This is a study of Jesus being rejected in HIs sound instruction. Teachers begin to ignore what Jesus taught and come up with their own ideas in hopes of making money with their ideas.

1. JESUS WAS REJECTED IN HIS SOUND INSTRUCTION
EDITED BY GLENN PEASE
1 Timothy 6:3-5 3If anyone teaches otherwiseand does
not agree to the sound instructionof our LORD Jesus
Christand to godly teaching, 4they are conceitedand
understandnothing. They have an unhealthy interest
in controversiesand quarrels about words that result
in envy, strife, malicioustalk, evil suspicions5and
constantfrictionbetween people of corrupt mind, who
have been robbed of the truth and who think that
godliness is a means to financialgain.
1 Timothy 6:3 New InternationalVersion
If anyone teaches otherwiseand does not agree to the
sound instructionof our Lord Jesus Christand to
godly teaching,
New Living Translation

2. Some people may contradictour teaching, but these
are the wholesometeachings of the Lord Jesus Christ.
These teachings promote a godly life.
English StandardVersion
If anyone teaches a different doctrineand does not
agree with the sound words of our Lord Jesus Christ
and the teaching that accords with godliness,
BIBLHEUB RESOURCES
A Warning Against Those Who Oppose Such Wholesome Teaching
1 Timothy 6:3-5
T. Croskery
I. THE OPPOSITION TO APOSTOLIC TEACHING-ON THE DUTIES OF
SLAVES. "If any one teachethother doctrine, and does not assentto sound
words, even the words of our Lord Jesus Christ, and to the doctrine which is
according to godliness."
1. The nature of this false teaching. It points, as the word signifies, to "a
different doctrine" from that of the apostle. There were false teachers in

3. Ephesus who, from a pretended interest in the class ofChristian slaves, taught
them that the gospelwas a political charter of emancipation; for the yoke of
Christ was designedto break every other yoke. They must have been of the
class referredto elsewhere who "despisedgovernment" (2 Peter2:10; Jude
1:8), and encourageddisobedience to parents. The tendency of their teaching
would be to sow the seeds of discontentin the minds of the slaves, and its
effects would be to plunge them into a contestwith societywhich would have
the unhappiest effects.
2. The opposition of this teaching to Divine truth.
(1) It was opposedto "wholesome words," to words without poisonor taint of
corruption, such as would maintain socialrelations on a basis of healthy
development.
(2) It was opposedto the words of Christ, either directly or through his
apostles. He had dropped sayings of a suggestive characterwhichcould not
but touch the minds of the slave class:"Renderto Caesarthe things that are
Caesar's;" "Blessedare the meek:for they shall inherit the earth;" "Resist
not evil;" "Love your enemies, pray for them which despitefully use you."
(3) It was opposedto the doctrine of godliness. It was a strange thing for
teachers in the Church to espouse doctrines opposedto the interests of
godliness. The disobedience ofslaves would commit them to a course of
ungodly dishonoring of God and his gospel.
II. THE MORAL AND INTELLECTUAL CHARACTER OF THESE
FALSE TEACHERS.
1. They were "besottedwith pride." They were utterly wanting in the humility
of spirit which the gospelengenders, but were puffed up with an empty show
of knowledge.
2. Yet they were ignorant. "Knowing nothing." They had no true
understanding of the socialrisks involved in their doctrine of emancipation,
or of the true method of ameliorating the condition of the slaves.

4. 3. They "dotedabout questions and disputes about words." They had a
diseasedappetencyfor all sorts of profitless discussions turning upon the
meanings of words, which had no tendency to promote godliness, but rather
altercations and bad feeling of all sorts - "from which comethenvy, strife,
evil-speakings, wickedsuspicions, incessantquarrels." These controversial
collisions sowedthe seeds of all sorts of bitter hatred.
4. The moral deficiencyof these false teachers. Theywere "men corrupted in
their mind, destitute of the truth, who suppose that godliness is gain."
(1) They had first corrupted the Word of God, and thus prepared the way for
the debasementof their own mind, leading in turn to that pride and ignorance
which were their most distinguishing qualities.
(2) They were "deprived of the truth." It was theirs once, but they forfeited
this precious treasure by their unfaithfulness and their corruption. It is a
dangerous thing to tamper with the truth.
(3) They heard that "godliness was a source ofgain." They did not preach
contentment to the slaves, orinduce them to acquiesce with patience in their
hard lot, but rather persuaded them to use religion as a means of worldly
betterment. Such counselwould have disorganizing, disintegrating effects
upon society. But it was, besides, a degradationof true religion. Godliness was
not designedto be a merely lucrative business, or to be followedonly so far as
it subserved the promotion of worldly interests. Simon Magus and such men
as "made merchandise" of the disciples are examples of this class. Such
persons would "teachthings which they ought not for the sake ofbase gain"
(Titus 1:11). - T.C.
Biblical Illustrator
Wholesome words.
1 Timothy 6:3, 5
Wholesome words

