The Servant of the Lord and Strife

by Brian Burns

CE Preacher’s Study Notes 1991 Paul is not addressing any new problems here in this passage. Instead, he brings up one of the first instructions he ever gave to Timothy in his initial letter. Notice his words in I Timothy 1:3-6:“As I besought thee to abide still at Ephesus, when I went into Macedonia, that thou mightest charge some that they teach no other doctrine, neither give heed to fables and endless genealogies, which minister questions, rather than godly edifying which is in faith: so do. Now the end of the commandment is charity out of a pure heart, and of a good conscience, and of faith unfeigned: from which some having swerved have turned aside unto vain jangling."

Ephesus already had the reputation for false doctrines, fables, and empty meaningless talk. Barnes said, “The Greeks and the Hebrews were greatly given to controversies of various kinds; and many of the questions discussed pertained to points which could not be settled, or which, if settled, were of no importance.” There were, and still are, much more important matters to deal with than these that lead to more problems. Paul was so determined to get this point across that he also wrote it in I Timothy 1:4; 4:7; 2 Timothy 2:16, 23; and Titus 3:9.

Destructive questions were prominent then, as well as now, and needed to be properly handled, as they do now. As with any type of evil, the course to take is plain according to Paul. In this chapter he says one should “shun, purge, flee, and refuse.” But, this is not all there is to combating evil. The Holy Spirit inspired positive instruction to follow the prohibitions. Let’s look at what Timothy was to avoid and what he should employ.

Definitions

1. “foolish” (Greek, moros, Strong’s #3473): “impious, godless” (Thayer, p. 420).
2. “unlearned” (apaidutos) (#521): “(only here in the N.T.) “without instruction and discipline, uneducated, ignorant, rude” (Thayer, p. 525) (All sources seem to agree).
3. “questions” (zeeteesis) (#2214): “(controversial) question, issue” (Arndt & Gingrich). “a subject of questioning or debate, matter of controversy" (Thayer, p.272).
4. “avoid” (paraiteomai): “to refuse, decline, avoid” (Vine’s, p. ?)
5. “knowing” (ido): “The tenses coming from ido and retained by usage form two families, of which one signifies ‘to see,’ the other ‘to know."
6. “gender” (gennao): “lit, become the father of 3. fig. bring forth, produce, cause” (Amdt & Gingrich, p. 155) [as in our text—BB].
7. “strifes” (makee): “in our lit. only in the plural and only of battles fought without actual weapons --- fightings, quarrels, strifes, disputes” (Amdt & Gingrich, p. 496).
8. “servant” (doulos): “an adj., ‘signifying in bondage,’ is used as a noun, arid the most common and general for ‘servant’, frequently indicating subjection without the idea of bondage” (Vine’s).
9. “must” (dei): “moral obligation” (Vincent).
10. “strive (makomai) (#3164): “to quarrel, rangle, dispute” (Thayer, p. 394).
11. “gentle” (eepios): “affable, mild, gentle” (Wuest).
12. “apt to teach” (didaktikos): “skilled in teaching” (Vine’s).
13. “patient” (anexikakos): “putting up with evil. Here only in the N.T.” (Robertson).
14. “meekness” (praotees): “gentleness, humility, courtesy, consideration” (Arndt & Gingrich, p. 699).
15. “instructing” (paiduo): “to train children, to teach” (Vine’s).
16. “oppose themselves” (antidiatithemenos): “signifies to place oneself in opposition, oppose (anti, against, dia, through [intensive), tithemi, to place) (Vine’s).
17. “preadveure” will give (mepote): is used wan various meanings according to the context” (Vine’s).
18. “repentance” (metanoya or -noia) (#3341): “a change of mind” (Thayer, p. 405).
19. “acknowledging” (epignosis): “more correctly, ‘the’ knowledge” (Vincent).
20. “recover” (ananeepho) (#366): “to return to soberness” (Thayer, p. 40).
21. “snare” (pagis) (#3803): “whatever brings peril, loss, destruction” (Thayer, p. 472).
22. “who are taken captive” (zogreo): “signifies to take men alive” (Vine’s).
23. “by him” (autou) and “his (ekeinou) will” (see discussion).

