timothy 3:4-5. By a comparison of this passage, also, with Titus 2:3-4, which bears a strong resemblance to this, it would seem that it was supposed that the deacons would be taken from those who were advanced in life, and that their wives would have some superintendence over the younger females of the church. It was, therefore, especially important that they should be persons whose influence would be known to be decidedly favorable to piety. No one can doubt that the character of a woman may be such, that it is not desirable that her husband should be an officer in the church. A bad woman ought not to be entrusted with any additional power or influence.

Grave - notes, 1 Timothy 3:4.

Not slanderers - compare Titus 2:3, "Not false accusers." The Greek word is διαβόλους diabolous - "devils." It is used here in its original and proper sense, to denote a "calumniator," "slanderer," or "accuser." It occurs in the same sense in 2 Timothy 3:3, and Titus 2:3. Elsewhere in the New Testament, it is uniformly rendered "devil" (compare notes, Matthew 4:1), and is given to Satan, the prince of the fallen angels Matthew 9:34, by way of eminence, as "the accuser;" compare Job 1:6-11 notes, and Revelation 12:10 note. Here it means that they should not be women who were in the habit of calumniating others, or aspersing their character. Mingling as they would with the church, and having an opportunity to claim acquaintance with many, it would be in their power, if they chose, to do great injury to the character of others.

Sober - notes, 1 Timothy 3:2.

Faithful in all things - To their husbands, to their families, to the church, to the Saviour.

Let the deacons be the husbands of one wife - notes, 1 Timothy 3:2.

Ruling their children and their own houses well - notes, 1 Timothy 3:4-5.

For they that have used the office of a deacon well - Margin, "ministered." The Greek word is the same as deacon, meaning ministering, or serving in this office. The sense would be well expressed by the phrase, "deaconizing well." The "word" implies nothing as to the exact nature of the office.

Purchase to themselves - Procure for themselves; see this word explained in the notes on Acts 20:28.

A good degree - The word here used (βαθμός bathmos) occurs nowhere else in the New Testament. It means, properly, "a step," as of a stair; and the fair meaning is that of going up higher, or taking an additional step of dignity, honor, or standing. So far as the "word" is concerned, it may mean either an advance in office, in dignity, in respectability, or in influence. It cannot certainly be inferred that the apostle referred to a higher grade of "office;" for all that the word essentially conveys is, that, by exercising this office well, a deacon would secure additional respectability and influence in the church. Still, it is possible that those who had performed the duties of this office well were appointed to be preachers. They may have shown so much piety, prudence, good sense, and ability to preside over the church, that it was judged proper that they should be advanced to the office of bishops or pastors of the churches. Such a course would not be unnatural. This is, however, far from teaching that the office of a deacon is a subordinate office, "with a view" to an ascent to a higher grade.

And great boldness in the faith - The word here rendered "boldness" properly refers to boldness "in speaking;" see it explained in the Acts 4:13 note; 2 Corinthians 3:12 note; Philippians 1:20 note. But the word is commonly used to denote boldness of any kind - openness, frankness, confidence, assurance; John 8:13, John 8:26; Mark 8:32; 2 Corinthians 7:4. As it is here connected with "faith" - "boldness in the faith" - it means, evidently, not so much public speaking, as a manly and independent exercise of faith in Christ. The sense is, that by the faithful performance of the duties of the office of a deacon, and by the kind of experience which a man would have in that office, he would establish a character of firmness in the faith, which would show that he was a decided Christian. This passage, therefore, cannot be fairly used to prove that the deacon was "a preacher," or that he belonged to a grade of ministerial office from which he was regularly to rise to that of a presbyter.

These things write I unto thee, hoping to come unto thee shortly - That is, he hoped to come there to give instructions personally, or to finish, himself, the work which he had commenced in Ephesus, and which had been interrupted by his being driven so unexpectedly away. This verse proves that the apostle Paul did not regard Timothy as the permanent diocesan bishop of Ephesus. Would any Episcopal bishop write this to another bishop? If Timothy were the permanent prelate of Ephesus, would Paul have intimated that he expected soon to come and take the work of completing the arrangements there into his own hands? In regard to his expectation of going soon to Ephesus, see the notes on 1 Timothy 1:3; compare the Introduction to the Epistle.