5. W. M. Taylor, D. D.
The opposite of wholesome in our common speechis that which tends to
produce disease;but the opposite of the Greek word, of which this is a
translation, is that which is already unsound or diseased. The thought of the
apostle is, that there is nothing morbid or unhealthy about the words of Jesus.
The words of the Lord are healthy, having nothing of the disproportion of
monstrosity, or the colouring of disease aboutthem; and therefore they are
wholesome, so that all who believe and obey them become thereby stronger,
nobler, and sounder in all the qualities of moral manhood. Now let us see how
this statementof Paul may be verified and illustrated.
I. We may take first THE MATTER OF CREED, and we shall find, when we
come to investigate, that in this department the words of the Lord Jesus were
distinguished by two qualities which mark them as pre-eminently healthy. The
first of these is their positive character. The Lord was no mere dealerin
negations. Dr. Samuel Johnsoncomplained of Priestley, as a philosopher, that
he "unsettled everything and settlednothing"; but no one can read the four
Gospels without feeling that in meeting Jesus he has come into contactwith
One who speaks in the most positive manner. On subjects regarding which the
wisestminds of antiquity were completely uncertain, He has the fullest
assurance. We may wade through volumes of metaphysics, from those of
Aristotle to those of Kant, without getting any distinct notion of God, but
"when we hear Jesus say, 'God is a Spirit, and they that worship Him must
worship Him in spirit and in truth,' we feel that God is a personal reality; and
though Christ does not define the nature of spirit, yet when He speaks ofGod
as thinking, loving, willing — His Fatherand ours — we understand Him
better than the philosophers, though He penetrates to the depth of a nature
which they had vainly soughtto define." He has settled our minds upon the
subject, not by argument, but by awakening in us the God-consciousness
which is one of the instincts of our being, and so bringing us to say, "It must
be so, for I canrest in that." In like manner, when He enforces duty He evokes
the conscience within us to a recognitionof its responsibility. So, too, in
reference to the future. He does not argue, He asserts withthe speechof One
who knows whereofHe affirms, and forthwith the natural longing of the heart
for immortality finds its craving satisfied, and settles in the certainty that

6. "dust thou art, to dust returnest, was not spokenof the soul." Akin to this
positive characteristic ofthe Saviour's words concerning creedis the
discouragementwhich they give to all indulgence in speculations about things
which are merely curious, and have no bearing upon our characteror
conduct. Thus, when one of His disciples asked, "Are there few that be
saved?" He declined to answerthe question, and fixed the attention of His
hearers on the vital and urgent matter of individual duty, saying, "Strive ye to
enter in at the strait gate," Everything that is profitless and without bearing
on life and godliness He brands as unworthy of considerationor discussion,
and all mere logomachies are unsparingly condemned by Him. Now in these
two things you have the symptoms of mental and spiritual health. The man
who accounts nothing certain never focuses his mind on any. thing; while he
who runs after every sort of speculation, scatters his mind over everything.
The one never gets ready to do anything; the other attempts so much that he
really accomplishes nothing. Is it not, precisely, in these two respects that the
unhealthiness of much of the thinking in our own age manifests itself?
II. But now, passing from the domain of creedTO THAT OF CHARACTER,
WE ARE EQUALLY STRUCKWITH THE HEALTHINESS OF THE
SAVIOUR'S WORDS in reference to that.
1. Forin dealing with that subject He is carefulto put supreme emphasis, not
on that which is without, but on that which is within. He distinguishes between
the head and the heart, and never confounds intellectualability with moral
greatness.Now the healthiness of all this is apparent at a glance, for it goes to
the rootof the matter, and only One who was Himself whole-heartedcould
thus have prescribed for diseasedhumanity.
2. Again, in reference to character, the healthiness of the Saviour's words
appears in that He insists, not on asceticismin any one particular, but on full-
rounded holiness. He does not require the eradicationof any one principle of
our nature, but rather the consecrationofthem all.
3. But looking now, to the department of conduct, we have in that another
equally striking exemplification of the healthiness of the words of the Lord
Jesus. He was very far from giving any countenance to the idea that religionis

