§ 5 The Appeal Renewed ( 2 Tim. 2:1–7 )
§5 The Appeal Renewed (2 Tim. 2:1–7)
After a brief “digression” in 1:15–18 that reminded Timothy of the disloyalty of “everyone in Asia,” with the noteworthy exception of Onesiphorus, Paul resumes the appeal to Timothy. With an emphatic, you then, in contrast to those in verse 15, Paul repeats the urgencies of 1:6–14: that he fulfill his trust and ministry (reflecting 1:6–7 and 13–14), in this instance by entrusting it to others (v. 2), and that he be ready to endure hardship (v. 3, reflecting the main concern of 1:8–12).
A series of three analogies (military, athletics, farming) reinforce the appeal to suffering and emphasize the need for wholehearted devotion to service (vv. 4–5) and the expectation of reward beyond the hardship (vv. 5–6). These emphases will be repeated in a different way in 2:8–13.
2:1 / This opening imperative, which in a general way gathers up the concerns of 1:6–14 and anticipates those that follow (2:2–13), is tied to what has preceded with an emphatic su oun (you then). You then stands in contrast to the general defection of the Asians (1:15) but in keeping with the likes of an Onesiphorus. The oun is at least resumptive (“then”), perhaps consequential (“therefore”), and goes back to the imperatives of 1:13–14.
You, therefore (having already been urged to suffer and keep the trust, and now in the light of the Asians and Onesiphorus), be strong in the grace that is in Christ Jesus. The imperative be strong (cf. 4:17; 1 Tim. 1:12; Rom. 4:20; Eph. 6:10; Phil. 4:13) is present tense (i.e., “keep on being”), passive voice, whose proper force is that one is being strengthened by God. The phrase in the grace can be either instrumental (“by means of the grace”) or locative (“in the grace,” so NIV). Though it is true that grace is the means by which we are saved and by which we are enabled to walk in God’s will, it is also true that that same grace is the sphere in which all of Christian life is lived (cf. Rom. 5:2). In light of the usage of this phrase in Ephesians 6:10 and elsewhere in the PE, Paul probably intends the latter. He wants Timothy to be strengthened by God himself as he stands in the grace that he has received. The source of such grace is to be found in Christ Jesus (cf. 1:13).
Thus Paul places the specific imperatives of this appeal (“Don’t be ashamed,” 1:8; “Take your share of suffering,” 1:8, 2:3; “Guard the deposit,” 1:14) within the context of this more general imperative of allowing God to strengthen him for his task of ministry. One should note the similarities with 1:6–7, 8c, and 14.
2:2 / The first task he is to be strengthened for is tied closely to the imperatives of 1:13–14. Just as Timothy must “keep safe what has been entrusted to him,” so also he is now to entrust (the verb form of the noun “deposit” in 1:14; cf. 1 Tim. 6:20) them to reliable men who, in turn, will also be qualified to teach others.
What strikes one about this sentence is both its uniqueness in the PE and its apparent interruption in the flow of the argument (or appeal). It seems strange, therefore, that so many should see this singular text as the main point of all three letters. Paul, however, is not so much concerned about “apostolic succession” (a true anachronism), as he is with the gospel itself, in light of the reality that Timothy is being urged by this letter to leave Ephesus and join Paul in Rome (in his suffering; cf. 4:9, 21). Because Timothy must leave, he is to entrust the things he has heard Paul say to others. Those to whom he entrusts those teachings are to be reliable or trustworthy people (cf. 1 Tim. 1:12). The same adjective in the PE often means “believing” (cf. 1 Tim. 4:3, 10, 12; 6:2; Titus 1:6); but here, as with its usage in the phrase “here is a trustworthy saying” (2:11, etc.), the emphasis is on their reliable character, not their status—although the genuine elders of 1 Timothy 3:1–7 and 5:17–18 are probably in view.
What Timothy is to entrust to them also reflects 1:13–14: the things you have heard me say (lit., “what you heard from me,” precisely as in 1:13, so therefore probably implying “the sound teaching” mentioned there). This tie of the gospel to Paul’s own preaching is thoroughgoing in Paul, beginning as it does in his earliest letter (1 Thess. 2:13).
What is not clear in this sentence is the phrase in the presence of [dia, ordinarily “through”] many witnesses. If dia here means in the presence of (so Chrysostom [d. A.D. 407] and many others), it must refer to the time of Timothy’s coming to faith (cf. 1 Tim. 6:11–13). But it is difficult to understand the reason for such an emphasis, especially in light of 3:10–11, which makes a point of Timothy’s longstanding companionship with Paul. If dia means “through,” as seems more likely, it probably means not that Timothy himself heard Paul’s teachings as they were mediated through many witnesses, but that, as Timothy should well know, what Paul taught is also attested to by many others—a needed emphasis in light of the many defections in Ephesus. (Cf. the plural “from whom” in 3:14, which also would support this interpretation.)
2:3 / With this imperative Paul returns to the second—and main—reason that Timothy needs “to be strengthened in the grace that is his in Christ,” namely, that he may, as Onesiphorus, “take his part in suffering.” Since this verb is an exact repetition from 1:8, this is by far the preferable translation to the endure hardship of the NIV (which has “join with me in suffering” in 1:8; cf. KJV, NEB). The verb (syn [“with”]-kako [“evil”]-paschō [“suffer”]) has to do with sharing suffering, not simply enduring difficulties, and is repeated by Paul (without the syn) in verse 9 of his own sufferings for the gospel.
On this occasion Paul qualifies the verb with an analogy from the military—like a good soldier of Christ Jesus. Military imagery is common in Paul (cf. 2 Cor. 10:3–5; Eph. 6:10–17; Philem. 2) and usually occurs in a context of struggling against opponents of his gospel (cf. 1 Tim. 1:18). While the imagery here may indeed reflect that concern (cf. 2:14–19), it more likely is a general metaphor for Timothy as a minister of the gospel, whose ministry has some analogies to the life of the soldier. By the very nature of his occupation, the soldier will often be called on to take his part in suffering.
2:4 / The imagery of soldiering in verse 3 calls forth at this point a reflection on the metaphor itself, which in turn will lead to two further metaphors. In 1 Corinthians 9:7 Paul has previously used two of these metaphors; but there all three images make a singular point (ministers of the gospel have a right to expect support from those to whom they minister). Here the military metaphor makes a considerably different point (the need for perseverance), and the subsequent metaphors add yet a further nuance (the promise of eschatological reward); all of which looks forward to verses 11–13.
The metaphor itself propounds: No one serving as a soldier gets involved in civilian affairs—he wants to please his commanding officer. One must be careful not to press images into meanings that differ from the author’s intent. Here the concern follows directly from verse 3, that Timothy is to “take his share in suffering.” Thus it is not a proscription against marriage or a call for separation from worldliness, as it has often been treated by Roman Catholics or Protestant Fundamentalists. Paul’s concern is singular: Timothy must give himself, even to the point of great suffering, to wholehearted devotion to his divine commanding officer. Indeed, it should be his desire to please him. Such a desire will mean obedience to the call to service, including suffering. The analogy does not negate “civilian affairs”; rather, it disallows “looking back” (cf. Luke 9:61–62) or hankering for an easier path (in this case defecting, as have so many others).
2:5 / The analogy calling for wholehearted devotion to service in order to “please” his Lord, calls for the companion analogy of an athlete (cf. 1 Tim. 1:18 and 6:12) who does not receive the victor’s crown unless he competes according to the rules. The emphasis now is on his “obeying the rules” (lit., “compete lawfully”; Gk., nomimōs, as in 1 Tim. 1:8), which seems to reflect a similar concern to that in verse 4. But it is not totally clear what “according to the rules” means: either the rules of the contest or the rules of training (e.g., the Games required a ten-month period of strict discipline). It probably refers to the rules of the contest itself, since the concern is not with Timothy’s need for discipline as such but with his taking his share “in suffering.” The “noble contest” (cf. 1 Tim. 6:12), like the “noble war” (cf. 1 Tim. 1:18), requires wholehearted devotion to the task, as well as full compliance with the rules of the contest, which in this case includes suffering.
However, although the accent falls upon according to the rules, the metaphor also reflects the eschatological emphasis recurrent in this letter (see esp. vv. 11–13; 4:6–8; cf. 1:1, 12). The athlete who competes according to the rules, that is, “takes his part in suffering,” will in fact receive the victor’s crown (cf. 4:8). For a similar use of athletics imagery in Paul, see 1 Corinthians 9:24–27.
2:6 / With yet a further image, farming, Paul reemphasizes, with the promise of eschatological reward, the point of wholehearted devotion, even if it calls for suffering. As with the analogy in verse 5, the emphasis here lies on the hardworking farmer; again the point refers back to verse 3 with its sharing in suffering.
But also as in verse 5, the imagery again accents the eschatological reward; he should be the first to receive a share of the crops. The point of his receiving the first share, therefore, is not about his making a living from the gospel (D-C, Hanson), which is totally foreign to the context, but about his final reward for being hardworking.
Thus, even though the military imagery does not precisely say so, each of the metaphors, besides calling Timothy to “take his share in suffering,” looks forward to the eschatological prize. As Barrett nicely puts it: “Beyond warfare is victory, beyond athletic effort a prize, and beyond agricultural labour a crop” (p. 102).
2:7 / The compounding of metaphors in verses 4–6 has led Paul from the specific point of his imperative for Timothy to “take part in suffering” to an equal emphasis on the eschatological “prize.” These two emphases form the basic point of the rest of the appeal (vv. 8–13). But in order to get to that final paragraph, Paul calls on Timothy to reflect on what I am saying, that is, the point of the three metaphors, which Paul has given without including explanations.
Just in case Timothy might miss the point, Paul adds that the Lord will give you (not “may the Lord grant you”; cf. KJV, which is based on an inferior text) insight into all this. Thus everything is from the Lord, both the strengthening to stand in his grace (v. 1) and the ability to understand the need to share in suffering.
2:2 / Those who take the “church manual” approach to these letters, and especially those who would date the letters as later pseudepigraphs, see this imperative as a key to understanding all three letters. Here is “the author” betraying his post-Pauline concerns of preserving the pure gospel through properly trained and ordained ministers. But the singularity of this verse in these letters must not be overlooked. The interpretation offered in this commentary accounts both for its singularity and its place in the context of this Epistle.
2:3 / On the use of the military and athletic metaphors in Paul, see J. N. Sevenster, Paul and Seneca, pp. 162–64; and V. C. Pfitzner, Paul and the Agon Motif, pp. 157–86. Here is a clear case of the “authentic” Paul reflecting imagery in common with such contemporaries as Seneca and Philo, yet using it in a uniquely Christian way. The usage here, as Pfitzner convincingly demonstrates, reflects Pauline usage, not Hellenism or Hellenistic Judaism. This fact should cause one to be more cautious in describing other such metaphors, unique to these Epistles, as un-Pauline.
2:5 / For the information that participants in the Olympic Games had to swear an oath to Zeus to observe strict training for the ten months prior to the competition, see Pausanius, Descriptions of Greece 5.24.9 (Loeb, II, p. 529). Kelly sees the point as “arduous self-discipline,” but that seems to move too far afield from the thoroughgoing context of sharing in suffering.
2:6 / D-C, followed by Hanson and others who see the letter as pseudepigraphic, think the point of both the athlete and the farmer metaphors is remuneration. But this misses the clear eschatological sense of the reward (see vv. 11–13 and 4:6–8) as well as the point of the metaphors in the present context. Such an interpretation is the result of their view of authorship and their subsequent fascination with the author’s “sources” (here, 1 Cor. 9:7 and 24–27) while paying little or no attention to the point of the metaphors in context. The meaning of the metaphors, they argue, is left for “the reader to find out for himself,” which is their interpretation of v. 7 (p. 108). It is arguable that an interpretation that makes good sense both of the details and the context is to be preferred to this procedure.