Mr. D's Notes on I Timothy
Rev. Stanley L. Derickson Ph.D.
Copyright 2000

CHAPTER 22

In the church were Faith and I were saved there were two dear old widows that were so important to the church in its beginnings. They were not as the widows that we are going to look at in this study for they were self sufficient financially, but they certainly illustrate the assistance to the body of Christ that these ladies can be.

Barbara Rice and Nellie Walcott lived in an old two story house with a full basement. They became involved with the Bible study that later developed into our home church. The church met in their home for some time before they built a Christian education wing that also had a meeting room.

When they invited the church into their home, they at some point in time limited themselves to live in a small apartment within the house. The upper floor was often occupied by missionaries on furlough. Ultimately the ladies gave the property to the church.

They were always involved in the church in any way that they could be. They were widows, but not widows indeed as Paul puts it. They had some of the qualifications we will see in the study, but they did not meet the qualification of need. That being said, the church did do many nice things for the ladies anyway.

Then these were the three widows indeed that were in our first church. They were "surviving" on Social Security and welfare. Had they had any further need the church should have been involved. I told them in a church service that I wanted them to let us know if they ever had a need.

Later in life I decided that I was out of line. If the church leadership knows their people properly, they will know when those needs exist and the widows wouldn't have to ask.

We want to look at GOVERNING FAMILY RESPONSIBILITIES in verses one and two, then BLOOD FAMILY RESPONSIBILITIES in verses three and four and finally at CHURCH FAMILY RESPONSIBILITIES in verses five through seven.

I. CHURCH RELATIONSHIPS

Verse 1. Rebuke not an elder, but entreat [him] as a father; [and] the younger men as brethren;

The obvious thought here is whether Paul is speaking about the elders of the church or the older men. If you link the verse to the previous context you would say the elders of the church, but with the following context it would seem obvious that he was speaking of the older men.

The term itself is the term applied to the elders of the church, yet the term is a general one to relate to many aspects. I will just list the many thoughts of the word according to Thayer. "1) elder, of age,1a) the elder of two people 1b) advanced in life, an elder, a senior 1b1) forefathers 2) a term of rank or office 2a) among the Jews 2a1) members of the great council or Sanhedrin (because in early times the rulers of the people, judges, etc., were selected from elderly men) 2a2) of those who in separate cities managed public affairs and administered justice 2b) among the Christians, those who presided over the assemblies (or churches) The NT uses the term bishop, elders, and presbyters interchangeably 2c) the twenty-four members of the heavenly Sanhedrin or court seated on thrones around the throne of God "

It seems that Paul has shifted gears from the organization of the leadership of the church and started to discuss the membership of the church and how Timothy is to relate to them.

What does rebuke mean? What can we say in a dispute or discussion with an older man that would be permissible and not be seen as a rebuke?

Webster views rebuke as "an expression of strong disapproval" Vine suggests, "to strike at"

This is the only New Testament usage of the term. It is related to the term in Rev 8:12 that is translated "was smitten". The context is speaking of the sun being smitten in one of the cataclysms of the end times.

Literally it means "to strike, or beat with a blow". By further drawing it might indicate a pounding with words.

It would seem that this is a harsh rebuke, one that would cause hurt, I would think. In a discussion or dispute, it would relate to Timothy telling the elder that he is wrong and/or less than intelligent for believing as he does.

I would view it as speaking to an elderly man in a way that causes hurt or pain to the person.

The second part of the admonition seems to me to imply that the elder person had done wrong or had erred in some manner. If you have an older man that has stepped away from the Lord, Paul asks that you draw him back in the loving way that you would try to entreat your own father about an error.

The man is older, probably wiser, and he has seen a thing or two. You need to give him the respect that he deserves.

The terms “entreat” seems to imply this type of action as well. This is the term we saw last study which was translated comfort elsewhere in Scripture. It is the thought of calling along side and comforting, beseeching or exhortation.

This is a term that is the kissing cousin to the term used of the Holy Spirit when He is termed by the Lord the other comforter.

It is used by Paul when he prayed for the removal of the thorn in the flesh. The term is translated "besought" in II Cor. 12:8.

When confronted with a problem with an older man the thought should be of one approaching his own father to encourage him toward proper behavior or life.

This is aimed directly at Timothy and his relation to these different groups of people. It also relates to other leaders and probably by application all believers.