7. a thing only of sentiment. He insisted, indeed, as we have seen, onthe
importance of faith in the greatcentral doctrines;and He was equally
emphatic in declaring the innerness of holiness. But He dwelt on both of these
only that He might the more effectually reachthat conduct which one has
called"three-fourths of life."
4. But another illustration of the healthiness of Christ's words in regardto
conduct may be seenin the absence ofall minute and specific details. He lays
down greatprinciples, leaving it to the conscienceofthe individual to make
the applicationof these to the incidents and occasionsoflife as they arise. The
words of Christ are not like the directions on a finger-pestat a crossing, orthe
indicators of the cardinal points upon a spire, which are of service only in the
places where they are set up; but rather like a pocketcompass, which, rightly
used and understood, will give a man his bearings anywhere. Nothing so
educates a man into weakness andhelplessness as to be told in every
emergencypreciselywhat he must do. That makes for him a moral "go-cart,"
outside of which he is not able to stand, and the consequenceis that he can
never be depended upon. If the teachershows the pupil how to work each
individual sum, he will never make him proficient in arithmetic. The man who
is continually asking himself, as to his food, what he shall eat and what he
shall drink and what he shall avoid, is either a dyspeptic or a valetudinarian.
He is not healthy. And in like manner, he who in the domain of morals is
continually inquiring of somebody, may I do this? may I go thither? or must I
refrain from that? has never rightly comprehended the healthiness of Christ's
words, and is far from having attained the strength which they are calculated
to foster. Here is the greatlaw, "Watchand pray, lestye enter into
temptation."
(W. M. Taylor, D. D.)
A contrastbetweentrue and false teaching
A. Rowland, LL. B.

8. At the close ofthe secondverse Paul urges Timothy not to be silent, but to
"teachand exhort" the Christians in Ephesus on the subject in slavery.
I. THE WHOLESOMENESSOF CHRIST'S TEACHING. The apostle speaks
of "wholesome words,"a translation which we prefer to that given in the
RevisedVersion ("sound words"), because it conveys the idea of imparting
health to men and to society. Christ's teaching is the ozone of the moral
atmosphere.
1. It concerneditselfwith practical questions. The Sermonon the Mount
(which is the chief specimen given us of His teaching)proves this to
demonstration. As Jesus Himself put it: a candle was not lighted by Him in
order to be lookedat or talkedabout; but that it might give light to all that
were in the house. In other words, the Christian religion is to be used rather
than to be discussed, andis meant to throw light upon all the obscurities of
life's pathway until it leads up to the light of heaven.
2. His teaching was embodied in His perfectlife. This made it the more
helpful. These slaves, forexample, to whom the apostle had been speaking,
wanted to know what they were to do under the provocations and hardships
of their lot. And nothing could help them more than the knowledge ofHim
whose gentlenesswas neverat fault; who, when He was reviled, reviled not
again;when He suffered He threatenednot, but committed Himself to Him
that judgeth righteously.
3. His teaching, tended, to the increase ofgodliness. "The doctrine which is
according to godliness, means the teaching which makes men more like God
— in holiness and righteousness and love. But in sharp contrastwith this is
presented—
II. THE UNWHOLESOMENESSOF FALSE TEACHING, the effects of
which were visible in the characterofthose who acceptedand taught it.
1. Self-sufficiencywas written on the foreheadof eachof them. As Paul says,
"He is proud," literally "carriedaway with conceit," "knowing nothing." A
footman is generally more awe-inspiring than his master. And this was true of

9. pretentious teachers in Paul's days, of whom he says they are "carriedaway
with conceit."
2. Love of verbal disputes was anothercharacteristic oftheirs. The word
translated "doting" indicates a distempered and sicklycondition, which turns
awayfrom the "wholesome" foodof the gospel;just as a child with a poor
appetite refuses bread-and-butter, and canonly daintily pick and choose
among delicacies, andthe more he has of them the worse his appetite becomes.
It is a bad sign when societyhas unwholesome appetites, caring more for art
than for truth — more for manner than for matter; for these are signs of
decadence suchas precededthe fall of the Roman empire.
3. A carnalappetite was displayed by these opponents of our Lord's
wholesome words. Our translation, "supposing that gain is godliness," is
incorrectand misleading. No one supposes, orever supposed, that worldly
gain is godliness, orleads to it; but many in all ages have been guilty of what
Paul suggests, namely, of "using godliness as a wayof gain." In other words,
these men, corrupted as they were in mind, in the whole inner life, and "bereft
of the truth," only professedthe Christian faith so far as it was serviceable to
their worldly interests.
(A. Rowland, LL. B.)
Supposing that gainis godliness
Gain not godliness
N. Emmons, D. D.
That men are greatlyexposedto embrace the absurd doctrine that virtue
exists in utility.
I. I AM TO EXPLAIN THE MEANING OF THE DOCTRINETHAT
VIRTUE CONSISTS IS UTILITY. This sentiment has been maintained by
those who believe, as wellas by those who disbelieve Divine revelation. The
turning point is utility. Intention is of no farther value than as it leads to
utility: it is the means, and not the end. "The result of this part of the subject

