1 Timoty 3:16 

16 And without controversy great is the mystery of godliness:

Even though I was once a blasphemer and a persecutor and a violent man, I was shown mercy because I acted in ignorance and unbelief. The grace of our Lord was poured out on me abundantly, along with the faith and love that are in Christ Jesus. (1 Timothy 1:13-14).

Paul did not know Christ and did not believe in Him before God's grace was poured out on him. God's grace drew him to faith and love in Christ Jesus. Paul was in Jerusalem and knew all about Christians and their message, but He did not really know Christ in a personal way until Christ Himself confronted him on the road to Damascus (Acts 9). Paul did not believe in Christ until he was blinded, given a prophetic vision, miraculously received back his sight, and experienced the fulfillment of the prophecy in Ananias. Paul, who declared himself "the worst of sinners" for killing Christians and trying to destroy the Church, received the gift of faith through a very special and supernatural intervention of God. This worst of sinners, then, became the greatest of evangelists. 

God is able to save the worst of sinners. God is able to save the ignorant and unbelieving. Salvation is a supernatural act of God to give understanding to the ignorant (cf. Luke 24:45) and to enable faith in the unbelieving (Ephesians 2:8-9). God transforms the hearing ear, so that this hearing can lead to belief, for "faith comes by hearing and hearing by the decree of God" (Romans 10:17). Thus, Jesus blessed those given "ears to hear" (Mark 4:9), those who were drawn and enabled to believe in Him by the Father (John 6:44; 15:6).

Friends, this Christmas, when we speak of gifts, there are two gifts that we must not neglect to recognize: the gift of eternal through Jesus Christ (Romans 6:23) and the gift of faith (Ephesians 2:8), by which the first gift can be personally applied to us. Christ's sacrifice on the cross was sufficient to cover the sins of everyone, but it is efficient for only those who believe. Praise God that He has not only offered eternal life through Christ but grants us the mind and heart, the understanding and faith, to receive it. 

Do not neglect the spiritual gift within you, which was bestowed on you through prophetic utterance with the laying on of hands by the presbytery (2 Timothy 4:14). 

This verse must be read in conjunction with 2 Timothy 1:6, where we read,

For this reason I remind you to kindle afresh the gift of God which is in you through the laying on of my hands.

Likely Paul was present with the elders when Timothy was "ordained". The "spiritual gift" was bestowed through Paul rather than the presbytery, for the presbytery is mentioned only as an accompanying body rather than the agent by which the gift was given. So we read from the Inernational Standard Bible Encyclopedia:

The laying on of hands by the presbyters (1 Timothy 4:14), and that by Paul (2 Timothy 1:6), are not mutually exclusive, especially since the former is mentioned merely as an accompanying circumstance of his endowment with special grace, the latter as the efficient cause of this endowment (Orr, James, M.A., D.D. General Editor. "Entry for 'TIMOTHY'". International Standard Bible Encyclopedia. 1915. ).

Why is this important?

I have contended that the apostles seem to be the only agents by which spiritual gifts could be distributed. In the early days of the church only the apostles had miraculous power (cf. Acts 2:43). They laid hands on Stephen and Philip (cf. Acts 6:6), so that these men also received miraculous power. However, they did not appear to have the ability to give anyone else this power, for in Philip's ministry, while people were getting saved, the manifestation of the Holy Spirit's power came only through the later ministry of the apostles Peter and John (cf. Acts 8:14-20). 

What am I suggesting? 

I am suggesting that miraculous power, as witnessed in Acts and referenced in the Corinthian church (cf. 1 Corinthians 12-14), was the power of the Holy Spirit, which was uniquely given through the apostles. It was not a power that could be given apart from the apostles; therefore, when the last of the apostles died, so ended the ministry of these miraculous gifts. 

Then, you may ask, what about the non-miraculous spiritual gifts?

I consider this a logically fallacious question. It is self-contradicting. Spiritual gifts by virtue of them being by the Holy Spirit is necessarily miraculous, for they are not attained by natural means. Therefore, all spiritual gifts are miraculous. Consequently, if all these gfits of the Spirit ended with the passing away of the apostles, then there are no true spirtual gifts today. 