But if I tarry long - Paul appears to have been uncertain how long circumstances would require him to be absent. He expected to return, but it was possible that his hope of returning soon would be disappointed.

That thou mayest know how thou oughtest to behave thyself - That is, that he might have just views about settling the affairs of the church.

In the house of God - This does not mean in a place of public worship, nor does it refer to propriety of deportment there. It refers rather to the church as a body of believers, and to converse with them. The church is called the "house of God," because it is that in which he dwells. Formerly, his unique residence was in the temple at Jerusalem; now that the temple is destroyed, it is the church of Christ, among his people.

Which is the church of the living God - This seems to have been added to impress the mind of Timothy with the solemn nature of the duty which he was to perform. What he did pertained to the honor and welfare of the church of the living God, and hence he should feet the importance of a correct deportment, and of a right administration of its affairs.

The pillar and ground of the truth - There has been no little diversity of opinion among critics whether this phrase is to be taken in connection with the preceding, meaning that "the church" is the pillar and ground of the truth; or whether it is to be taken in connection with what follows, meaning that the principal support of the truth was the doctrine there referred to - that God was manifest in the flesh. Bloomfield remarks on this: "It is surprising that any who have any knowledge or experience in Greek literature could tolerate so harsh a construction as that which arises from the latter method." The more natural interpretation certainly is, to refer it to the former; and this is supported by the consideration that it would then fall in with the object of the apostle. His design here seems to be, to impress Timothy with a deep sense of the importance of correct conduct in relation to the church; of the responsibility of those who presided over it; and of the necessity of care and caution in the selection of proper officers.

To do this, he reminded him that the truth of God - that revealed truth which he had given to save the world - was entrusted to the church; that it was designed to preserve it pure, to defend it, and to transmit it to future times; and that, therefore, every one to whom the administration of the affairs of the church was entrusted, should engage in this duty with a deep conviction of his responsibility. On the construction of the passage, Bloomfield Rosenmuller, and Clarke, may be consulted. The word "pillar" means a column, such as that by which a building is supported, and then any firm prop or support; Galatians 2:9; Revelation 3:12. If it refers to the church here, it means that that is the support of the truth, as a pillar is of a building. It sustains it amidst the war of elements, the natural tendency to fall, and the assaults which may be made on it, and preserves it when it would otherwise tumble into ruin.

Thus it is with the church. It is entrusted with the business of maintaining the truth, of defending it from the assaults of error, and of transmitting it to future times. The truth is, in fact, upheld in the world by the church. The people of the world feel no interest in defending it, and it is to the church of Christ that it is owing that it is preserved and transmitted from age to age. The word rendered "ground" - ἑδραίωμα hedraiōma - means, properly, a basis, or foundation. The figure here is evidently taken from architecture, as the use of the word pillar is. The proper meaning of the one expression would be, that truth is supported by the church. as an edifice is by a pillar; of the other, that the truth rests "on" the church, as a house does on its foundation. It is that which makes it fixed, stable, permanent; that on which it securely stands amidst storms and tempests; that which renders it firm when systems of error are swept away as a house that is built on the sand; compare notes on Matthew 7:24-27.

The meaning then is, that the stability of the truth on earth is dependent on the church. It is owing to the fact that the church is itself founded on a rock, that the gates of hell cannot prevail against it, that no storms of persecution can overthrow it, that the truth is preserved from age to age. Other systems of religion are swept away; other opinions change; other forms of doctrine vanish; but the knowledge of the great system of redemption is preserved on earth unshaken, because the church is preserved, and because its foundations cannot be moved. This does not refer, I suppose, to creeds and confessions, or to the decisions of synods and councils; but to the living spirit of truth and piety "in" the church itself. As certainly as the church continues to live, so certain it will be that the truth of God will be perpetuated among people.

And, without controversy - Undeniably, certainly. The object of the apostle is to say that the truth which he was about to state admitted of no dispute.