10. is, that those persons have been grosslymistaken, who taught that virtue was
to be pursued for its own sake. Virtue is upon no other accountvaluable, than
as it is the instrument of the most exquisite pleasure." All who suppose that
virtue consists in utility, agree in maintaining that virtue has no intrinsic
excellence, as anend, but only a relative excellence, as a means to promote the
only ultimate end in nature, that is, happiness. Since happiness is, in their
view, the supreme good, and misery the supreme evil, they conclude that the
whole duty of men consists in pursuing happiness, and avoiding misery. Upon
this single principle, that virtue wholly consists in its tendency to promote
natural good, in distinction from natural evil, Godwin has founded a scheme
of sentiments which, carried into practice, would subvert all morality, religion
and government.
II. I proceedto demonstrate THE ABSURDITY OF SUPPOSINGTHAT
"GAIN IS GODLINESS,"OR THAT VIRTUE ESSENTIALLY CONSISTS
IN UTILITY. This sentiment is not only false, but absurd, because it
contradicts the plainest dictates of reasonand conscience.
1. To suppose that virtue consists in utility, is to suppose that virtue may be
predicated of inanimate objects. These have a natural tendency, in various
ways, to promote human happiness. The mode in which a man is made
subservient is by inducement and persuasion. But both are equally the affair
of necessity. The man differs from the knife as the iron candlestick differs
from the brass one; he has one more wayof being actedupon. This additional
way in man is motive, in the candlestick it is magnetism. Such is the natural
and avowedconsequenceofthe doctrine, that virtue consists in utility. It
necessarilyimplies that mere material objects may be really virtuous; and
some material objects may have more virtue than the most benevolent of the
human race.
2. To suppose that virtue consists in utility, is to suppose that virtue may be
predicated of the mere animal creation. It is no less absurd to ascribe virtue to
the utility of animals than to ascribe virtue to a refreshing shower, or a
fruitful field.

11. 3. To suppose that virtue consists in utility, is to suppose that men may be
virtuous, without any intention to do good. They certainly may be very useful,
without having utility in view. Men are every day performing actions which
have a tendency to promote that public goodwhich lies beyond all their views
and intentions. But the doctrine under considerationplaces allvirtue in the
tendency of an action, and not in the intention of the actor. Intention is of no
farther value than as it leads to utility. This is stripping moral virtue of every
moral quality, which is a gross absurdity.
4. To suppose that virtue consists in utility, is to suppose that men may be
virtuous in acting, not only without any intention, but from a positively bad
intention. If the virtue of an actionconsists altogetherin its tendency, it may
be as virtuous when it flows from a bad intention as when it flows from a good
intention, or from no intention at all. The intention of an agentdoes not alter
the tendency of his action. A man may do that from a goodintention, which
has a tendency to do evil; or he may do that from a bad intention, which has a
tendency to do good. Some actions done from the worst intentions have been
the most beneficialto mankind. Be it so, that no malevolent actionhas a
natural or direct tendency to promote happiness; yet if virtue consists in
utility the goodeffectof a malevolent action is just as virtuous as the good
effectof a benevolent one. Forthe doctrine we are considering places all
virtue in the tendency of an action, and not in the intention of the agent.
5. To suppose that virtue consists in utility, is to suppose that there is nothing
right nor wrong in the nature of things, but that virtue and vice depend
entirely upon mere accidentaland mutable circumstances.There are certain
relations which men bear to eachother, and which they bear to our Creator,
which create obligations that never canbe violated without committing a
moral crime.
6. To suppose that virtue consists in utility is to suppose that there is nothing
in the universe intrinsically goodor evil but happiness and misery.
7. To suppose that virtue consists in utility is to suppose that there is really no
such thing as either virtue or vice in the world. If the actions of free agents are
either goodor evil, solelyon accountof their tendency to promote either

12. pleasure or pain, then nothing can be predicated of them but advantage or
disadvantage. Actions which promote happiness may be denominated
advantageous, but not virtuous; and actions which produce misery may be
denominated disadvantageous, but not vicious.
III. MEN ARE GREATLY EXPOSED TO EMBRACEIT. This the apostle
plainly intimates, by exhorting Timothy to withdraw himself from those who
"supposedthat gainis godliness."
1. From the resemblance whichthis error hears to the truth, though it be
diametrically opposite to it. Those who maintain that virtue consists in utility,
representit under the alluring name of universal philanthropy, which is an
imposing appellation. They pretend that happiness is the supreme good, and
virtue solely consists in promoting it to the highest degree. Theyinsinuate that
this philanthropy directly tends to diffuse universal happiness, and to raise
human nature to a state of perfectionin this life.
2. The danger will appear greaterif we considerby whom this pleasing and
plausible error is disseminated. It is taught by grave divines, in their moral
and religious treatises and public discourses. Law and Paley have been
mentioned as placing the whole of virtue in utility. Dr. