TIMOTHY: The Bible Knowledge Commentary: New Testament
The Pastoral Epistles:“The Pastoral Epistles” is a term used to designate Paul’s two letters to Timothy and one letter to Titus. Two things distinguish these three epistles from Paul’s other letters: (1) They are among the last things Paul wrote, reflecting the sort of concerns which burdened the apostle near the end of his ministry. (2) They are ostensibly addressed not to a congregation but to two young men who were functioning in pastoral roles. This does not mean, of course, that the letters were not read before congregations. The epistles show clear signs that their author intended them to be used widely. Nor does this mean that the epistles are mere handbooks on pastoral duties. There is much of general interest in the letters. Yet 1 and 2 Timothy and Titus are distinctive among Paul’s letters. They are highly personal, practical, and unsystematic in nature; and they deal with matters of church order which Paul had not hitherto addressed except in passing. The evolving need for structure in the churches, combined with Paul’s awareness that his own steadying influence would soon be passing from the scene, prompted him to treat certain ecclesiastical and pastoral subjects which have profited the church immensely ever since.
New Commentary on the Whole Bible: New Testament Volume
First Timothy was written by Paul to encourage Timothy to take care of the church, the house of the living God , in his absence. Paul directed Timothy to combat false teachers and their teaching anything different from what the apostles had taught. He also gave Timothy instructions about the worship in church meetings, the selection of qualified elders and deacons, the appointment of widows to church care and church service, and his relationships with sisters and older brothers in the church. This is followed by a personal appeal to Timothy, as a man of God, to fight the good fight of faith until the time of the Lord’s appearing.
READ:
TITUS: New Commentary on the Whole Bible: New Testament Volume
Paul’s Epistle to Titus was written probably from
Titus was a Greek and therefore a Gentile; he was converted through Paul’s ministry. He accompanied the apostle on the deputation sent from the
READ:
PHILEMON: New Commentary on the Whole Bible: New Testament Volume
Paul’s Epistle to Philemon is closely linked with Paul’s Epistle to the Colossians. Both were carried by the same bearer, Onesimus. Paul and Timothy stand in the headings, and Paul appears as a prisoner. Hence it follows, it was written at the same time and place as the Epistle to the Colossians (which was about the same time as the Epistle to the Ephesians), viz., at
Onesimus, of Colosse (called “one of you”), slave of Philemon, had fled from his master to
READ: Philemon
HEBREWS: New Commentary on the Whole Bible: New Testament Volume
Since the writer of Hebrews did not identify himself (or, herself), readers throughout the ages have made conjectures about its authorship. Among the candidates who have been named are Paul, Barnabas, Apollos, and Luke.
Clement of Alexandria attributed it expressly to Paul, on the authority of Pantaenus (second century). Clement said that since Jesus is referred to as the “apostle”, Paul, through humility, does not call himself an apostle of the Hebrews. This is especially appropriate since Paul is known as the apostle to the Gentiles. Clement added that Paul prudently omitted his name on it because the Hebrews to whom it was written were prejudiced against him. (Clement also thought that Paul wrote it in Hebrew and Luke translated it into Greek.) The earliest extant collection of Paul’s epistles in one volume, namely the Chester Beatty Papyrus (P46), dated early third century, includes Hebrews as the second book in the collection, following Romans. Origen quoted Hebrews as being an epistle of Paul; however, in his Homilies, he regarded the style distinct from that of Paul, and as “more Grecian” but the thoughts as the apostle’s—adding that the “ancients who have handed down the tradition of its Pauline authorship must have had good reason for doing so, though God alone knows with certainty who was the actual writer.” In the African church, in the beginning of the third century, Tertullian ascribed it to Barnabas.
The author’s intention in this epistle is to show the superiority of Christ and the new covenant over Judaism and the old covenant. The new covenant was introduced by one far higher than the angels or Moses, through whom the Jews received the law. And the OT priesthood and sacrifices are inferior to Christ’s priesthood and sacrifice. Besides, Christ is the substance of which the former are but the shadow, and type necessarily gives place to the antitype. Now we are no longer kept at a comparative distance from God, as under the law, but have freedom of access through the opened veil, i.e., Christ’s flesh. His readers, Jewish Christians, were in danger of returning to Judaism and the OT economy—and thereby committing apostasy. The writer urges them to see the preeminence of Christ over everything in the old covenant, to not return to Judaism, and to go forward in pursuit of Christ.
