Combatting False Teachers, Part 2 - 1 Tim 1:5-7a

 (5) But the goal of our instruction is love from a pure heart and a good conscience and a sincere faith. (6) For some men, straying from these things, have turned aside to fruitless discussion, (7) wanting to be teachers of the Law, (1 Tim 1:5-7a)

In these verses, Paul seeks to encourage and remind Timothy to make sure his attitude towards the false teachers comes from a Godly perspective and not a natural human one. These false teachers may desire to steer believers into their errors, but Paul’s message to Timothy is that a Godly man instructs others in good conscience with a pure heart filled with love for others, which is an example of a leader with a sincere faith. Paul does not seem to be starting verse 5 off by pointing out a flaw in Timothy, since he had trained him well. But Paul understood that the dissension being created in the church at Ephesus by their teachings was something that needed to be addressed immediately. And that is the encouragement that Paul is giving Timothy.

Instruction in Love

But the goal of our instruction is love from a pure heart and a good conscience and a sincere faith. (1 Tim 1:5)

‘the goal of our instruction’

Definition of ‘instruction’ (‘commandment’ - KJV; ‘command’ - NIV; ‘charge’ - ESV) - This is the Greek word, parangelia { par-ang-gel-ee'-ah } and means ‘announcement, a proclaiming or giving a message to; hence, a charge, command.’ (G3852 - Strong's Greek Lexicon (NASB95)) Similarly, Louw and Nida define it as “an announcement as to what must be done—‘order, instruction, command.’” [1] 

And in verse 5, Paul contrasts the goal of his instruction or charge to Timothy with that of the false teachers. Its aim was to produce true ‘love’ within the believer. The love that a believer is supposed to have is one that loves God with every fiber of one's being (Mat 22:37; Deut 6:5; Deut 30:6; Mark 12:30, 12:33; Luke 10:27; 1 John 4:19; John 13:35, 14:15; 1 John 4:7-8). 

‘love’

Definition of ‘love’ - This is the Greek word, agapē { ag-ah'-pay } and means ‘affection, good will, love, benevolence, brotherly love.’ (G26 - Strong's Greek Lexicon (NASB95)) Louw and Nida define it as, “to have love for someone or something, based on sincere appreciation and high regard—‘to love, to regard with affection, loving concern, love.’” [2] 

John MacArthur stated that it describes, “a love of choice, of will. It involves self-dental and self-sacrifice to benefit others.” [3] And Ralph Earle called this kind of love, “the unselfish love of full loyalty to God and boundless goodwill to our fellowmen.” [4] 

Love stands in contrast to the strife and envy which produce controversies and disputes that the false teachers were creating within the church body.

‘from a pure heart and a good conscience and a sincere faith’

To Paul, the kind of love described above is expressed in three ways in this verse: 

1. a pure heart 

2. a good conscience 

3. a sincere faith 

‘from a pure heart’

Definition of ‘pure’ - this is the Greek word, katharos { kath-ar-os' } and means ‘free from corrupt desire, from sin and guilt, free from [anything added; any alien element or ingredient] of what is false, sincere, genuine.’ (G2513 - Strong's Greek Lexicon (NASB95)) Louw and Nida define the word as, “pertaining to being ritually clean or pure—‘clean, pure.’” [5] The meaning is clear, there is no mixture of right and wrong, or clean and corrupt, or righteousness and sin. The motive of the heart is blameless and pure. 

First, the prerequisite for the love Paul speaks of is that it can only come ‘from a pure heart’ - this is a reoccurring theme throughout Scripture as we see in Ps 24:3-4,

Who may ascend into the hill of the LORD? And who may stand in His holy place? He who has clean hands and a pure heart, Who has not lifted up his soul to falsehood And has not sworn deceitfully. (Ps 24:3-4)

The only way we can stand before a holy God is with clean hands and a pure heart. Clean hands symbolically speak of being free from sin and a pure heart speaks of having our inward thoughts, intentions and motives cleansed, purified. Mankind cannot approach God dripping in his sin; God is holy and just and will not allow it, which is why the law required sacrifices to pay for sin before Israelites could approach God. The same is true for believers today. Our sins must be paid for and forgiven by God to be allowed in His presence, which is exactly what Jesus did on the Cross. (see also: Ps 73:1; Mat 5:8; Heb 10:22; Ps 51:10; Pro 4:23; Jas 4:8; 1 Sam 16:7; 1 Pet 1:22; Ps 19:14; Mat 6:21; Ps 119:11; Act 15:9; Ez 36:26). 