DiscussionPaul’s statement here seems to make it plain that such questions will definitely arise. Some believe that Timothy may have been trying to satisfy every inquisitor that came his way and that he needed to learn how to avoid these circumstances. Matthew Henry said,

“It is very remarkable how often, and with what seriousness, the apostle cautions Timothy against disputes in religion, which surely was not without such design as this, to show us that religion consists more in believing and practicing what God requires than in subtle disputes.”

So, there are times that we refuse certain types of questions. Earnest R. Campbell, Greek student and instructor, said,
“The word ‘questions’ basically speaks of seeking, inquiries, and looking for something. It is used pertaining to questions and disputes about cleansing (John 3:25), about circumcision (Acts 15:2, 7), and with respect to that which is contrary to sound words (1 Timothy 6:3, 4). In actual usage it seems to speak of questions which border on becoming disputes.”

This is the same word used in 1 Timothy 1:4 that is the product of “fables and endless genealogies,” and what is “unprofitable and vain” (Titus 3:9). When the end results are obvious, we are not bound by 1 Peter 3:15 to answer; instead, we reject it. Paul reminds Timothy that he already knows this. This word is often rendered see Whether it is translated “see” or “knowing,” the experience always seems to be an absolute. Some examples:

Matthew 2:2 “we have ‘seen’ his star”
Mark 5:6 “when he ‘saw’ Jesus”
Luke 12:30 “Father ‘knoweth’ that ye have need”
Luke 19:41 “he ‘beheld’ the city”

The use of “knowing” indicates that Timothy knew, on the basis of past experience, that such questions do breed fights. Lenski said, “Having gotten to know that point of ‘knowing’ this; he is no longer uneducated even on this point.” It is interesting to note that such questions gender or “become the father” of strifes, plural. Vine and Arndt & Gingrich point out that this word is always in the plural. In other words, many fights may be the offspring of just one godless and uneducated question that is argued instead of rejected.

These fights and quarrels are not consistent with the conduct of the Lord’s servant. Paul puts the servant under moral obligation to comply with the following instructions. “Must” is used in the same way here as it is in I Timothy 3:2. There it requires an elder to have all of the stated qualities, and here it requires the servant to meet these. Thayer calls this servant “one who gives himself up wholly to another’s will.” This describes every true Christian, not just the preacher or teacher. The first obligation given to the servant is a negative. “Do not fight, quarrel or dispute” (Vine’s, p. 83). Wuest shows the Greek to be machomai, the word from which we get the word “macho.” This is not the same word that is used in the following verses.

2 Timothy 2:5 — ”strive lawfully”, atheo, from athos, meaning “a contest, to engage in a contest.”
Luke 13:24 — ”Strive to enter in at the strait gate”, agonizomai, “to endeavor with strenuous zeal” (Thayer, p. 10).
Romans 15:30 —”strive together with me in your prayers sunagonizomai, “to help one” (Thayer, p. 600).
Jude 3 —“earnestly contend for the faith”, epagonizomai, similar to above.

To the faithful men of 2 Timothy 2:14, Timothy was to “charge them before the Lord that they strive not about words to no profit.” “Strive” here is logomakeo meaning “to wrangle about empty and trifling matters.”

In summary, inspiration does not allow the servant to be quarrelsome at all. This is not limited to the questions of verse 23. This command should be coupled with the instructions of James 1:19-20. Gentleness should take the place of fights. Vine tells us that the Greeks applied this word to a nurse with trying children, a teacher with refractory scholars, or of parents toward their children. This is the very way Paul used the word in I Thessalonians 2:7 “But we were gentle among you, even as a nurse cherisheth her children.” This gentleness is not allowing others to walk all over us, but it is the outlook of a person seeking the good of others even if they are obstinate.