In light of the idea that the secondary purpose of the epistle, to set in order church conduct, it would relate to the elders and their relationships to these groups of people within their church.

If a church elder rebukes an elder man then he should be reprimanded for his action.

I might insert here that in our year 2000 society in America this is a much needed line of thought. Older men are not respected in our country, nor are they seen to have much value at all.

It will take a marked effort for men coming out of seminaries and Bible colleges in our day to relate properly to the older men of their churches and ministries.

In Leviticus there is a long listing of do's and don'ts and among them is the following admonition. Lev. 19.32 "Thou shalt rise up before the hoary head, and honour the face of the old man, and fear thy God: I [am] the LORD."

HONOR the face of the old man placed in the same sentence with FEAR THY GOD! I trust the import of that sinks into some young people in our society.

"[and] the younger men as brethren;" The term brethren can denote brothers (Jn 1:40 Peter/Andrew being brothers), as well as the general sense of other male believers. (Rom. 1:13; 7:1, 4; 8:12) There are other uses of the term and is general for any group that are related together by a number of relationships.

I surmise that since this is a long listing of subgroups within the local assembly that the younger men would be the young male believers and Paul would be indicating the thought of treating the younger men of the church as blood brothers.

The thought of rebuking either my father or my brother is a thought that is totally foreign to me. I thought them wrong but never did I state the same to my father, and very seldom to my brother.

The respect of the father would dictate your approach.

The practical application of this is the fact that in many of our churches we are ignoring the wisdom of the older men of the church so that we can go with the more trendy things of life that the younger generation likes.

It isn't that we should let the old fogies limit the growth of the church, but neither should we grow a church on the trendy and the worldly.

It has crossed my mind that it is the older that have resisted the "contemporary music" fad. It is the younger that have pushed it - because they like it.

Is it possible that God put "elders" in control of Israel - of cities and in this age of churches to help keep out the new and trendy?

Verse 2 The elder women as mothers; the younger as sisters, with all purity.

The term “elder women” is the same term translated "an elder" in verse one.

Why do you believe that Paul inserted the little phrase "with all purity?”

I take it that the idea of "rebuke not" and "entreat as" are applicable to all of the groups listed.

The idea of rebuking my mother was interesting to me for many times I disagreed, but only a time or two did I challenge her on anything. When I was smaller, it was fear. She would have killed me. She was BIGGG!!!!

The obvious picture here is for the elders to treat the people in their church as their own family. As their dad, their mom, their brother, and their sister.

"IN ALL PURITY" is the obvious application to the normal family life - purity in all relationships. Not only moral purity by purity of communication, action, etc.

The thought of moral purity would completely eliminate many problems within the church. If every elder treated all the people of the church as sisters of his own family, then he would never be out of line with them.

Respect should be extended to all of the family, even when they are weird, strange. Senile, tactless etc.

Robertson takes this to mean women employed by the church, women that are hired for work within the church. I for one don't see this indicated anywhere, nor do I believe it to be true. I would view this as a general principle of how the church is to operate in relation to the widows within the body.

II. BLOOD FAMILY RESPONSIBILITIES

Verse 3. Honour widows that are widows indeed.

Honor widows. The question comes to mind - if I am to honor widows that are widows indeed, then are there widows that I don't have to honor? NO!

Honor, I think has more to it than just simple honor or respect. We will see this as we go along.

The term translated honor here is also used in Eph. 6:2 of honoring your father and mother so the picture Paul is painting continues with the idea of respect.

Is it possible that the respect that you show to people in some cases, should result in material giving as well? Indeed, giving of material things is a sign of honor in a way. When we give a present to someone it is in honor of some special day or it may at times be for just showing that you honor their friendship.

Before we move on, I would like to draw your attention to something that is somewhat foreign to our own society. In our society the widow is not held in high esteem unless she has money and you might get some. This is true in some churches. The attention given to widows often is to keep on their good side in case the church is in the will.

The widow is usually totally ignored by society, indeed all too often by her own family. In the Old Testament the widow was one of those subgroups of the Israelite nation that God had a special place for. He wanted the widows and the orphans cared for. It seems from the many times that it is mentioned that these two groups were very close to God.

I will just list a few references for you to study on your own along this line. A concordance will also help if you want to go further. Ps 68.5; 146.9; Prov. 15.25; Ex 22.22; Job 31.16; De 24.17; 14.29. (James 1:27 mentions that pure religion is visiting the widows and orphans.)