Per Donald Guthrie, the “heart stands for the totality of man’s moral affections, and without purity there, nobility of character is clearly impossible. Jesus reserved a special promise for the pure in heart ([‘they will see God’ -] Matt. 5:8) and spoke of the pruning of the vine as an illustration of the cleansing of believers through the word (John 15:3).” [6] 

In addition, the love Paul is speaking of can only flow from a heart that is cleansed (free from defilement of sin), which is the only way for it to be pure (cf. 2 Tim 2:22). 

‘good conscience’

Definition of ‘conscience’ - This is the Greek word syneidēsis { soon-i'-day-sis } and means ‘that process of thought which distinguishes what it considers morally good or bad, commending the good, condemning the bad, and so prompting to do the former, and avoid the latter.’ (Conscience - Vine's Expository Dictionary of New Testament Words) Louw and Nida define it as, “the psychological faculty which can distinguish between right and wrong—‘moral sensitivity, conscience.’” [7] 

Donald Guthrie wrote that conscience, 

indicates literally ‘joint knowledge’, and came to be used of the facility to distinguish between right and wrong. The right operation of this facility was given special prominence in Paul’s theology. By way of contrast, Timothy is later reminded that apostasizers are those whose consciences are branded (1 Tim. 4:2). This conscience-concept was well known in Hellenistic culture, but acquired under Christian usage a broader application (cf. Simpson). [8] 

Albert Barnes added this, 

A conscience free from guilt. Of course there can be no genuine love to God where the dictates of conscience are constantly violated, or where a man knows that he is continually doing wrong. If a man wishes to have the evidence of love to God, he must keep a good conscience. All pretended love, where a man knows that he is living in sin, is mere hypocrisy. [9] 

And paraphrasing from John Gill, everyone has a conscience that will either accuse or excuse. Our conscience is naturally defiled by sin, so it is never going to lead mankind into righteousness on its own. It will either ignore our sin or it will point out all the trivial ones. It will always tell us everything is just fine even though our disaster is at hand. But a good conscience is one that has been purified by the grace of God and purged from dead works by the blood of Christ. The purified conscience influences the believer to begin acting righteously. It does not, however, mean that the believer is suddenly perfect. The change begins and continues under the guidance and direction of the indwelling of the Holy Spirit. [10] 

‘a sincere faith’

Definition of ‘sincere’ - This is the Greek word anypokritos { an-oo-pok'-ree-tos } and means “pertaining to being genuine and sincere, and hence lacking in pretense or show—‘genuine, sincere.’” [11] 

A sincere faith is one that has no pretense or hypocrisy. It has a solid foundation in Christ and is based on our confidence in Him as Savior and Lord. We are not questioning that promise of the salvation we have received, we are embracing it whole-heartedly. Paul is also likely saying this because the false teachers that needed to be refuted lacked a true and sincere faith in the God they said they were following, even as they perverted the Gospel message they originally received. 

These teachers had exchanged the true Gospel for one of fables and genealogies. Their goal, intentional or unintentional, was to undermine the faith of the believers in the Church at Ephesus, since their teachings would have filled the heads of those listening with questions meant to challenge the Gospel they had already received and confuse their understanding of it. And this confusion would have created disagreements and strife between those being enticed and those rejecting the message of these false teachers, thus undermining the unity within the body of Christ. 

Just keep in mind one thing – from all outside appearances, the message these false teachers proclaimed appeared to be genuine, at least to those who did not have a strong grip on the truths of the Gospel. 

