This is a very personal letter. From elsewhere in the New Testament we know that Paul was very fond of Timothy; he speaks of his love for the younger man and of his conviction that he was faithful (1 Cor. 4:17). Paul says further that Timothy could remind the Corinthians of Paul’s way of life, which indicates a certain intimacy and shows that Paul trusted him. It accords with this that he likens Timothy’s relationship to him to that of a son to his father (Phil. 2:22), and with a cheerful disregard for consistency speaks of him as a brother (and fellow worker, 1 Thess. 3:2). He links Timothy with himself in the opening greetings in some of his epistles (2 Cor. 1:1; Phil. 1:1; Col. 1:1; 1 Thess. 1:1; 2 Thess. 1:1), which argues that he was a trusted colleague. Paul asks the Corinthians to ensure that Timothy “has nothing to fear” if he should visit them (1 Cor. 16:10), which seems to indicate a certain diffidence about the young man. He sent him to the Thessalonians, he assures them, “to strengthen and encourage you in your faith” (1 Thess. 3:2), and he plans to send him to the Philippians, explaining, “I have no one else like him, who takes a genuine interest in your welfare” (Phil. 2:20).
All this gives point to Paul’s greeting, “To Timothy my true son in the faith” (1 Tim.1:2). The letter is written to a younger man for whom the apostle had a deep affection and whom he had for years entrusted with important missions. What Paul now says brings out the truth that Christians are linked in the service of the Lord and that there is significant help they can and should give to one another.
The letter is important also for the light it sheds on the ministry of the Christian church. Throughout all the years of its history, the ministry has been of great importance. It has taken a variety of shapes, some very authoritarian, some egalitarian. It has been strongly hierarchical in some of its forms, and the very idea of a hierarchy has been rejected in others. However it has been understood, it has been seen as at the heart of ecclesiastical organization. It comes as something of a surprise to realize that, apart from the Pastoral Epistles, the New Testament has very little to say about it (and when it does, it speaks of forms like the apostle or the prophet, which have ceased to exist, at least as regular ministers). It is accordingly important that 1 Timothy has so much to say about ministers—more, indeed, than has any other New Testament writing.
It is significant that Paul says nothing about ordination in this letter, unless he has it in mind when he refers to “the prophecies once made about you” (1 Tim. 1:18) or to the gift given when the elders “laid their hands on you” (4:14). In either case this is possible, but the point is that in neither case does Paul mention ordination, and both passages may be otherwise explained. However we understand these passages, clearly what matters to Paul is that those in the ministry should be upright people, leaders whose character is beyond reproach. So he gives instructions about the bishop (ejpivskopo" [episkopos, G2176], 3:1-7). NIV appropriately renders the Greek “overseer,” for there is no reason for holding that in New Testament times the office discharged anything like the functions it came to have in the church and that arise in our minds when the word “bishop” is used today. But NIV obscures the fact that it was this office and no other that very shortly evolved into the monarchical bishop. It is one of our problems about the early history of the ministry that we do not know precisely what functions the New Testament “bishop” discharged. Paul is much more interested in his character than in his ecclesiastical activities. The church has all too often reversed this priority; 1 Timothy is of permanent value in pointing to the truth that it is the quality of Christian life that people show that fits them for office in the church.
It is usually agreed that the elder and the bishop were identical in the church of this period. Paul does not equate them in this letter as he does in Titus 1:5-7, but he does not differentiate them either, and there is no reason for taking 1 Tim. 5:17-19 as referring to anyone other than the bishops of chapter 3. The elders, we learn, are active in directing the affairs of the church, though what form their direction took is not stated. Evidently some had administrative duties, and others were concerned with preaching and teaching, these latter being singled out as worthy of special honor. Paul combines an Old Testament passage with a saying of Jesus to bring out the truth that the elders are to be paid for their work (5:18; cf. Deut. 25:4; Luke 10:7). And he makes it clear that the elder is a reverend personage, not to be accused lightly (1 Tim. 5:19).
Paul also has something to say about deacons, and once again the emphasis is on character (1 Tim. 3:8-10), with some emphasis on the importance of family life (3:12). Between these two references there is another that may refer to the wives of deacons or may tell us something about female deacons (3:11). Again the emphasis is on character and conduct.
The church has all too often neglected this emphasis. There have been battles as some have tried to exercise wide-ranging authority, and others have resisted this strenuously. There have been discussions as to whether the ministers in one church can recognize those in another; the validity of orders has been a matter of prime concern. Indeed, in the modern ecumenical movement the recognition of ministries has been a matter of profound interest. The strong emphasis on character in this letter is of the greatest importance, coupled as it is with a total bypassing of all that is implied in the term “the validity of orders.” This does not mean that we can neglect proper arrangements in recognizing ministries. But Paul is teaching the whole church that there are more important considerations than the proper arrangements for a service of ordination.
While he thus has a good deal to say about the way those who are called into the ministry should live, he is not silent either about the conduct of others in the church. Paul insists on the importance of prayer (1 Tim. 2:8) and on the way believers should behave, including women (2:9-15), believers generally (3:14-15), older and younger people (5:1-2), widows (5:3-16), slaves (6:1-2), and the rich (6:17-19). There are different duties for people in different stations, but all who profess to be Christians must be careful that their lives reflect their doctrines. The letter keeps reminding readers of the importance of upright Christian living.
First Timothy is also a protest against needless controversies. There are warnings against those who “devote themselves to myths and endless genealogies” (1 Tim. 1:4; “godless myths,” 4:7). Those who forbid marriage and introduce food laws are also condemned (4:3), and Timothy is warned against “an unhealthy interest in controversies and quarrels...that result in envy” (6:4). Perhaps some in the modern church should give heed to the warning against people who “think that godliness is a means to financial gain” (6:5), while the modern community is almost a classic illustration of the saying, “The love of money is a root of all kinds of evil” (6:10).
An interesting and permanently valuable part of this letter is the way Paul refers to the past in such a way as to afford guidance for the future. Thus he looks back to the time when he was with Timothy and to the teaching he then gave him; he exhorts him to continue in the course then urged (1:3-11). It is the same elsewhere: the instructions Paul has given in the past will enable Timothy to act in the future (3:14-15). Objectors to Pauline authorship often cavil at the insistence on sound doctrine, but they do not usually notice that this is derived from the essentials of the gospel: Paul writes of “the sound doctrine that conforms to the glorious gospel of the blessed God” (1:11). He refers to Jesus as the “one mediator between God and men” and goes on to say that he “gave himself as a ransom for all men.” It was to spread this message that Paul “was appointed a herald and an apostle...and a teacher of the true faith to the Gentiles” (2:5-7). The writer is clear that the events that constitute the gospel form the basis of the whole Christian message. Whatever the circumstances in which Timothy finds himself, the gospel is to form the message he proclaims, the gospel that Paul preached and that is central to the life of the whole Christian church.
Even many who see the letter as pseudonymous make the point that the writer is still appealing to Paul. The letter stands as a reminder that there are some truths that persist from age to age. The meaning of the gospel of Christ is not to be modified in the interests of Christians living in circumstances very different from those of Paul. In other words, this letter points us to a “given” in the Christian message. There are great truths that are to be embraced in every age. The fact remains that the writer does not refute the heresies to which he makes reference. Rather he draws Timothy’s attention to the way those heresies should be refuted—another important and continuing value of this writing.