The common ground between the widow and orphan is that they both have lost the man in their life as well as their provider. Indeed, that is what this text in I Tim. is all about - taking care of the widows.

I would like to list the requirements listed in this text for a "widow indeed".

1. one that has lost her husband in verse five.

2. one who trusteth in God (a believer) verse 5

3. one who continues in supplication and prayers night and day verse 5 - a Godly woman that is known for her walk with the Lord.

4. one who liveth not in pleasure verse 6 - if she is out at the mall every day buying clothes etc. then she is not qualified. She should not be married to the pleasures of this life. She should be committed to living a right and proper life.

5. one who is blameless verse 7 - yes this is the same word that is used of the elder of the church in chapter three. Their life should be such that no one can lay hold of them with accusations.

6. one who is over 60 verse 9 - I assume that the limit is set because one younger could probably take care of herself.

In our society with medical help etc. as it is there are many sixty year old women that should probably be supporting themselves for awhile. Life expectancy was not very high in Paul's day. If a woman can't support herself then the church should help.

7. one who was wife of only one man verse 9 - if she has outlived two husbands, then she will probably have plenty of family if not money to take care of herself.

This may also relate to the idea that if she has had more than one husband that she is more serious about men rather than being serious about the Lord.

8. one who is well reported of because of her good works verse 10 - she is to have a good reputation around the community. It might be that the good works could be continued as she can for the church.

This seems to shift to a list of the good works that are mentioned above. It isn't that she must have done all of these, but that she is the type of woman that has done these good works and is known for them.

a. one who has brought up children verse 10 - that person deserves some help. They have done a good size job in life already!

b. one who has lodged strangers
c. one who has washed the saints feet
d. one who has relieved the afflicted
e. one who has diligently followed every good work 10

9. one who has no one to help support them 16

This indicates that a woman that can support herself or has family that can support her should not be on the widows list.

However, anyone filling this list of qualifications should seek and find help from her local assembly.

Yes, we have Social Security and welfare and all those other programs, yet they do not always keep the older women going. IF there is a need then the church should meet it if the woman is a widow indeed.

We should note that "Poverty is not dishonorable in itself, but only when it comes from idleness, intemperance, extravagance, and folly." Plutarch

Some have suggested that this should be a group of widows that are gathered together to work in the church. The sixty-year limit in Paul's days would have made the women pretty old for much work at all.

The thought of a group for work is not widely held. It would not be wrong to involve the widows as they have ability if they desire to, but it should not be involvement because the church is helping them. The church isn't to be in the employment business. It should be to serve the Lord.

The thought of taking care of widows is not new in Timothy's time, but was around even in the early part of Acts.

Acts 6:1 mentions, "And in those days, when the number of the disciples was multiplied, there arose a murmuring of the Grecians against the Hebrews, because their widows were neglected in the daily ministration."

The first deacons arose from the need to care for the widows of the early church.

I have always thrilled with churches that get behind their people to care for them.

When living in Nebraska we attended a small Bible church. I had surgery with no insurance and Faith was making very little at her job. The church rallied behind us and saw us through the bad times. They were truly God's provision for our needs at that time.

This is something that we should do for more than just the widows. If we have people that fall into problems, then we should help. If they dive into the problems because they decide not to work then you have another story indeed.

Verse 4 But if any widow have children or nephews, let them learn first to shew piety at home, and to requite their parents: for that is good and acceptable before God.

"piety" is translated worship in Acts 17:23. The Englishman's concordance states that the literal translation of the word in the Timothy text would be, "to care piously for their own house."

"Requite" is translated shalt perform, shall reward, will pay, shall render, yielded, to give and others. It seems to have the idea of children giving back, as in giving back what they have been given in their lives with their family.

In short the Godly thing to do if you have a widow in your family that is in the need of help, is take her in and show her the proper hospitality and care for her as she cared for you.

This concept is not widely held in our own society. We tend to say to our old folks, "get lost." This is not to say that care homes etc. are wrong for they are not. In many cases the people need the care that only a care home can offer.

If on the other hand the widow is not in need of that care, but is not able to be in her own surroundings then your place may well be the place where she belongs.

Those dear old mothers took care of us when we needed help, and we should in turn help them when they are in need of help.