 

Duane Litfin added this, 

Whereas the false teachers were motivated by worthless curiosity, Paul’s instruction was designed to promote the most magnificent of virtues by maintaining the purity of the church’s teaching. God’s truth always purifies the human spirit, while error putrifies it. [12] 

As some commentators pointed out, in one verse Paul purposely links these three together because, 

[w]ithout real faith there is no good-conscience; without a reconciliation of the conscience there is no pure heart; without a pure heart there is no true Christian love conceivable. Thus all are blended in the closest union. [13] 

Dissension in the Church

For some men, straying from these things, have turned aside to fruitless discussion, (1 Tim 1:6)

The definition of ‘straying’ (‘swerved’ - KJV; ‘departed’ - NIV) - this is the Greek word astocheō { as-tokh-eh'-o } and means ‘to deviate from, miss the mark.’ (G795 - astocheō - Strong's Greek Lexicon (NASB95)) Louw and Nida define it as “to go astray as the result of departing from the truth—‘to abandon the truth, to lose one’s way.” [14] 

What had these false teachers strayed from? They had strayed from the self-sacrificial pure love of the gospel message that comes from a pure heart, a good conscience and a sincere faith. The gospel changes someone from the inside out. And it is the embracing of that message that creates those three. Only then do they create the sacrificial love that seeks to teach others and reproduce in others what was originally produced in them. 

The ‘straying’ mentioned in this verse indicates that the false teachers “were formerly sound in their doctrine. They taught correctly for a time, but had strayed and turned aside. They were elevating the Law of Moses (desiring to be teachers of the law) to a place God did not intend. The Christian life is about Christ, not about the Law of Moses.” [15] 

This may also indicate that these false teachers had never actually embraced the truths of the Gospel since they so easily strayed from what they had originally heard. Without embracing it, it would seem the Gospel had never changed them. And without that change, they simply could not communicate a message that accomplished what the gospel does in mankind. What they ended up doing was producing ‘fruitless discussions.’ 

Albert Barnes describe ‘fruitless discussions’ as, 

They were discourses on their pretended distinctions in the law; on their traditions and ceremonies; on their useless genealogies, and on the fabulous statements which they had appended to the law of Moses. [16] 

The Gospel gives believers solid doctrines and a meaningful way to handle them. But when that is lost or replaced, there is nothing of value to turn to. All that is left is to drag up something else to replace it and there is nothing worthy to replace the words of God to mankind. The grace and the love embedded in the Gospel bring life to the believer. Anything else is a waste of time and energy. 

wanting to be teachers of the Law, (1 Tim 1:7a)

One of the problems with ‘wanting to be teachers’ is the ego it engenders. Far too many want to do things that they are simply incapable of doing. After exchanging the Gospel for the ‘Law’ they had delusions of grandeur that they had any capability to teach a Law they had so little familiarity with. Think about how long Paul it had taken Paul to become a teacher of the Law, and he wasn’t even a Pharisee yet! When they should have recognized their own inadequacies, they allowed their ego to take over. As MacArthur put it, “They were not concerned about truly learning the law, or knowing the God of the law, or serving the people in love by the law. They desired the kind of prestige accorded rabbis in Judaism, only they sought that within the church.” [17] And knowing that the law does not save them, they tried to teach others that it did. 

Jesus’ words about the Pharisees were quite fitting for these false teachers, 

But they do all their deeds to be noticed by men; for they broaden their phylacteries and lengthen the tassels of their garments. They love the place of honor at banquets and the chief seats in the synagogues, and respectful greetings in the market places, and being called Rabbi by men. 

(Mat 23:5-7; see also: 1 Tim 6:4; Prov 25:14; 26:12; 1 Cor 3:18)

Anyone that aspires to be a teacher understands that it is not a place for proud or arrogant people. 