How do you explain gifted preachers, teachers, administrators, etc.?

I would question whether these were truly miraculous gifts rather than natural abilities. The same could be said for gifted musicians, artists, atheletes, and intellectuals. Perhaps if an eight-year-old stands up expounding the deep truths of Scripture, even though they have never read the Bible themselves nor studied theology, this could be considered a "gifted" child. But much of what passes for spiritual gifts today are nothing of the sort. 

Friends, I know I'm throwing cold water on some cherished notions. But I think it's about time that Christians wake up and get a clue. We should not water down the truly miraculous by calling everything a miracle. We should not diminish true spiritual gifts from the Scriptures by calling every talent of Tom, Dick and Jane a spiritual gift.

Our every ability, even though they are not miraculous per se, are from God, for He is our Maker. We don't have to try to figure out what our "spiritual gift" is to serve the Lord. We can simply use our natural abilities, and we can still give glory to God, for whether "spiritual" or "natural", they are all ultimately from the Lord. 

Likewise, I want women to adorn themselves with proper clothing, modestly and discreetly, not with braided hair and gold or pearls or costly garments, but rather by means of good works, as is proper for women making a claim to godliness (1 Timothy 2:9-10).

Paul gives instructions to young and old, slave and master, husbands and wives, and men and women. In the passage above Paul gives instructions to women. It may be perhaps one of the most ignored instructions of our time. 

This instruction to women carries over the main verb from 1 Timothy 2:8, where Paul says, "I want the men..." The connecting word "likewise" suggests that just as Paul counseled a propriety in worship for men, he was giving a similar counsel to women. Men were commanded to pray in "every place" with "holy hands" and "without wrath and dissension". This was propriety in worship for men. For women, Paul had a different emphasis.

Paul was concerned that women possess a proper, modest, and discreet appearance and find their recognition in doing good works. If he simply stopped there, Paul would have gained the nodding approval of most women today; however, he got somewhat specific. He specified what was not proper, modest and discreet. He mentioned "braided hair," "gold", "pearls", and "costly garments", the very things many women today do and wear to be fashionable and pretty.

I wonder what might be the modern equivalents of these things that Paul counseled the Christian women of his day against. Could it be the outfits that seem more fitting for a dance than for worship? Could it be the makeup, hairstyle and jewelry that seek to encourage both men and women to take a second look? Could it be the purses that cost a thousand or thousands of dollars? What about the specialized shoes, adding height and style to any woman's appearance?

Unfortunately, the very mention of these things might cause an anti-men reaction beginning with something like, "What about men?!" Or else, "You're a guy. You would say such things! How would you understand what women need?"

Friends, I have no calling to target women, and I have spoken just as strongly with respect to things that men must do for their part. 

So I encourage Christian women everywhere to choose to be unique. Don't give in to the pressure of advertisers and peers to buy the name-brand purse, shoes, or other apparel. Don't seek to attract attention, especially in the place of worship, but rather do everything to keep the attention Christ-ward. Let your modesty, good works, and respect for your husband bring you praise.

My fear is that rather than promoting godliness, women today are promoting materialism and envy. Modest and proper appearance simply seeks to keep the attention on Christ and the inner beauty of a heart devoted to Him. 

Men, we are not guiltless for our part. Oftentimes, we are the ones encouraging and buying our wives the expensive jewelry, purses, shoes, outfits, cars, homes, etc. I fear that uniwittingly we are undermining the priorities of God in our families by what we do. We are also surrendering our role as spiritual leaders when we cave to our own material interests and that of our wives. And what message, values and priorites are we giving to our children in the next generation? 

So, friends, as men and women, we must work together to change course in our thinking about the priorities of our lives. And I encourage women to consider beginning with their appearance in worship. Pursue what is modest, proper and discreet.