READ: Hebrew 3:12-15, 4:14-16,
JAMES: New Commentary on the Whole Bible: New Testament Volume
The first mention of James’s epistle by name occurs early in the third century in a writing by Origen, who died c. a.d. 254. None of the Latin fathers before the fourth century quotes it; but soon after the Council of Nicea (a.d. 325), it was admitted as canonical both by the Eastern and Western churches, and was specified as such in the Councils of Hippo and Carthage (a.d. 397). The Epistle of James took a long time to be accepted into the NT canon because of “its untheological nature, its brevity, the question of James’s identity, the fact that it was not written by one of the twelve apostles, and its general address (sent to no specific person or church)” (Burdick). But eventually this epistle (along with 2 Peter, 2 and 3 John, Jude, and Revelation) was accepted into the NT canon and read as authoritative Scripture.
Most scholars have identified this James as Jesus’ brother, the prominent elder of the church in Jerusalem. The whole character of the epistle coincides with what we know of this James’s legalism and Jewishness.
As an elder of Jerusalem writing to the twelve tribes of the dispersion, James set forth the gospel in its relation to the law, which the Jews so reverenced. As Paul’s epistles are a commentary on the doctrines flowing from the death and resurrection of Christ, so James’ epistle has a close connection with Christ’s teaching during his life on earth, especially his Sermon on the Mount. In both the Sermon on the Mount and the Epistle of James, the law is represented as fulfilled in love—and the very language is remarkably similar. The whole spirit of this epistle breathes the same gospel-righteousness that the Sermon on the Mount inculcates as the highest realization of the law.
READ:
PETER: New Commentary on the Whole Bible: New Testament Volume
The genuineness of Peter’s first epistle is attested by
Peter wrote this epistle to console the persecuted and prepare them for a greater approaching ordeal, and to exhort all—husbands, wives, servants, elders, and people—to live godly lives in the presence of the heathen so that they could not reproach Christianity but rather be won to Christ. Peter himself explained why he wrote this epistle: “I have written briefly, exhorting, and testifying that this is the true grace of God wherein ye stand”. The expression “exhorting and testifying” refers to Peter’s exhortations throughout the epistle grounded on testimony that he bore to the gospel truth, already well known to his readers by the teaching of Paul in those churches (Alford). Therefore, Peter did not set forth a complete statement of this gospel in this epistle. He reaffirmed it with his own style and expression.
READ:
JOHN: New Commentary on the Whole Bible: New Testament Volume
Our records of early church history show that the first epistle of John was readily received and recognized as John’s writing. Eusebius says of Papias, a disciple of John and a friend of Polycarp: “He used testimonies from the First Epistle of John.” Irenaeus, according to Eusebius, often quoted this epistle.
The similarities between John’s Gospel and John’s epistles are so remarkable that no one could doubt that all four of these writings were done by the same person. The syntax, vocabulary, and the thematic developments are so strikingly similar that even the inexperienced reader can tell that John’s epistles were penned by the writer of the Gospel of John. One reason for this similarity in style is that John probably wrote the epistles shortly after he compiled his Gospel. The Gospel was written c. a.d. 90, and all three epistles were written most likely c. a.d. 90-95.
Many scholars think that John wrote these epistles to certain local churches in Asia—especially to those around Ephesus, the church in which John functioned as an elder in his latter days. One of the reasons that prompted his first epistle was that a heretical faction had developed within the church, a faction that promoted heretical teachings concerning the person of Christ. Scholars have identified this heresy as Docetism. The Docetists denied that Jesus had actually partaken of flesh and blood; they denied that God had come in the flesh. According to Irenaeus, they “represented Jesus as having not been born of a virgin, but as being the son of Joseph and Mary according to the ordinary course of human generation, while he nevertheless was more righteous, prudent, and wise than other men. Moreover, after his baptism, Christ descended upon him in the form of a dove from the Supreme Ruler, and that then he proclaimed the unknown Father, and performed miracles. But at last Christ departed from Jesus, and that then Jesus suffered and rose again, while Christ remained impassible, inasmuch as he was a spiritual being”. John refuted this heresy.
John urged his readers (1) to have fellowship with God in the light, (2) to confess their sins, (3) to love God, (4) to love their fellow Christians, (5) to abide in Christ, (6) to purify themselves from worldly lusts, (7) to know God personally and experientially, (8) to appreciate the gift of eternal life, (9) to follow the Spirit of truth (and the anointing) in discerning false teachings, and (10) to esteem Jesus Christ as the true God. Above all these items, John stressed how necessary it was for the early believers to maintain a proper relationship with those who had been with Jesus.