In order to fulfill this gentleness, the servant must be qualified to teach. This word is didaktikos, from which we get the English word “didactic,” meaning “used or intended for teaching.” Context would also demand the desire to teach as well as the ability. A nurse, teacher, or parent lacking the desire to assist others would perform poorly. Matthew Henry ties this in with the preceding items by saying, “Those are unapt to teach who are apt to strive, and are fierce and froward.” The only other time this word is used it is required of the elder, but here to the servant of the Lord “which might not always be an evangelist” (E. M. Zerr). If you work with people very long the need for patience will be evident. This is the only time this word is used in the New Testament Vine shows this to be a compound word from anecho, “to hold up”, and kakos, meaning “evil.” E. R. Campbell believes this to be very close to anekomai, which involves holding up another that is weak, or in trouble, as in Ephesians 4:2 and Philippians 3:13, where it is rendered “forbearing.” With this characteristic we are able to work out the evil without resentment toward the person. Not a compromise or acceptance of evil, but working it out with the qualities listed above. All of these accomplishments are achieved through meekness. Vine elaborates by saying,

It must be clearly understood, therefore, that the meekness manifested by the Lord and commended to the believers is the fruit of power. The common assumption is that when a man is meek it is because he can not help himself; but the Lord was “meek” because He had the infinite resources of God at His command. Described negatively, meekness is the opposite to self- assertiveness and self-interest.

This same attitude is needed when we try to restore an erring brother (Galatians 6:1), and Paul says meekness is a fruit of the Spirit (Galatians 5:22-23). “Meek” does not mean “weak”, but is “strength under control.” To the casual reader these words may seem to be soft and feeble but these methods are used in “instruction.” Instruction is a stronger word than “teach” in verse 24, because it includes correction and discipline. Thayer uses the word “castigate,” which means “to punish or rebuke sharply, esp. by harsh public criticism” (Webster’s). The Lord “chastens” those that He loves (Hebrews. 12:6-7; Revelations 3:19). Paul wrote of Hymeneus and Alexander that he delivered to Satan “that they learn not to blaspheme.” This instruction cannot be misunderstood as condoning the practice of those in opposition. They have set themselves against what is good and right. Although they are “opposing” what is good for them, this word mainly means that they oppose God, as the men did that blasphemed in I Timothy 1:20.

We now learn that repentance is the goal of all of this work. Is repentance a decision of the individual or of God? This part of the verse says, “if God peradventure will give them repentance.” Peter tells us that the Lord is “not willing that any should perish, but that all should come to repentance” (2 Peter 3:9). Now we know the answer, but what does this phrase mean? This phrase is a 2 aorist active optative which expresses a desire and denotes action, but does not indicate if it is completed.

The Calvinists find their doctrine of the elect in this verse, but it is not taught here. As Lenski said, “the thought is not that God ever withholds repentance, but that men so often refuse to accept it.” The choice is up to the one in opposition that is being instructed by the Lord’s servant in the way of truth. Paul told the Ephesians that he wanted God to give them (same as “give” above) “the spirit of wisdom and revelation in the knowledge of Him” (Ephesians. 1:17). This too was a wish and not something that God would do to them without any action on their part. In Chapter 3:1-4, they found out that they needed to read his letters and then they would gain wisdom and knowledge from the revelation of God. Another example is found in Acts 5:31. The apostles are explaining to the Jews about Jesus and his mission here on Earth. “Him hath God exalted with his right hand to be a Prince and a savior, for to give repentance to Israel, and forgiveness of sins.” We know that this giving of repentance and forgiveness was not unconditional, but was contingent upon their belief and obedience to the words Peter spoke to them that day in Acts 2:36-41. Repentance is brought about by an “acknowledging” of the truth which means a “correct knowledge” (Thayer). The acknowledging is not a proclamation of the truth, but gaining a full knowledge which enables one to understand where they are and what they need to do. With this insight to the truth the individual repents. To repent is “to change one’s mind or purpose and it always involves a change for the better in the N.T.” (Vine). Knowledge of truth and repentance leads one to “recover” themselves or “to return to soberness” (Thayer). There is a picture here of a Christian, intoxicated with error, and suddenly the truth shows him where he is, and he makes a change for the better. Arndt and Gingrich say it means to “come to one’s senses again.” Although it is a different phrase, this does remind us of the prodigal when he “came to himself” (Luke 15:17). A person brought to his senses would never want to remain in the snare of the devil. It is a sad predicament to be captured by Satan, but even worse not to know it. The Laodiceans did not even know how pitiful they really were, but Jesus enlightened them so they would have the occasion to repent and open the door of their heart to Him (Revelations 3:14-19).

Snares capture alive but continue to tighten so that they always maim and eventually kill. Many animals are drawn to a snare because it appears to be an easy passage or doorway, but they learn too late that it is a deadly trap. Satan makes the allurements of evil attractive and easy, thus capturing many that think they can pass by unharmed. But this verse deals mainly with the escape not the capture. The individual spoken of here has been patiently taught, nursed, and instructed in the truth, so that they may repent and sober up, but then they are taken captive again. The word “captive” always means “taken alive or held captive.” Luke 5:10 is the only other time it is used, and the Lord is telling the disciples that “henceforth thou shalt catch men.”

The last phrase of this verse, “by him at his will,” has given rise to much discussion. If Paul had stopped at this point, much ink would have been saved, but he added the perfect participle and two pronouns autou (“him”), ekeinou (“his”), and this divides the commentators into three groups:

1. Caught by the devil to do the devil’s will.
2. Caught alive by God to do His will.
3. Captured alive by the devil—then the last phrase—”for God’s will” is then thought to modify the whole clause—”sobered up again for God’s will” (Lenski).

There are notable and accepted works that are divided on this last part of the verse. Most translations checked seem to agree with the first view. Bullinger takes number two and Robertson says of the third view, “This is probably the best, ‘taken captive by the devil’ ‘that they may come back to soberness to do the will of God. There are difficulties in either view.”

Since we usually want to settle on one, the second view seems to be the most logical. Jesus told his followers long ago that they were to capture men, using the Gospel of course. Here the servant of the Lord is trying to lead the trapped individual out of the devil’s snare and into the safety of God’s will. Having been created beings and not creators, we arc destined to be under someone or something’s control. Paul shows us the two choices in Romans 6:16 — “Know ye not, that to whom ye yield yourselves servants to obey, his servants ye are to whom ye obey; whether of sin unto death, or of obedience unto righteousness?” So the choice is still the person’s. We can have sin or righteousness, repent or reject the truth, sober up or stay in intoxication, be a captive of God to do His will or stay in the snare of the devil. This whole passage is a progression, so it seems best that it ends with God as the total victor. E. M. Zerr says that “the captive is freed and taken captive by the Lord and put to service that is in harmony with His will.” Lenski explains,

The devil’s snare does not catch alive, it always implies spiritual death; or, if you will, when his net closes, the devil hits his victim on the head. God catches alive so that his catch remains alive. One should not disregard this perfect participle: a recent past being caught alive and so remaining caught and alive. Is that not what the gospel does? So we see why ‘autou’(him), which refers to God, occurs in the last phrase and is properly followed by ‘ekeinou’(his) and not merely by another ‘autou’. This last pronoun is very emphatic because it repeats the first: ‘caught alive by him (who alone ever so catches and holds men) for that One’s will (who alone so catches).’ Yes, ‘if perhaps,’ such a result is achieved; out of the devils snare (negative) and caught alive to remain so by God and for His will, it would be a blessed result. MacKnight also takes this position.

Summary Being written for the Lord’s servant makes this passage as applicable today as the day that Paul held his own pen. There are disputes that can and must be avoided so that precious time is used to spread the Gospel and not giving birth to strifes. There were times that Jesus refused to answer certain questions. We too need to learn how to evaluate the ones that come our way. The Lord’s servant is morally bound not to strive. Ensnared Christians need to be approached with these attributes and abilities so that they may be able to make the correct choice and escape the devil’s snare. They then return to being productive servants of God, performing His will with the rest of the servants.

402 Blanco St., Duncanville, TX 75137