As I urged you when I went into Macedonia, stay there in Ephesus so that you may command certain people not to teach false doctrines any longer or to devote themselves to myths and endless genealogies. Such things promote controversial speculations rather than advancing God’s work—which is by faith... They want to be teachers of the law, but they do not know what they are talking about or what they so confidently affirm. We know that the law is good if one uses it properly. We also know that the law is made not for the righteous but for lawbreakers and rebels..." (1 Timothy 1:3-4, 7-9)

In the above passage, it appears Paul is correcting some in the church that were teaching "false doctrines," filled with "myths and endless genealogies" and wrong teaching pertaining to the law. Who were these false teachers, who  Paul writes "want to be teachers of the law"? 

We have a similar warning in Titus:

But avoid foolish controversies and genealogies and arguments and quarrels about the law, because these are unprofitable and useless. Warn a divisive person once, and then warn them a second time. After that, have nothing to do with them. You may be sure that such people are warped and sinful; they are self-condemned (Titus 3:9-11).

Again, in 1 Timothy 6:3-5 Paul returns to this topic and group again:

If anyone teaches otherwise and does not agree to the sound instruction of our Lord Jesus Christ and to godly teaching, they are conceited and understand nothing. They have an unhealthy interest in controversies and quarrels about words that result in envy, strife, malicious talk, evil suspicions and constant friction between people of corrupt mind, who have been robbed of the truth and who think that godliness is a means to financial gain.

But again, who were these people in the church that were so ignorant, divisive, sinful, warped, profit-seeking, and self-condemned?  

We discover from Titus that these were mainly Jews, "those of the circumcision group":

For there are many rebellious people, full of meaningless talk and deception, especially those of the circumcision group. They must be silenced, because they are disrupting whole households by teaching things they ought not to teach—and that for the sake of dishonest gain... Therefore rebuke them sharply, so that they will be sound in the faith and will pay no attention to Jewish myths or to the merely human commands of those who reject the truth... They claim to know God, but by their actions they deny him. They are detestable, disobedient and unfit for doing anything good (Titus 1:10-11, 14, 16).

Once again we return to the controversy between the Jewish and Gentile believers, where the Jewish believers were insisting that the Gentiles must continue to follow the Law of Moses. They were likely trying to impress their Gentile counterparts with their genealogical connection to the partriarchs of the Old Testament. The "Jewish myths" and "human commands" may relate to the very "human traditions" that Jesus rebuked the Pharisees for teaching and by which they "nullified the Word of God" (cf. Mark 7:13).

Paul says that the Law was made "for lawbreakers", "not for the righteous". Who were the righteous? The true Christians, for they had the righteousness of God in Christ (2 Corinthians 5:21). Therefore, while it may apply to these Jewish false teachers, who insisted that the Law was still in effect, it did not apply to the true believers, who have been declared righteous in Christ. 

-------------------

The grace of our Lord was poured out on me abundantly, along with the faith and love that are in Christ Jesus (1 Timothy 1:14).

Some have argued that faith is not a gift of God but an act of human free will. But here Paul states very clearly that what was poured out on Him was not simply grace but also faith and love in Christ. As I have argued with respect to  Ephesians 2:8-9, every aspect of salvation is the gift of God:

For it is by grace you have been saved, through faith—and this is not from yourselves, it is the gift of God— not by works, so that no one can boast.

Again, when we come to Romans 12:3, once again Paul speaks of "the faith God has distributed to each of you." Remember, also, my exposition of Romans 10:17, where Paul clearly says that faith comes by the decree of God: "So then faith comes by hearing, and hearing by the word of God" (NKJV). 

Recently, I have also commented that in 2 Corinthians 4:13 Paul taught that it was on the basis of a Spirit-given faith that they believed: "Since we have that same spirit of  [or Spirit-given] faith, we also believe and therefore speak."

Therefore, friends, understand that while the actual act of believing may be our own action, and can be referred to as such, we cannot claim any credit for it because it arose out of a God-given saving faith. Remember, as "those dead in their trespasses," "blinded by Satan," when not one of us were seeking God, God overcame our sinful free wills to save us.

------------------

I urge, then, first of all, that petitions, prayers,intercession and thanksgiving be made for all people— for kings and all those in authority, that we may live peaceful and quiet lives in all godliness and holiness. This is good, and pleases God our Savior, who wants all people to be saved and to come to a knowledge of the truth. For there is one God and one mediator between God and mankind, the man Christ Jesus, who gave himself as a ransom for all people. This has now been witnessed to at the proper time. And for this purpose I was appointed a herald and an apostle—I am telling the truth, I am not lying—and a true and faithful teacher of the Gentiles (1 Timothy 2:1-7).