READ:
JUDE: New Commentary on the Whole Bible: New Testament Volume
The writer of this epistle identified himself as Jude, a brother of James. Most commentators agree that this James is not James, the brother of John and son of Zebedee, but James, the brother of Jesus and prominent elder in Jerusalem. As such, Jude was also Jesus’ brother. In fact, Jude (Greek, “Judas,” from the Hebrew word “Judah”) is named as one of Jesus’ brothers in Matthew.
Jude did not believe that his brother Jesus was the Christ, the Son of God, until after Jesus’ resurrection. Instead of introducing himself as the brother of Jesus, he called himself a brother of James (an eminently known figure—especially to Jewish Christians) and “a slave of Jesus Christ”. This shows his humility.
Jude wrote this epistle primarily to Jewish Christians who were being infected by a form of libertine Gnosticism through heretical teachers. Gnosticism had adherents who practiced asceticism and adherents who lived in carnal self-indulgence. The NT apostles wrote various epistles to counter various gnostic teachings and practices. Jude wrote this short polemic to defend the true faith and to reprove the false teachers who promoted their libertine notions and lived lawless lives.
READ:
REVELATION: New Commentary on the Whole Bible: New Testament Volume
The author of Revelation calls himself John. Justin Martyr (c. a.d. 100-165) in his Dialogue quotes from Revelation, as the work of John the apostle, with respect to the prophecy of the millennium of the saints, to be followed by the general resurrection and judgment. This testimony of Justin is referred to also by Eusebius.
The best authorities among the Fathers state that John was exiled under Domitian (Irenaeus, Clement of Alexandria; Eusebius’s Ecclesiastical History, . Victorinus says that he had to labor in the mines of Patmos. At Domitian’s death, a.d. 96, John returned to Ephesus under the emperor Nerva. He received the Revelation while he was on the island of Patmos. This island is one of the Sporades group of islands. Its circumference is about thirty miles. “It was fitting that when forbidden to go beyond certain bounds of the earth’s lands, he was permitted to penetrate the secrets of heaven” (Bede, Explanations of Apocalypse).
Tregelles well says, “There is no book of the New Testament for which we have such clear, ample, and numerous testimonies in the second century as we have in favor of the Apocalypse. The more closely the witnesses were connected with the apostle John (as was the case with Irenaeus), the more explicit is their testimony. The doubts that prevailed after ages must have originated either in ignorance of the earlier testimony, or else from some supposed intuition of what an apostle ought to have written. The objections on the ground of internal style can weigh nothing against the actual evidence. It is in vain to argue, a priori, that John could not have written this book when we have the evidence of several competent witnesses that he did write it.”
Gregory of Nyssa (fourth century) called Revelation “the last book of grace.” It completes the volume of inspiration, so that we are to look for no further revelation till Christ himself shall come. Appropriately the last book completing the canon was written by John, the last survivor of the apostles. The NT is composed of the historical books, the Gospels and Acts, the doctrinal epistles, and the one prophetical book, Revelation. The same apostle wrote the last of the Gospels, and probably the last of the Epistles, and the only prophetical book of the NT.
After a brief introduction that sets forth the main subject of the book, viz., to “show unto his servants things which must shortly come to pass,” Revelation begins with admonitory addresses to the seven churches from the divine Son of man, whom John saw in his vision (chaps. 1-3). From chapter 4 to the end is mainly prophecy, interspersed with practical exhortations and consolations similar to those addressed to the seven churches, and so connecting the body of the book with its beginning. In fact, chapters 4–22 can be seen as containing expansions of many of the important themes introduced in the first three chapters.
Basically, three schools of interpreters exist: (1) the Preterists, who hold that almost the whole prophecy of Revelation has been fulfilled. (2) The historical interpreters, who hold that it comprises the history of the church from John’s time to the end of the world, the seals being chronologically succeeded by the trumpets and the trumpets by the vials. (3) The Futurists, who consider almost the whole prophecy as yet future, and to be fulfilled immediately before Christ’s second coming. The first theory was not held by any of the earliest fathers. The Futurist school is open to this great objection: it would leave the church of Christ without prophetical guidance or support under her fiery trials for 1700 or 1800 years. The Jews had a succession of prophets who guided them with the light of prophecy. What their prophets were to them, the apocalyptic Scriptures have been, and are, to the church. Also, there are schools of interpretation with respect to the coming of Christ and the millennial kingdom. (1) The premillennial interpreters believe Christ will return just prior to establishing a millennial kingdom on earth. (2) The amillennial interpreter does not think there will be a literal millennial kingdom (he takes the language in 20:3-6 to be figurative). (3) The postmillennial interpreter thinks the church age will produce the kingdom on earth—after which time Christ will return.
READ: Rev. 1:1-10,
No comments:
Post a Comment