Great is the mystery - On the meaning of the word "mystery," see the notes on 1 Corinthians 2:7. The word means that which had been hidden or concealed. The meaning here is not that the proposition which he affirms was mysterious in the sense that it was unintelligible, or impossible to be understood; but that the doctrine respecting the incarnation and the work of the Messiah, which had been so long "kept hidden" from the world, was a subject of the deepest importance. This passage, therefore, should not be used to prove that there is anything unintelligible, or anything that surpasses human comprehension, in that doctrine, whatever may be the truth on that point; but that the doctrine which he now proceeds to state, and which had been so long concealed from mankind, was of the utmost consequence.

Of godliness - The word "godliness" means, properly, piety, reverence, or religiousness. It is used here, however, for the gospel scheme, to wit, that which the apostle proceeds to state. This "mystery," which had "been hidden from ages and from generations, and which was now manifest" Colossians 1:26, was the great doctrine on which depended "religion" everywhere, or was that which constituted the Christian scheme.

God - Probably there is no passage in the New Testament which has excited so much discussion among critics as this, and none in reference to which it is so difficult to determine the true reading. It is the only one, it is believed, in which the microscope has been employed to determine the lines of the letters used in a manuscript; and, after all that has been done to ascertain the exact truth in regard to it, still the question remains undecided. It is not the object of these notes to enter into the examination of questions of this nature. A full investigation may be found in Wetstein. The question which has excited so much controversy is, whether the original Greek word was Θεὸς Theos, "God," or whether it was ὅς hos, "who," or ὁ ho, "which." The controversy has turned, to a considerable degree, on the reading in the "Codex Alexandrinus;" and a remark or two on the method in which the manuscripts in the New Testament were written, will show the true nature of the controversy.

Greek manuscripts were formerly written entirely in capital letters, and without breaks or intervals between the words, and without accents; see a full description of the methods of writing the New Testament, in an article by Prof. Stuart in Dr. Robinson's Biblotheca Sacra, No. 2, pp. 254ff The small, cursive Greek letters which are now used, were not commonly employed in transcribing the New Testament, if at all, until the ninth or tenth centuries. It was a common thing to abridge or contract words in the manuscript. Thus, πρ would be used for πατερ pater, "father;" κς for κυριος kurios, "Lord;" Θς for Θεος Theos, "God," etc. The words thus contracted were designated by a faint line or dash over them. In this place, therefore, if the original uncials (capitals) were ΘC, standing for Θεὸς Theos, "God," and the line in the Θ, and the faint line over it, were obliterated from any cause, it would easily be mistaken for OC - ὅς hos - "who."

To ascertain which of these is the true reading, has been the great question; and it is with reference to this that the microscope has been resorted to in the examination of the Alexandrian manuscript. It is now generally admitted that the faint line "over" the word has been added by some later hand, though not improbably by one who found that the line was nearly obliterated, and who meant merely to restore it. Whether the letter O was originally written with a line within it, making the reading "God," it is now said to be impossible to determine, in consequence of the manuscript at this place having become so much worn by frequent examination. The Vulgate and the Syriac read it: "who," or "which." The Vulgate is, "Great is the sacrament of piety which was manifested in the flesh." The Syriac, "Great is the mystery of godliness, that he was manifested in the flesh." The "probability" in regard to the correct reading here, as it seems to me, is, that the word, as originally written, was Θεός Theos - "God." At the same time, however, the evidence is not so clear that it can be properly used in an argument. But the passage is not "necessary" to prove the doctrine which is affirmed, on the supposition that that is the correct reading. The same truth is abundantly taught elsewhere; compare Matthew 1:23; John 1:14.

Was manifest - Margin, "Manifested." The meaning is, "appeared" in the flesh.

In the flesh - In human nature; see this explained in the notes on Romans 1:3. The expression here looks as though the true reading of the much-disputed word was "God." It could not have been, it would seem evident, ὁ ho, "which," referring to "mystery;" for how could a mystery "be manifested in the flesh?" Nor could it it be ὅς hos, "who," unless that should refer to one who was more than a man; for how absurd would it be to say that "a man was manifested, or appeared in the flesh!" How else could a man appear? The phrase here means that God appeared in human form, or with human nature; and this is declared to be the "great" truth so long concealed from human view, but now revealed as constituting the fundamental doctrine of the gospel. The expressions which follow in this verse refer to God "as" thus manifested in the flesh; to the Saviour as he appeared on earth, regarded as a divine and human being. It was the fact that he thus appeared and sustained this character, which made the things which are immediately specified so remarkable, and so worthy of attention.