Does "all" always mean every single person; that is, all without exception? Consider the following verse:

And all the country of Judea was going out to him, and all the people of Jerusalem; and they were being baptized by him in the Jordan River, confessing their sins (Mark 1:5)

Did every single person in the whole region of Judea and city of Jerusalem get baptized by John the Baptist? Even the Pharisees, Sadduccees, Romans, etc.? Clearly not! Mark likely meant all kinds of people from Judea and all sorts of people from Jerusalem came to be baptized. In other words, he meant all without distinction, not all without exception. Consider another verse:

For the grace of God has appeared that offers salvation to all people (Titus 2:11).

Again, is every single person in view or people of all kinds? In Titus 1:10-2:10 Paul has just addressed different ethnicities (Jews vs. Gentiles) ages (older vs. younger), genders (male vs. females) , and social status (slaves vs. masters). The context suggests that what is in view in the words "all people" is all categories of people, whether Jew or Gentile, young or old, male or female, slave or free. This language is not new to Paul, for elsewhere he writes, 

There is neither Jew nor Gentile, neither slave nor free, nor is there male and female, for you are all one in Christ Jesus (Galatians 3:28).

Here there is no Gentile or Jew, circumcised or uncircumcised,barbarian, Scythian, slave or free, but Christ is all, and is in all (Colossians 3:11).

I believe that what is in view in the three references to "all people" in 1 Timothy 2:1, 4, and 6 is an "all" without distinction rather than an "all" without exception. So, Paul calls for prayer for all kinds of people (vs. 1). Then, he makes a particular appeal for "kings and all those in authority" (1 Timothy 2:2).

God wants all categories of people to be saved (v. 4). Paul's argument here is that the right perspective is not "us" vs. "them," because God wants all manner of people saved, and not simply those presently favorable to their cause.

-----------------

A woman should learn in quietness and full submission. I do not permit a woman to teach or to assume authority over a man; she must be quiet. For Adam was formed first, then Eve. And Adam was not the one deceived; it was the woman who was deceived and became a sinner. But women will be saved through childbearing—if they continue in faith, love and holiness with propriety (1 Timothy 2:11-15).

I have already discussed what the last verse means in a post on this day last year, so I won't repeat myself here. Paul argues for a clear distinction of roles between Christian men and women. In passages like 1 Corinthians 11 and 14 and in this one Paul clearly wants to show that there is a gender functional hierarchy within the church, such that while both serve in various capacities, men should have the leadership and teaching authority over women. Paul's arguments from nature and the creation account exclude the possibility of his instruction being culturally or covenantally bound. 

-----------------

If you point these things out to the brothers and sisters, you will be a good minister of Christ Jesus, nourished on the truths of the faith and of the good teaching that you have followed. Have nothing to do with godless myths and old wives’ tales; rather, train yourself to be godly. For physical training is of some value, but godliness has value for all things, holding promise for both the present life and the life to come (1 Timothy 4:6-8).

Just a brief comment here. It should be noted that the words "train yourself to be godly" had to do with learning correct doctrine from the context. Also, the words "physical training" was probably not a reference to physical exercise so much as a reference to the ascetic restrictions on marriage and food that the false teachers espoused (cf. 1 Timothy 4:3). Thus, Paul is commending meditation on the Scriptures over ascetic practices.

----------------

Timothy, guard what has been entrusted to your care. Turn away from godless chatter and the opposing ideas of what is falsely called knowledge, which some have professed and in so doing have departed from the faith (1 Timothy 6:20-21) 

1 & 2 Timothy are perhaps the last letters that Paul wrote before he died, so they reflect not only his final words but also his final charge, as he reflects on what is most needful for the church. Throughout these letters one of the central themes for Paul is his warning against false teaching. Many historians see in these letters an early indication of what would become a full-fledged Gnosticism ("knowledge" from Greek gnosis) in the following centuries (cf. 1 Timothy 6:20-21). A prominent teaching of Gnosticism was a dualistic view of the universe, where the spiritual part was all good and the material part was all evil. The practical outflow of this belief would lead some to live ascetic lives, because they wanted to be more connected with their spiritual part. Others did just the opposite, living promiscuously and indulging every fleshly desire, because they figured their bodies, already evil, could not corrupt their spiritual part, which would be released upon death.