Let not many of you become teachers, my brethren, knowing that as such we will incur a stricter judgment. (Jas 3:1)

A teacher should be filled with humility and a very healthy fear of God. In many respects, it should have that person on their face before God, since they are being called to be more of a servant than others and the judgment for teaching false doctrines is much greater on the teacher than the listener. The role should never be sought as a status symbol or to lord it over others or to demonstrate their superiority over others. Pride does not produce godliness. Arrogance does not produce understanding or wisdom. 

(5) Whereas the object and purpose of our instruction and charge is love, which springs from a pure heart and a good (clear) conscience and sincere (unfeigned) faith. (6) But certain individuals have missed the mark on this very matter [and] have wandered away into vain arguments and discussions and purposeless talk. (7) They are ambitious to be doctors of the Law (teachers of the Mosaic ritual),

The Amplified Bible (La Habra, CA: The Lockman Foundation, 1987), 1 Ti 1:5–7.

Footnotes

1. Johannes P. Louw and Eugene Albert Nida, Greek-English Lexicon of the New Testament: Based on Semantic Domains (New York: United Bible Societies, 1996), p. 425.

2. Johannes P. Louw and Eugene Albert Nida, Greek-English Lexicon of the New Testament: Based on Semantic Domains (New York: United Bible Societies, 1996), p. 292.

3. John MacArthur, The MacArthur New Testament Commentary, 1 Timothy (Chicago: Moody Publishers © 1995), p. 18.

4. Ralph Earle, “1 Timothy,” in The Expositor’s Bible Commentary: Ephesians through Philemon, ed. Frank E. Gaebelein, vol. 11 (Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan Publishing House, 1981), p. 351.

5. Johannes P. Louw and Eugene Albert Nida, Greek-English Lexicon of the New Testament: Based on Semantic Domains (New York: United Bible Societies, 1996), p. 535.

6. Donald Guthrie, Pastoral Epistles: An Introduction and Commentary, vol. 14, Tyndale New Testament Commentaries (Downers Grove, IL: InterVarsity Press, 1990), p. 73.

7. Johannes P. Louw and Eugene Albert Nida, Greek-English Lexicon of the New Testament: Based on Semantic Domains (New York: United Bible Societies, 1996), p. 323.

8. Donald Guthrie, Pastoral Epistles: An Introduction and Commentary, vol. 14, Tyndale New Testament Commentaries (Downers Grove, IL: InterVarsity Press, 1990), p. 73.

9. Albert Barnes’ New Testament Notes on Colossians, p/o the Online Bible, Computer Program, © 1987-2026.

10. John Gill’s Commentary, p/o the Online Bible, Computer Program, © 1987-2026.

11. Johannes P. Louw and Eugene Albert Nida, Greek-English Lexicon of the New Testament: Based on Semantic Domains (New York: United Bible Societies, 1996), p. 674.

12. A. Duane Litfin, “1 Timothy,” in The Bible Knowledge Commentary: An Exposition of the Scriptures, ed. J. F. Walvoord and R. B. Zuck, vol. 2 (Wheaton, IL: Victor Books, 1985), p. 731–732.

13. John Peter Lange, Philip Schaff, and J. J. van Oosterzee, A Commentary on the Holy Scriptures: 1 & 2 Timothy, trans. E. A. Washburn and E. Harwood (Bellingham, WA: Logos Bible Software, 2008), p. 18.

14. Johannes P. Louw and Eugene Albert Nida, Greek-English Lexicon of the New Testament: Based on Semantic Domains (New York: United Bible Societies, 1996), p. 373.

15. Robert N. Wilkin, “The First Epistle of Paul the Apostle to Timothy,” in The Grace New Testament Commentary, ed. Robert N. Wilkin (Denton, TX: Grace Evangelical Society, 2010), p. 962–963.

16. Albert Barnes, Notes on the New Testament: I Thessalonians to Philemon, ed. Robert Frew (London: Blackie & Son, 1884–1885), p. 116.

17. John MacArthur, The MacArthur New Testament Commentary, 1 Timothy (Chicago: Moody Publishers © 1995), p. 19.