1 Timothy 6:3-6

This is the wrong call.
That was really good.
Hey everybody, welcome back as we close out the week
in First Timothy, close to closing out the book.
We’ll probably get through,
we may get through this book at the end of next week,
but we’ll see how that goes today.
Coming off kind of a rough,
a speed bump yesterday,
some difficult texts conceptually,
sociologically.
We move back to,
I would say closer to the core
of this book and we get,
we really get kind of a,
we close the week with a kind of double-barreled dose of Paul.
Paul has,
you know, he’s a strong leader.
He’s an outspoken leader.
He’s talking to Timothy,
but keep in mind that Paul undoubtedly knows
this letter will be shared.
It will be read in the church.
I think he anticipates that.
He may even be using that idea to be honest.
So let me jump in here.
We’re at the very,
the tail end of verse two,
which is really kind of part of verse three,
but we’ll go from there.
So,
“Teach and urge these duties.
Whoever teaches otherwise and does not agree
with the sound words of our Lord Jesus Christ
and the teaching in accordance with godliness
is conceited,
understanding nothing,
and has a morbid craving for controversy
and for disputes about words.
From these come envy,
dissension,
slander,
base suspicion,
and wrangling among those
who are depraved in mind and bereft of the truth,
imagining that godliness is a means of gain.”
So,
you know,
pretty hard to miss the fact
that you’ve changed tone at that point.
Paul tells Timothy,
you know, I want you to
teach these.
And remember, I do think these are public words.
These are not exclusive to Paul and Timothy’s conversation.
This is going to be in the broader context of the church,
and you have to kind of imagine it that way.
Whoever teaches otherwise,
that’s essentially the summary here,
not whoever doesn’t agree with the words
of the Lord Jesus,
and by implication, the teachings I’ve just laid out for you,
is conceited,
that they are arrogant,
and they understand nothing,
and they have a morbid craving for controversy
and dissension and dispute about words.
So, I don’t know what to say about these words,
Mike.
I mean, Paul is,
he’s
certainly keeping nothing back here.
He’s not,
there’s nothing you need to decode in this.
He’s just saying, “Look, if you don’t like it,
“and if you’re causing trouble,
“and if you’re teaching other things
“that aren’t what I’ve just told you,
you’re conceited, “you understand nothing, and you’re just trying
“to stir the pot,
which is not in keeping
“with trying to be the church.”
Pretty sharp edge.
Yeah, you made the case,
and I think it’s worth noting
at the early part of this conversation,
it may seem to us like this is almost a schizophrenic turn in the text,
it probably strikes us as coming from nowhere.
If that’s the case,
then I would advise
that maybe it would do us all well to slow down
and to consider where we’ve been,
because I think actually this very much fits
the general thread that’s been woven throughout this book.
There has been a lot of critique levied in this book,
even in the encouragement of Timothy,
and I think we pointed out at different turns,
that even in encouraging Timothy,
there is a form of critique against the opponent
that is assumed in that.
And here,
following that day when we had talked
about social interaction and we talked about the difficulty
in a contemporary reading of the instruction given to slaves,
but here we suddenly have now continuing that kind
of where the rubber meets the road conversation,
very practical application.
Paul then turns right here to say,
“If you are going to teach words
“that are not the sound words of the gospel,
“if you’re going to,” and this should bring back to mind
that conversation about those sort of vain wonderings,
or he also calls them those practices
that are restricted,
overly restrictive kinds of beliefs.
If those things are the things being taught,
then that is conceit,
it understands nothing, it has a morbid craving for controversy.
Now,
yes, Clint, I do think there’s a kind of bite to it.
On the flip side,
we all have had an experience
of someone who was using words and they were destructive.
A person,
we probably wouldn’t use the word,
morbid craving for controversy,
but there are times when people take it too far
and they begin to say and teach things
that not only divide the community,
but in some cases,
they really do harm to people.
And when that happens,
Paul makes it clear
that is a point to achieve correction.
It’s a time to separate, to distinguish.
Clearly that requires wisdom,
but I just want to make the case here
that I do think while it may seem that this is abrupt,
I think one can make a case that does fit a general tone
that we’ve seen throughout.
Yeah, and I would say even in a,
maybe a broader sense,
Michael, you can read these words and think of Paul
as coming off a little arrogant himself,
maybe coming on too strong.
There’s no doubt that Paul is a strong leader.
He’s an outspoken leader.
However,
what’s really interesting is when you compare these kinds of words with other things,
we’ve seen even in this study,
other places where Paul says,
look,
stop fussing at each other about rules,
treat each other kindly,
take care of the weaker brother or the weaker sister.
There have been just as many times in Paul’s writings
where he’s taken a pastoral tone.
What really seems to set Paul off
is the idea of causing conflict and division within the body.
Paul often reserves his harshest criticisms
for those who make the faith harder for others,
who teach circumcision,
who have this idea that they know the truth
and that they wanna add rules and burdens to people.
And that just gets under Paul’s skin
in a way that nothing else really seems to do.
And so,
yes,
if this is all you read of Paul, you would wonder,
what do I make of this guy?
But I think when you balance this with other things,
you have to kind of admire a leader.
There is a danger in being a leader
who won’t stand up to
those who are causing issues.
At some point, leadership will demand
a difficult conversation with a difficult person.
And when we,
as leaders or when we,
as family members, whatever,
avoid that long enough,
we actually make it worse and not better.
And so,
then he continues here,
when you do this,
that’s when you get envy, dissension,
slander,
suspicion,
and wrangling among those who are depraved
and bereft of truth.
And this last bit about they imagine godliness
as a means of gain.
In other words, they’re in this for what is good for them,
either notoriety or perhaps even wealth,
the acquisition of stuff.
These are harsh words.
And unfortunately,
Michael, history’s
not short on examples of people
who have used the church for their personal gain.
And I suspect when they have to answer for that,
it’s not going to be good.
And Paul is prefiguring that,
I think, to some extent.
Yeah, in fact, I think the point
that you were making about Paul
may be coming across strongly in a section like this
is in some ways fleshed out in this very exact phrase.
Imagining that godliness is a means of gain
makes it clear that the opponents in Paul’s view
are pursuing this form of teaching
and they are reaching towards this end
not for the sake of the other,
not with the other’s best interest in mind,
not out of a servant’s heart, not with humility,
but rather at the core with self at the center.
That is Paul’s shortcut to anger.
Paul has a very short half-life
between recognizing that kind of self-centered reality
and then quickly turning to the denunciation of that.
He sees that as antithetical to the gospel itself.
Yeah, and not to jump on top of you there, Michael, but
because for Paul, if we are at the center,
who isn’t?
Then it’s not about Jesus.
If it’s about me as a leader and not about Christ
and I lead as a follower, then for Paul,
the ship is sinking.
And yeah, that pushes his buttons in a big way.
That said,
I don’t think for most of us
we should take literal advice from Paul
and start going around calling people depraved of mind
and bereft of the truth.
That’s probably not the way
to start off a coffee conversation, right?
But seriously,
I do think we must be careful
with the ideas that we allow to dominate our attention.
That was true in Paul’s day
as the church wrestled with some of the practices
of what it means to be a Gentile while also a Christian.
That also applies today.
It really,
as we consume the news on television
and we consume our friends’ lives on our devices,
when we get our ideas from such a variety of sources,
some of those, if we’re honest, we don’t even know where they come from.
I do think we today also as Christians
should be very vigilant in what we allow into our life.
In the same way that a person who cares about their health
is careful about what they eat,
I think the ideas and the thoughts
and the time that we spend engaging with substantial matters
should be measured with some discernment
because we might easily find ourself
on the other side of this line
and numbered with those who Paul would say
are ultimately serving their own ends
as opposed to the ends of the body.
And no Christian wants to be there.
And there is a warning,
I think, even in our present time to be careful
about what we allow in through that gate.
Yeah, and there may be a temptation for Paul
to come on even stronger than normal
because he’s doing this from a distance.
He’s addressing this danger to the community
without being there.
And if he were there,
I suspect he could narrow his comments
to the particular people.
He would take them aside.
He would rebuke them.
He would instruct them.
He would correct them,
whatever that may be.
But he’s now trying to do that through Timothy.
And whatever is happening is already entrenched.
It’s not just a danger.
This is something that is going on.
And that makes it more difficult on Paul’s end
because he has to now root it out.
He can’t prevent it anymore.
He has to fix it.
And that’s always more difficult.
It is always to squash.
It is easier to squash something before it gets established.
But that’s not the case in this community.
Whatever is there is already there.
And so Paul has to kind of try to root it out
and get rid of it.
And he has to do that from second chair
with Timothy really being the point person
and Paul being the person giving advice.
And so I think he wants to make it very clear
how he feels about this situation
to try and put Timothy in a position of succeeding.
At least that’s how I read it.
It’s very tempting, both in the early church
and as it is today,
both for life Christians
as well as for ordained Christian leaders
to pursue our faith in such a way that points back to us.
And I think Paul’s very encouraging word
that comes here in verse six.
Of course, there’s great gain and godliness
combined with contentment is an incredibly contemporary
word for the church that whenever you have a church leader in particular,
it may be the easiest example
who is driven by the idea of numbers or success
or influence or charisma or whatever that might be for the individual.
Great harm can be done very quickly
for the sake of the church.