A careful reading of Paul, Peter and John suggests that some of these Gnostic ideas had already crept into the church, whether in the denial of Jesus' incarnation (God come in flesh), the denial of the bodily resurrection of believers, restrictions on marriage, eating and other activities or, just the opposite, in complete moral permissiveness. 

Friends, I would like to suggest an alternate understanding of 1 Timothy 5:17-20,

Let the elders who rule well be counted worthy of double honor, especially those who labor in the word and doctrine. For the Scripture says, “You shall not muzzle an ox while it treads out the grain,” and, “The laborer is worthy of his wages.” Do not receive an accusation against an elder except from two or three witnesses. Those who are sinning rebuke in the presence of all, that the rest also may fear. 

This text is sometimes used to justify pastors getting double pay or earning twice that of their members. Aside from such an interpretation being a violation of a number of other passages in Scripture, such is not the proper understanding of this passage. 

First, may I suggest that Paul has already discussed matters regarding the officers, namely "bishops" and "deacons" in chapter 3 of this book. The word "elders" here must be understood in the context of this section, which pertain not to an office of an elder but rather "older men" (1 Timothy 5:1). Some translations can be confusing because although it is the same Greek word, the translators have rendered it in two different ways (i.e. "older man" in 1 Timothy 5:1 and "elders" in 1 Timothy 5:17). This is totally unwarranted. It is best to keep the translations consistent within this context, where Paul speaks of both older men and older women (particularly widows). 

Second, the verb translated "rule well" is also misleading because it suggests again that Paul is speaking of an office in a church rather than simply older men who "manage well." Some translations even add the word "church" when the context suggests no such thing. It could simply be that they have managed their households well throughout the course of their lives. In fact the same Greek word can be found just a couple of chapters earlier in 1 Timothy 3:4-5, where Paul actually does speak about an officer of the church:

He must manage his own family well and see that his children obey him, and he must do so in a manner worthy of full respect. (If anyone does not know how to manage his own family, how can he take care of God’s church?).

Here, even though he is speaking of the qualifications of a "bishop" (or "overseer"), he uses the word in the context of managing their own families. Therefore, the burden of proof would be for those that would see anything other than older men being commended for good management of their families in 1 Timothy 5:17.

Third, what is suggested by the phrase, "be counted worthy of double honor"? Does this mean double pay? The two Scriptures given to explain what Paul means paint a different picture. Paul cites an Old Testament text and a saying of the Lord Jesus Christ.

The first expression is from Deuteronomy 25:4, "You shall not muzzle an ox while it treads out the grain." This command simply refers an ancient Jewish practice. Oxen were tethered to a grinding wheel, which they moved round and round as the grain was being crushed. As the grain was being fed into the grinder, the oxen likely ate some of the grain that fell along the sides. Muzzling an ox would reflect stingy taskmasters, who wanted every last piece of grain being ground. In other words, those that work hard should be allowed to receive some benefit from their labor. In the case of these older men, who have retired after faithfully working their entire lives, Paul says that they deserve support from their community in their retirement - a kind of social security if you will.

The second expression is from Jesus' command with respect to His sending out of the seventy-two disciples: "The laborer is worth of his wages." The full verse reads, "Stay there, eating and drinking whatever they give you, for the worker deserves his wages" (Luke 10:7). Jesus was not talking about money here, even though he mentions "wages." How do we know this? The text speaks only of "eating and drinking whatever they give you." A few verses earlier Jesus also told them not to take money purses or bags (Luke 10:4). Again, like the passage in Deuteronomy, the meaning is not salary or wage or money but rather basic support for life.

In fact, this is what Paul would argue that every minister of the Gospel is allowed to receive, whether food and drink, or in another place, food and clothing (1 Timothy 6:6). Today, we have grossly exaggerated support for anyone, even ministers, to include a nice house, car, private education for kids, etc. And some go even farther than this.