Justified in the Spirit - That is, the incarnate person above referred to; the Redeemer, regarded as God and man. The word "Spirit," here, it is evident, refers to the Holy Spirit, because:

(1) it is not possible to attach any intelligible idea to the phrase, "he was justified by his own spirit, or soul;"

(2) as the Holy Spirit performed so important a part in the work of Christ, it is natural to suppose there would be some allusion here to him; and,

(3) as the "angels" are mentioned here as having been with him, and as the Holy Spirit is often mentioned in connection with him, it is natural to suppose that there would be some allusion to Him here. The word "justified," here, is not used in the sense in which it is when applied to Christians, but in its more common signification. It means to "vindicate," and the sense is, that he was shown to be the Son of God by the agency of the Holy Spirit; he was thus vindicated from the charges alleged against him. The Holy Spirit furnished the evidence that he was the Son of God, or "justified" his claims. Thus he descended on him at his baptism, Matthew 3:16; he was sent to convince the world of sin because it did not believe on him, John 16:8-9; the Saviour cast out devils by him, Matthew 12:28; the Spirit was given to him without measure, John 3:34, and the Spirit was sent down in accordance with his promise, to convert the hearts of people; Acts 2:33. All the manifestations of God to him; all the power of working miracles by his agency; all the influences imparted to the man Christ Jesus, endowing him with such wisdom as man never had before, may be regarded as an attestation of the Holy Spirit to the divine mission of the Lord Jesus, and of course as a vindication from all the charges against him. In like manner, the descent of the Holy Spirit on the day of Pentecost, and his agency in the conversion of every sinner, prove the same thing, and furnish the grand argument in vindication of the Redeemer that he was sent from God. To this the apostle refers as a part of the glorious truth of the Christian scheme now revealed - the "mystery of religion;" as a portion of the amazing records, the memory of which the church was to preserve as connected with the redemption of the world.

Seen of angels - They were attendants on his ministry, and came to him in times of distress, peril, and want; compare Luke 2:9-13; Luke 22:43; Luke 24:4; Hebrews 1:6; Matthew 4:11. They felt an interest in him and his work, and they gladly came to him in his sorrows and troubles. The design of the apostle is to give an impressive view of the grandeur and glory of that work which attracted the attention of the heavenly hosts, and which drew them from the skies that they might proclaim his advent, sustain him in his temptations, witness his crucifixion, and watch over him in the tomb. The work of Christ, though despised by people, excited the deepest interest in heaven; compare notes on 1 Peter 1:12.

Preached unto the Gentiles - This is placed by the apostle among the "great" things which constituted the "mystery" of religion. The meaning is, that it was a glorious truth that salvation might be, and should be, proclaimed to all mankind, and that this was a part of the important truths made known in the gospel. Elsewhere this is called, by way of eminence, "the mystery of the gospel;" that is, the grand truth which had not been known until the coming of the Saviour; see the Ephesians 6:19 note; Colossians 1:26-27; Colossians 4:3 notes. Before his coming, a wall of partition had divided the Jewish and Gentile world. The Jews regarded the rest of mankind as excluded from the covenant mercies of God, and it was one of the principal stumblingblocks in their way, in regard to the gospel, that it proclaimed that all the race was on a level, that that middle wall of partition was broken down, and that salvation might now be published to all people; compare Acts 22:21; Ephesians 2:14-15; Romans 3:22; Romans 10:11-20.

