Preface to the Original Edition
Preface to the Original Edition
Commentaries are of several kinds. Some interpret the text by carrying on a running dialogue with previous commentaries; others are written as if there had been no previous commentaries. Some are concerned strictly with exegesis (what the text meant to its original recipients); others are more concerned with the here and now, that is, how this word applies for today, but without sufficient regard for what it originally meant (except when they have difficulties to get around!). Since this commentary is purposely of a single kind and has a rather singular point of view, it seemed appropriate at the outset to explain what is intended.
The basic concern throughout is with exegesis, an exposition of Paul’s intent in writing these letters to Timothy and Titus in their historical context. But since I am also a committed believer in Scripture as God’s Word, it will be clear throughout that more is at stake than merely being informed about the past. However, despite the concern that these letters be heard as God’s Word for today, there has been every attempt to remove dogmatic or partisan applications. Hence the reader for the most part has been left on her or his own to “make the applications.” For guidelines on these matters, one might consult my How to Read the Bible for All Its Worth (co-authored with Douglas Stuart).
What is more important to note is the singular point of view from which this commentary has been written. As will be noted in the Introduction, the crucial matter for writing a commentary on these Epistles is whether or not they are authentic. After teaching these letters several times at the college and seminary level, I grew to have a firm conviction that, despite the linguistic, stylistic, and theological difficulties, one could make more sense of them as having been written by Paul than otherwise. But I was still generally dissatisfied both with my own teaching and with most commentaries that shared my convictions about authorship, because there seemed to be a lack of unifying perspective as to why they were written and what they were all about. It was clear to all that some false teachers lay behind the writing of what was supposed to be the earliest of the letters—1 Timothy. But in general only lip service was paid to that reality; thereafter everything was treated as though what Paul intended were a church manual, to guide the church organizationally through its ongoing years. It was this point of view that I found myself uneasy with, even though much in chapters 2, 3, and 5 seemed to support it.
Then one year I decided to lead a group of seminarians through 1 Timothy by taking 1:3 absolutely seriously—as though that really were the reason for the letter, namely, to urge Timothy to stop the false teachers in Ephesus. At every point we asked, How does this, or may this, reflect the ad hoc situation of the church in Ephesus that was being torn apart by false teachers? The results astonished us. And after a few more times through the PE (Pastoral Epistles) with other classes, I became fully convinced of the correctness of this point of view. It is exactly how one makes the best sense of all the earlier letters of Paul, and for me and several generations of seminarians, it has become the key to understanding the PE as well.
I want to thank those many seminarians at Gordon-Conwell who, over several years, have helped shape the thinking that has gone into this commentary, and especially the members of the seminar of Winter Term, 1983, who interacted with the rough draft of this work and helped to make it a better book. Above all I must thank my teaching assistant, Patrick Alexander, who has provided so much help by reading through two full drafts and thus improving the style at many points, by checking primary and secondary references, and by arranging the bibliography. Special thanks to Corinne Languedoc, faculty secretary par excellence, and Connie Gundry and Barbara DeNike, whose combined typing skills made it possible to meet the publisher’s deadline.