But back to the point, a minister is not in view in 1 Timothy 5:17 but older men that have managed well, whether it be their homes or in the community of believers. 

Now, the expression "especially those who labor in the word and doctrine (lit. "teaching")" should suggest to the reader that this reference to "elders" or perhaps better "older men" also include those that do not labor in the word and teaching. So those that are diligent with respect to the word and teaching (note: again, there is no particular context given, whether church or family or community) are just a part of these older men. 

Finally, when we return to the meaning of "double honor," we can conclude that it does not refer to salary, wage or money per se but rather a measure of support to sustain their lives in their old age. The idea of "double" does not necessary imply "twice" but rather "more so." In the immedate context, Paul has referred to the importance of giving "honor" to widows, who have served well (1 Timothy 6:3). So with reference to the older men, "double honor" has the sense of "Even more, honor..."

Now, I can see that there could be a sense of "twice" in that these older men could have demonstrated faithful management both of their families and within the community or church as ministers (i.e. bishops or deacons); therefore, they should both be honored in light of their dual faithfulness, once in their homes and then in the church. Again, the implication is not double pay but rather recognition in view of their two areas of faithful service. 

Ch4:13 - Until I get there, focus on reading the Scriptures to the church, encouraging the believers, and teaching them.

By preaching the old law is no longer valid, from which scriptures is Timothy (and others) preaching?  I'm assuming the gospels of Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John haven't been written at this point, let alone being used to minister to Gentiles.  Are they using the old testament much in the way we do, to show the lineage from God to Jesus?  So they use the scripture to preach of His coming, then confirm with their first hand experience because of the Holy Spirit?  Were there scriptures written telling of the miracles performed by Jesus prior to the official gospels?  This line caused me to pause when I read it and wonder from what was Timothy reading/preaching. 

Yujin responds... Great question! Actually, a more literal translation of that verse reads:

"...till I come, give heed to the reading, to the exhortation, to the teaching..." (Young's Literal Translation).

The word "Scripture" and "to the church" are interpretative additions and not part of the original text. There was certainly reading and exhortation from the Old Testament Scriptures; however, the apostolic letters, like those of Paul, were also considered Scriptures. Peter suggests this in his exhortation:

Bear in mind that our Lord’s patience means salvation, just as our dear brother Paul also wrote you with the wisdom that God gave him. He writes the same way in all his letters, speaking in them of these matters. His letters contain some things that are hard to understand, which ignorant and unstable people distort, as they do the other Scriptures, to their own destruction (2 Peter 3:15-16).

The reference to "other Scriptures" imply that the apostle Peter considered Paul's letters as Scripture.

Now, even though the Mosaic Law is no longer directly applicable for the Christian, it is not, therefore, unprofitable for instruction. It reveals God's holiness and His dealings with Israel, and how often and completely they failed in keeping God's righteous requirements. The OT stories are meant to give us illustrative examples both of faith and failure. As Paul also wrote,

These things (OT stories) happened to them as examples and were written down as warnings for us, on whom the culmination of the ages has come (1 Corinthians 10:11).

Again, in Hebrews, after that great chapter of OT saints who exercised faith (Hebrews 11), we are told:

Therefore, since we are surrounded by such a great cloud of witnesses, let us throw off everything that hinders and the sin that so easily entangles. And let us run with perseverance the race marked out for us, fixing our eyes on Jesus, the pioneer and perfecter of faith (Hebrews 12:1-2).

Finally, not just the NT Scriptures, but "all Scriptures" are given for Christians to live a life that pleases God:

All Scripture is God-breathed and is useful for teaching, rebuking, correcting and training in righteousness,  so that the servant of God may be thoroughly equipped for every good work (2 Timothy 3:16-17).

Therefore, even though all Scriptures are not profitable in the same way or have the same application for all times, they are, nevertheless useful for the Christian. You are correct that the OT can give a clearer understanding of the fulfillment passages in the NT, it can show the culmination of certain promises, and give context to certain allusions in the NT that presume an understanding of the practice or principle given in the OT. And, yes, particular miracles of Jesus were foretold in the OT as those miracles the Messiah would do. A Bible with a basic marginal cross-reference column should give you the OT references for the particular miracles Jesus performed in the Gospels.