The Jew had no special advantage for salvation by being a Jew; the Gentile was not excluded from the hope of salvation. The plan of redemption was adapted "to man" as such - without regard to his complexion, country, customs, or laws. The blood of Christ was shed for all, and wherever a human being could be found, salvation might be freely offered him. This "is" a glorious truth; and taken in all its bearings, and in reference to the views which then prevailed, and which have always more or less prevailed about the distinctions made among people by caste and rank, there is scarcely anymore glorious truth connected with the Christian revelation, or one which will exert a wider influence in promoting the welfare of man. It is a great privilege to be permitted to proclaim that all people, in one respect - and that the most important - are on a level; that they are all equally the objects of the divine compassion; that Christ died for one as really as for another; that birth, wealth, elevated rank, or beauty of complexion, contribute nothing to the salvation of one man; and that poverty, a darker skin, slavery, or a meaner rank, do nothing to exclude another from the favor of his Maker.

Believed on in the world - This also is mentioned among the "great" things which constitute the mystery of revealed religion. But why is this regarded as so remarkable as to be mentioned thus? In point of importance, how can it be mentioned in connection with the fact that God was manifest in the flesh; that he was vindicated by the Holy Spirit; that he was an object of intense interest to angelic hosts, and that his coming had broken down the walls which had separated the world, and placed them now on a level? I answer, perhaps the following circumstances may have induced the apostle to place this among the remarkable things evincing the greatness of this truth:

(1) The strong "improbability" arising from the greatness of the "mystery," that the doctrines respecting the incarnate Deity would be believed. Such is the incomprehensible nature of many of the truths connected with the incarnation; so strange does it seem that God would become incarnate; so amazing that he should appear in human flesh and blood, and that the incarnate Son of God should die, that it might be regarded as a wonderful thing that such a doctrine had in fact obtained credence in the world. But it was a glorious truth that all the natural improbabilities in the case had been overcome, and that people had accredited the announcement.

(2) the strong improbability that his message would be believed, arising from the "wickedness of the human heart." Man, in all his history, had shown a strong reluctance to believe any message from God, or any truth whatever revealed by him. The Jews had rejected his prophets and put them to death Matthew 23; Acts 7; and had at last put his own Son - their Messiah - to death. Man everywhere had shown his strong inclination to unbelief. There is in the human soul no elementary principle or germ of faith in God. Every man is an unbeliever by nature - an infidel first; a Christian afterward; an infidel as he comes into the world; a believer only as he is made so by grace. The apostle, therefore, regarded it as a glorious fact that the message respecting the Saviour "had been" believed in the world. It overcame such a strong and universal reluctance to confide in God, that it showed that there was more than human power in operation to overcome this reluctance.

(3) the extent to which this had been done may have been a reason why he thought it worthy of the place which he gives it here. It had been embraced, not by a few, but by thousands in all lands where the gospel had been published; and it was proof of the truth of the doctrine, and of the great power of God, that such high mysteries as those relating to redemption, and so much opposed to the natural feelings of the human heart, should have been embraced by so many. The same thing occurs now. The gospel makes its way against the native incredulity of the world, and every new convert is an additional demonstration that it is from God, and a new illustration of the greatness of this mystery.

Received up into glory - To heaven; compare John 17:5; see the notes on Acts 1:9. This is mentioned as among the "great" or remarkable things pertaining to "godliness," or the Christian revelation, because it was an event which had not elsewhere occurred, and was the crowning grandeur of the work of Christ. It was an event that was fitted to excite the deepest interest in heaven itself. No event of more importance has ever occurred in the universe, of which we have any knowledge, than the re-ascension of the triumphant Son of God to glory after having accomplished the redemption of a world.

In view of the instructions of this chapter, we may make the following remarks.

1. The word "bishop" in the New Testament never means what is now commonly understood by it - "a Prelate." It does not denote here, or anywhere else in the Now Testament, one who has charge over a "diocese" composed of a certain district of country, embracing a number of churches with their clergy.

2. There are not "three orders" of clergy in the New Testament. The apostle Paul in this chapter expressly designates the characteristics of those who should have charge of the church, but mentions only two, "bishops" and "deacons." The former are ministers of the word, having charge of the spiritual interests of the church; the other are deacons, of whom there is no evidence that they were appointed to preach. There is no "third" order. There is no allusion to anyone who was to be "superior" to the "bishops" and "deacons." As the apostle Paul was expressly giving instructions in regard to the organization of the church, such an omission is unaccountable if he supposed there was to be an order of "prelates" in the church. Why is there no allusion to them? Why is there no mention of their qualifications? If Timothy was himself a prelate, was he to have nothing to do in transmitting the office to others? Were there no special qualifications required in such an order of people which it would be proper to mention? Would it not be "respectful," at least, in Paul to have made some allusion to such an office, if Timothy himself held it?