When a person is driven by that inner need,
a kind of instability,
a desire to reach or to grab,
I think there is deep levels of wisdom beyond
what we’re going to be able to really unearth
in a conversation like this in that idea
that godliness must be combined with contentment.
That if we find ourselves never content,
it’s likely we’re not living in the kind of godliness
we’ve been called to.
And that is particularly prescient,
that’s particularly important in the midst of a congregation where the leadership,
Paul has identified and is now clearly saying is
reaching for ends other than for the sake of the furtherance of the gospel.
And when that selfishness is called out,
Paul says the only metric by which one can see health
is the measure of that godliness,
that right Christian
character combined with a kind of contentment that only comes
with being in Christ and living that out faithfully
in the Christian community.
Yeah, I think the last word that I would add there,
Michael, is if we notice the movement
from the morbid craving
and disputes about words,
these are really pointed at an individual.
And then if you see the next sentence,
from those come envy, dissension,
slander,
those are intended for the community.
So what one person
contributes can have a negative impact
on the broader group.
And I think this is the danger,
this is why for Paul,
it is certainly a matter
of right and wrong,
it is certainly a matter of theology,
but in its simplest form,
it’s also a matter of math.
You have one or two people threatening the faith
of dozens of people,
hundreds of people, however,
whatever that number might be.
And Paul,
whatever else we could say about him,
Paul is certainly aware of the impact that one person
trying to grab leadership for the wrong reasons,
teaching the wrong things in the wrong way
can have on the church.
A ton of damage has been and can be done by false leaders
who are about themselves.
We’ve all seen it in churches.
Some of us have lived through it in church communities.
And when it happens,
it is majorly destructive.
And I think to Paul’s credit,
if that means he has to step on some toes
and offend some people by being a little rough around the edges,
then so be it,
that’s what he’s gonna do.
If he needs to swing a sledgehammer,
he’s going to do that in order to try
and protect the community from those kind of influences.
And it comes across strong,
but really, I think it’s passion.
Yeah, it’s passion.
It’s an awareness of what’s at stake.
And that may strike us as of high amplitude.
If you let me say that,
it may seem very intense,
but that should, I think, bring with it a kind of critique of our own temptation
to make church a place that always feels comfortable
and that where we want to go
and be with friends and be affirmed.
I mean, these are good things
and a church should do these things.
But Clint,
I think it’s also important
that we recognize that our church community
must also be a place that challenges those things
that would allow us to continue our life
living as if we didn’t need a savior.
And here we have leaders in the church
who are teaching things to the body
that would lead it to believe
that there are things that they need to do,
which will result in either the advancement
of their salvation or maybe even the achievement of their salvation.
We don’t know the subtleties of the arguments at hand.
What we do know is that Paul has no time
for those who take Jesus Christ out of center seat.
So if I have a concluding word here, it’s,
you know, for us,
that’s the question that comes back to each of us.
You may not count yourself a leader.
Maybe that’s a term you wouldn’t use,
whether you should or not.
But every single one of us is responsible
for Jesus Christ being at the center.
And in any way that we might entertain ideas
or patterns or habits that revoke or reject
or do not accept that,
we are going to find ourself outside the circle of grace
that Paul believes is the lifeblood of the Christian faith.
It’s a measure of freedom and wholeness,
not a kind of rejection of just,
you know, all of the things that you should do.
It’s not a list of moralisms, but for Paul,
this is the center.
And if we believe that the center is being rejected and say nothing,
then we don’t truly understand the depth
and importance of that center.
Yeah, I think we would be an heir
if we read these words as permission for us
to talk this way to people we don’t agree with.
That’s not what’s happening here.
Paul knows that these people
teaching something other than the gospel
are dangerous to the church.
And as such, he has to pull the rug out from under them.
He has to have the community know that they are dangerous.
He has to expose their motives,
and he has to level these charges at them
in a way that the rest of the community will see
and therefore it will have an undermining effect
on the influence and power of those people.
This is not a pattern for the way the rest of us
talk to each other when we see things differently.
That’s not what’s happening here.
Paul is going after what he understands to be a deep threat
and he’s doing it publicly
so the church can be in on the conversation.
And I think ultimately that’s what’s happening in the passage.
That’s a good conclusion.
We want to thank you for joining us today for this conversation.
If you haven’t already,
check out the new series
that we just kicked off today,
literally just released called “Stuff That Bugs Pastures.”
We promise it’s not just us complaining.
We hope you’ll check it out
and hope that if you find it interesting, you’ll share it.
But friends, have a great weekend
and we look forward to seeing you next week
as we kick off our study
and finish the first book of Timothy.
Yeah, and just a word along those lines.
We’ve not heard, to my knowledge, from anybody with suggestions of where we go from here.
So if we don’t hear,
we’ll probably move into second Timothy.
If you have ideas of something else,
just please let us know so we can have the conversation.