III. CHURCH FAMILY RESPONSIBILITIES

Verse 5 Now she that is a widow indeed, and desolate, trusteth in God, and continueth in supplications and prayers night and day.

What is the link to the term desolate, and the "trusteth in God" that Paul mentions?

The thought here seems that she is trusting God for her continued needs. The widow that cast in her mites might well relate to this section. She gave all that she had and placed herself on the Lord for her provision.

It isn't just a, "Well Lord I've blown all that my husband left me and now it's up to you." It is a conscious reliance on the Lord for needs and this is backed by her prayers for the same. She is entreating her God for the things that He has promised to give to her. Matt 6:33

"Night and day" prayer. What a prayer partner! We need some like this woman! Not that they pray twenty-four hours a day, but praying through out the day.

The term desolate according to Thayer "to make single or solitary - leave alone, forsake." This is a woman that is without recourse other than to God for her needs.

Verse 6 But she that liveth in pleasure is dead while she liveth.

The dead refers to her spiritual condition. She is living in this world for the pleasures that it can give and she is not responsive to God nor to things of the Lord, thus she is not worthy of help from the church.

The church should not ignore this group of widows for they do need the Lord and need to be reached with the Gospel. If, on the other hand, they are carnal Christian women, then they need to be rebuked for their sins, BUT AS MOTHERS and sisters.

Verse 7 And these things give in charge, that they may be blameless.

The things above are to be given to the church as a charge for their knowledge of their responsibility. The blameless refers to them being widows INDEED and not cheating God and the church.

This is true of the church as well. The church needs to know that they are responsible for the widows or they might be blamed for not taking care of them. In Acts six the problem was that some of the widows were not being ministered to and it led to hard feelings and charges.

In our later life - after both our parents were gone, we came in contact with an old woman that was a member at a church where I was interim pastor. As we talked with her and became friends with her I was taken with the importance of this passage. This woman was self sustaining financially and was quite active for her age, but as her health diminished she needed some assistance and later a care home.

The reason I bring this up is that her lost family was right there to take care of her. They knew their responsibility even though they weren't Christians.

Had she not had that type of family it would have been the church’s kindness and responsibility to fill in for her in her time of need.

Common sense demands this care of an aged woman, yet God felt he had to tell us this via the apostle Paul - He tends to know how Christians degenerate toward one another.

There is a sense in which we should be open to assisting widows on a personal basis as well - help as you can when you can.

Before we move on, the term nephew currently relates to the son of a brother or sister, however in the English language in the past it related closely to grandchildren or any family member according to Barnes.

Barclay mentions along this same line of thought "It was Greek law from the time of Solon that sons and daughters were, not only morally, but also legally bound to support their parents. Anyone who refused that duty lost his civil rights. Aeschines, the Athenian orator, says in one of his speeches: "And whom did our lawgiver (Solon) condemn to silence in the Assembly of the people? And where does he make this clear? 'Let there be,' he says, 'a scrutiny of public speakers, in case there be any speaker in the Assembly of the people who is a striker of his father or mother, or who neglects to maintain them or to give them a home."' Demosthenes says: "I regard the man who neglects his parents as unbelieving in and hateful to the gods, as well as to men." Philo, writing of the commandment to honour parents, says: "When old storks become unable to fly, they remain in their nests and are fed by their children, who go to endless exertions to provide their food because of their piety." To Philo it was clear that even the animal creation acknowledged its obligations to aged parents, and how much more must men? Aristotle in the Nichomachean Ethics lays it down: "It would be thought in the matter of food we should help our parents before all others, since we owe our nourishment to them, and it is more honourable to help in this respect the authors of our being, even before ourselves." As Aristotle saw it, a man must himself starve before he would see his parents starve. Plato in The Laws has the same conviction of the debt that is owed parents: "Next comes the honour of loving parents, to whom, as is meet, we have to pay the first and greatest and oldest of debts, considering that all which a man has belongs to those who gave him birth and brought him up, and that he must do all that he can to minister to them; first, in his property; secondly, in his person; and thirdly, in his soul; paying the debts due to them for their care and travail which they bestowed upon him of old in the days of his infancy, and which he is now able to pay back to them, when they are old and in the extremity of their need." Barcley, William; THE LETTERS TO TIMOTHY TITUS, AND PHILEMON; Philadelphia; Westminster; 1975; PP. 106-7

My how things have changed! Let's get back to what is right and give our elders honor and respect!