First Timothy - Introduction & Outline

The book of first Timothy is one of the pastoral epistles and is a personal letter from Paul to Timothy. It is a letter whose express purpose is to build up a young leader who is the pastor of a huge church in the city of Ephesus. Timothy is dealing with false teachers within the church itself and seems to be overwhelmed with the responsibilities of how to address and root them out of the church. It is a problem that is not so uncommon in churches today. This letter is meant to encourage Timothy by reminding him of God’s faithfulness.

Who was Timothy?

Timothy grew up without a father. Acts 16:1 tells us that his mother and grandmother were believing Jews who understood the Old Testament Scriptures but his father was an unbelieving Greek. It would also appear that his father did not have much of an influence on his son. We also know that it was Timothy’s mother and grandmother who raised him in his faith (2 Tim. 1:5; 3:15). So, when Paul came through on one of his missionary trips, all three heard the Gospel and became believers in Jesus as Messiah, Lord and Savior.

Paul seems to have had a profound influence upon Timothy as he called him a “true child of the faith.” (1 Tim 1:2). As a matter of fact, according to one commentator,

[John] Stott comments, “Gnēsios (‘true’ or ‘genuine’) was used literally of children ‘born in wedlock, legitimate’ (BDAG - [Greek–English Lexicon of the New Testament and Other Early Christian Literature]). It is possible, therefore, that Paul is hinting at the circumstances of Timothy’s physical birth. Since his father was a Greek, Jewish law [would] have regarded him as illegitimate.”

1 Timothy | Evidence Unseen

Regardless of his supposed birth status, Paul didn’t seem to think it mattered at all, even if Timothy may have. In Philippians 2:20, Paul called Timothy a ‘kindred spirit’ who had a genuine concern for the welfare of others.

Authorship

Until recent modern critics arose in the 19th century, the authorship of this epistle has always been attributed to the Apostle Paul. With the exception of the heretic Marcion, no one in the early church questioned that Paul wrote what are called the pastoral epistles. There are references to this one and the other pastoral epistles in the writings of 2nd century church fathers like Ignatius, Polycarp and Clement of Rome. They are listed as canonical books in the Muratorian Canon created at the end of the 2nd century. They were also referenced and quoted and attributed to Paul by 3rd century church fathers Origen, Clement of Alexandria and Tertullian.

The Critics

Because these modern-day critics have gained some level of popularity today, their critiques should be answered to destroy the thought that there is any truthfulness to their so-called evidence. There are at least five critiques put forward about the Pastoral Epistles: [1]

First, the historical references in these epistles do not fit into the chronology of Paul’s life given in Acts. This is actually true but has always been acknowledged. However, the critics proposing this thesis need to demonstrate that Paul was never released from his imprisonment in Rome, as recorded in Acts. Even though Acts does not record Paul’s execution, the rest of the New Testament, as well as writings from church history, indicate he was released. The narrative of Acts seems to make clear that the charges against Paul were invalid as both Festus (Acts 25:14-21) and Herod (Acts 26:32) acknowledge this fact. Also, scholars that understand Roman law agree that Paul would have been released. There is also Paul’s confidence expressed in other epistles that he would be released from his first imprisonment (Phil 1:19, 25-26; 2:24; Phm 22).

As John MacArthur wrote,

That is in sharp contrast to his expectation of imminent execution in 2 Timothy 4:6. Further, many in the early church believed that Paul visited Spain (cf. Rom. 15:28). For example, Clement of Rome, writing to the Corinthians about thirty years after the apostle's death, notes that "after preaching both in the east and in the west, [Paul] gained the illustrious reputation due to his faith, having taught righteousness to the whole world, and came to the extreme limit of the west, and suffered martyrdom under the prefects" (The First Epistle of Clement to the Corinthians V, vol. 1 of The Ante-Nicene Fathers [reprint; Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1973], 6). The "extreme limit of the west" was not Rome, the center of the empire, but its western frontier in Spain (cf. Kent, Pastoral Epistles, 45-46). Such a visit would have been impossible had Paul not been released. [2]

Second, the false teaching described is a fully developed Gnosticism of the 2nd century. Like was seen in the Colossians Epistle, Gnosticism was not fully developed during the lifetime of the Apostles. Furthermore, these false teachers were within the church, the body of believers. Additionally, the brand of Gnosticism being taught contained Jewish elements (1 Tim 1:7; Tit 1:10; 1:14; 3:9) that were not part of 2nd century Gnosticism. Paul was fighting asceticism, as we will see in 1 Timothy 4:1-5. Even though Gnostics were ascetics, they did not invent it. It makes one wonder why it became so popular with the ‘pillar saints’ and ‘desert fathers’ when Paul spoke so strongly against it. Also, Gnostics denied the resurrection of the body, but so did the Jewish Sadducees. Just like in 2 Timothy 2:18, there were those that opposed a physical resurrection and Paul opposed it as heretical here and in 1 Corinthians 15. But as you can see, Paul was defending the truths God had inspired him to teach and write about, beliefs that would be forgotten and plague the Church in the following centuries.

Third, the organizational structure of the church is said to be that of the 2nd century and too developed for Paul’s day. Modern (so-called) ‘scholars’ would charge that the pastoral letters (1 Timothy, 2 Timothy, and Titus) adopt a 2nd century model of the church. They believe these epistles adopt ‘bishops’ whose terminology began to be used in the 2nd century and left behind the 1st century concept of elders and deacons. But ‘elder’ or ‘overseer’ and ‘bishop’ refer to the same office, so using ‘bishop’ was the same thing as using the word ‘elder.’ These same ‘scholars’ think Paul had no interest in the organization of the church. Yet, Acts 14:23 states that he and Barnabas appointed elders “in every church” they visited or created. As we see in Philippians 1:1, Paul and Timothy wrote to the “saints in Christ Jesus who are in Philippi, including the overseers and deacons.” This seems to be a hollow accusation with no merit at all.

Fourth, these epistles do not contain the great theological themes found in Paul’s other books. But these were personal letters written to his closest associates who Paul had personally taught his Holy Spirit inspired theological views. These letters were purposely not like the others because they were filled with the practical matters of church life and organization. But this criticism fails when one looks closely at these books. The inspiration and purpose of Scripture is found in 2 Tim 3:16-17. Titus 3:5-7 is one of the clearest and most compelling statements on salvation. Also in Titus 2:13 is a clearly stated example of Jesus’ deity. 1 Timothy 2:5 boldly states that Jesus is the only mediator between God and man and verse 6 is on his substitutionary atonement. And since Timothy and Titus traveled with Paul in his earlier missionary trips, it’s not really that surprising that these epistles do not have long and fully developed theological teachings. These two guys got that straight from Paul himself.

Fifth, Paul uses vocabulary in these epistles that are not found in his other epistles. Some commentators see this as the only real argument of the five. Yet, it too fails to account for the personal nature of these epistles. They will insist that one-third of the Greek words used are not found in his other epistles or other places in the New Testament. But Paul was not writing to an entire church, he was writing to his closest associates; men whom he had personally trained in theology and leadership. Also, one needs to consider that the subject matter of the pastoral epistles were different from the other epistles he wrote. Other epistles were focused on teaching doctrine and correcting error. So, one should not be surprised that the circumstances surrounding how he wrote to Timothy and Titus would demand a different vocabulary than what he would use when addressing an entire church. Critics argue that 2nd century writers used much of the vocabulary used in the pastoral epistles. If one actually read church history, one would find that most of the preserved writings were written to fellow leaders (elders / overseers / bishops) not to the church members. There are also reasons why some of the pastoral vocabulary began being used in the 2nd century that have nothing to do with pushing the authoring of these epistles into the 2nd century. Some critics will attempt to maintain that these pastoral letters were ‘pious’ forgeries, but the church never accepted those types of writings, so why would they have done so in the 2nd century?

The bottom line is, none of these arguments are the least bit convincing. Paul was the author, and authored them sometime in the early to mid 60’s AD.

Date Written

Since most historians believe that this letter was written between his first and second imprisonment, that date is generally believed to be between 62 and 64 AD. It is also understood from other factors about Paul and Timothy, to have been written while Paul was in Macedonia.

Purpose

Paul seems to have written this epistle for the express purpose of addressing a heresy that Timothy had to deal with in the Ephesian church.

Background and Setting

John MacArthur gave a concise paragraph for the setting of this epistle,

After being released from his first Roman imprisonment (cf. Acts 28:30), Paul revisited several of the cities in which he had ministered, including Ephesus. Leaving Timothy behind there to deal with problems that had arisen in the Ephesian church, such as false doctrine (1:3-7; 4:1-3; 6:3-5), disorder in worship (2:1-15), the need for qualified leaders (3:1-14), and materialism (6:6-19), Paul went on to Macedonia, from where he wrote Timothy this letter to help him carry out his task in the church (cf. 3:14,15). [3]

Outline

A simple outline for 1st Timothy: [4]

Chapter 1 – Warning against false doctrine; Paul’s testimony; Timothy’s charge
Chapter 2 – Prayer, public worship, roles of men and women
Chapter 3 – Qualifications for overseers and deacons; the mystery of godliness
Chapter 4 – Coming apostasy; training in godliness; example in speech and life
Chapter 5 – Honoring widows and elders; practical church care
Chapter 6 – Godliness with contentment; dangers of riches; final exhortations

Footnotes

The following five points are summarized from John MacArthur, The MacArthur New Testament Commentary, 1 Timothy (Chicago: Moody Publishers © 1995), pp. x-xii. Much of this information can also be found here, 1 Timothy | Evidence Unseen.
1 Timothy Summary and Study Bible

Sources

All Scriptures quotes are from the New American Standard Bible, 1995 Revision, unless otherwise noted. Verse links from Blue Letter Bible, https://www.blueletterbible.org/

All Greek word definitions utilize the Greek Lexicon, part of the Online Bible, Computer Program, © 1987-2005, Blue Letter Bible and/or Logos Bible Software, Ver 10, © 2023-2026, unless otherwise referenced.

Search This Blog

shadmans Musings