Finally, you are correct in your assessment that the works of the Holy Spirit, that is the signs and miraculous gifts, were given to confirm the message and preaching of the apostles (Hebrews 2:3-4; 1 Corinthians 1:5-6), a confirming work that I believe ended with the first century apostolic era.

Just as a final disclaimer. When I wrote that the Old Covenant is obsolete and has been replaced by the New Covenant, this does not mean that the whole Old Testament is obsolete, for there are yet a lot of Old Testament prophecies that have not been fulfilled. What is more, the promises of the New Covenant are also present in the Old Testament. So I make a distinction between the Old Covenant and and Old Testament. By the Old Covenant I mean the Mosaic Law. It is the Law of Moses that has become obsolete and no longer directly applicable for the Christian.

Friends, here's a Christmas thought. It can be such a busy time of year. What with last-minute presents, Christmas decorations, traveling to family, hosting family, cooking holiday meals, work parties, parties with friends, and church presentations, life can be a bit hectic this time of year. I encourage you to stop and consider Christ Jesus our Lord, born of a virgin, "God with us," the Savior of the world. 

A great host of angels declared to the shepherds, "Glory to God in the highest heaven, and on earth peace to those on whom his favor rests" (Luke 2:14). If you have lost sight of this peace from God, perhaps you have lost sight of the Christ of Christmas. There will be a hundred and one things to distract you from that peace or even to take that peace away; however, remember,

Therefore, since we have been justified through faith, we have peace with God through our Lord Jesus Christ, through whom we have gained access by faith into this grace in which we now stand (Romans 5:1-2). 

Don't confuse the feeling of peace with the true peace of God. We were once "enemies of God" (Romans 5:10), powerless to save ourselves and sinful to the core (Romans 5:6,8), 

But God demonstrates his own love for us in this: While we were still sinners, Christ died for us (Romans 5:8).

While we celebrate the birth of Jesus, it is actually in His death that we are redeemed. But before He could die for us, He had to be born and become like us, so that He could be the proper substitute for us in death to satisfy the righteous requirements of God.

Friends, our brother Fernando has provided a very thoughtful commentary on a difficult phrase, namely, "she will be saved in childbearing." I thought I might just add my two cents as well. Hopefully, my perspective will not be too simplistic. Let's consider the three related verses

For Adam was formed first, then Eve. And Adam was not deceived, but the woman being deceived, fell into transgression. Nevertheless she will be saved in childbearing if they continue in faith, love, and holiness, with self-control (1 Timothy 2:13-15).

The difficulty exists because of Paul's normal use of the word "save" to mean eternal deliverance from sin. On face value, it appears that he's saying that a woman receives this kind of salvation by means of bearing children. If this is really his teaching, it would be a first, because nowhere else does he teach this, and it runs contrary to his fundamental message that salvation is by grace through faith.

But, before addressing this difficulty, let us observe that Paul changes his prounoun from third person singular ("she will be saved") to the third person plural ("if they continue..."). Unfortunately, there  is no occasion in the Bible, where we find the expression "they will be saved." When groups are mentioned, it is always seen in the collective singular (e.g. in Romans 9:27 we read that the "remnant (group singular)...will be saved (singular)"). Now, an argument could be made that here in 1 Timothy 2:15 a group is also in view, for even though the verb "will be saved" is in the singular, the modifying clause is plural ("if they continue..."). So, perhaps rather than a reference specifically to Eve, verse 15 may have a singular group as the subject; that is, something like "woman-kind". If so, we would translate as follows:

Nevertheless woman-kind will be saved in childbearing if they continue in faith, love, and holiness, with self-control.

Now, to the central issue. In what sense will woman or woman-kind "be saved in childbearing." I suggest that we understand the non-usual meaning of "save" here. So, rather than speaking of eternal salvation, I suggest Paul may be arguing for a deliverance from the original curse associated with the woman's first transgression. 

If you remember in Genesis, part of the curse on the woman was that she would try to usurp man's God-given authority over her:

To the woman he said,
I will make your pains in childbearing very severe; 
   with painful labor you will give birth to children. 
Your desire will be for your husband [meaning your desire will be for your husband's role], 
   and he will rule over you (Genesis 3:16).

Notice, how in this text childbearing is related to the woman's desire for authority. Perhaps Paul's commentary on Adam and Eve in 1 Timothy 2 gives us a clue as to the meaning of this verse in Genesis. Paul suggests that when women stay true to their role as the childbearer, they will be saved from the temptation to usurp the authority of their husbands. 

Paul has already talked about what is "proper for women" with respect to modest dress (1 Timothy 2:9-10), in 1 Timothy 2:11-15 he writes with respect to her role in submission to man (1 Timothy 2:11-12) such that her proper role as "childbearer" is set in contrast to an improper role in teaching or having authority over a man (1 Timothy 2:12). Thus, "childbearing" is what we might say euphemistically today is the woman's "saving grace." It represents her fulfilling her proper role as the woman; consequently, Paul is quick to assert that it is not by itself a redeeming grace but needs to be accompanied by "faith, love, holiness, with self-control."

Some of you may argue with my interpretation of Paul's use of the word "saved" here; however, I have demonstrated in the past that Paul often used irony and other figures of speech in his writing. In this context he may be using the word "save" with respect to his allusion to the curse on Eve for her transgression in Genesis 3 rather than his typical use with respect to eternal salvation in Christ. I believe the immediate context bears this out.

To sum up, I understand 1 Timothy 2:15 to mean that Eve, and woman-kind in general, would be saved from the curse of her first transgression, namely, the desire to usurp the role of her husband, if she remains faithful to fulfill her God-given role as the childbearer in faith, love, holiness and self-control.

 1 Timothy 2

Beginning with the premise that it is known and accepted that no deed can be done to get salvation, I have mulled over each time I read over this section, what Paul means by:

¹⁵ Yet she will be saved through childbearing—if they continue in faith and love and holiness, with self-control.

The context suggests Paul is addressing the way women and men should present themselves, in godliness. Women should adorn themselves (V9) with modesty and self-control (v 10) professing godliness – with good works.  Verse 8, too, speaks of the good works men should present themselves: praying, lifting holy hands, no anger, and no quarreling.  Paul is pointing to the external evidences of our faith.

In a manner of speaking, he even says ‘don’t wrap yourselves in material things, but godliness.’

Consider v 9: likewise also that women should adorn themselves in respectable apparel, with modesty and self-control, not with braided hair and gold or pearls or costly attire,

Rewording, without losing the meaning: likewise also that women should adorn themselves in respectable apparel, the apparel of modesty and self-control, not the apparel of costly things.

(1 timothy 6:⁷) “for we brought nothing into the world, and we cannot take anything out of the world” only the glory we have prepared to lay at His feet.

So what does ‘Childbearing’ in verse 15 mean? I think that statement is a continuation of what was introduced in verse 13. ‘For Eve was made, then the woman was deceived; yet she will be saved through childbearing.’ He points to another work, but having established that works do not save he must be pointing to Christ in some way.  I take the meaning of “Childbearing” to point to something deeper than just the natural act of Jesus being born. 

I read in the ESV, and have caught on to a pattern when Paul writes, hyphens are used to interject a sudden thought as if to give emphasis and expound on a point; I have no idea what is written in the Greek or how a hyphen was selected, but I think the pattern fits here. ‘She (Eve) will be saved through childbearing (a work),’ then to drive the idea home further Paul adds to this idea, as a closing statement. He adds by connecting all women back into his lesson with “if they” and completed the lesson by speaking of the works done in faith, “If they continue in faith and love and holiness with self-control,” just as he mentioned previously about women.

‘Technogonia,’ the Greek work used here is to mean child bearing or rearing of a family. Again the acts of being a good home builder are signs of female faith. Just as we see a sign of male faith is in how he manages his home (1 Timothy 3:4,12)

So no works save, but a good home should be the expression of a godly man and a godly woman, including their godly parenthood.