3. There is only one order of preachers in the church. The qualifications of that order are specified with great minuteness and particularity, as well as beauty; 1 Timothy 3:2-7. No man really needs to know more of the qualifications for this office than could be learned from a prayerful study of this passage.

4. A man who enters the ministry "ought" to have high qualifications; 1 Timothy 3:2-7. No man "ought," under any pretence, to be put into the ministry who has not the qualifications here specified. Nothing is gained in any department of human labor, by appointing incompetent persons to fill it. A farmer gains nothing by employing a man on his farm who has no proper qualifications for his business; a carpenter, a shoemaker, or a blacksmith, gains nothing by employing a man who knows nothing about his trade; and a neighborhood gains nothing by employing a man as a teacher of a school who has no qualifications to teach, or who has a bad character. Such a man would do more mischief on a farm, or in a workshop, or in a school, than all the good which he could do would compensate. And so it is in the ministry. The true object is not to increase the "number" of ministers, it is to increase the number of those who are "qualified" for their work, and if a man has not the qualifications laid down by the inspired apostle, he had better seek some other calling.

5. The church is the guardian of the truth; 1 Timothy 3:15. It is appointed to preserve it pure, and to transmit it to future ages. The world is dependent on it for any just views of truth. The church has the power, and is entrusted with the duty, of preserving on earth a just knowledge of God and of eternal things; of the way of salvation; of the requirements of pure morality: to keep up the knowledge of that truth which tends to elevate society and to save man. It is entrusted with the Bible, to preserve uncorrupted, and to transmit to distant ages and lands. It is bound to maintain and assert the truth in its creeds and confessions of faith. And it is to preserve the truth by the holy lives of its members, and to show in their walk what is the appropriate influence of truth on the soul. Whatever religious truth there is now on the earth, has been thus preserved and transmitted, and it still devolves on the church to bear the truth of God on to future times, and to diffuse it abroad to distant lands.

6. The closing verse of this chapter 1 Timothy 3:16 gives us a most elevated view of the plan of salvation. and of its grandeur and glory. It would be difficult, if not impossible, to condense more interesting and sublime thought into so narrow a compass as this. The great mystery of the incarnation; the interest of angelic beings in the events of redemption; the effect of the gospel on the pagan world; the tendency of the Christian religion to break down every barrier among people, and to place all the race on a level; its power in overcoming the unbelief of mankind; and the re-ascension of the Son of God to heaven, present a series of most wonderful facts to our contemplation. These things are found in no other system of religion, and these are worthy of the profound attention of every human being. The manifestation of God in the flesh! What a thought! It was worthy of the deepest interest among the angels, and it "claims" the attention of people, for it was for human beings and not for angels that he thus appeared in human form; compare notes on 1 Peter 1:12.

7. How strange it is that "man" feels no more interest in these things! God was manifest in the flesh for his salvation, but he does not regard it Angels looked upon it with wonder: but man, for whom he came, feels little interest in his advent or his work! The Christian religion has broken down the barrier among nations, and has proclaimed that all people may be saved; yet the mass of people look on this with entire unconcern. The Redeemer ascended to heaven, having finished his great work; but how little interest do the mass of mankind feel in this! He will come again to judge the world; but the race moves on, regardless of this truth; unalarmed at the prospect of meeting him; feeling no interest in the assurance that he "has" come and died for sinners, and no apprehension in view of the fact that he will come again, and that they must stand at his bar. All heaven was moved with his first advent, and will be with his second; but the earth regards it with unconcern. Angelic beings look upon this with the deepest anxiety, though they have no personal interest in it; man, though all his great interests are concentrated on it, regards it as a fable, disbelieves it all, and treats it with contempt and scorn. Such is the difference between heaven and earth - angels and human beings!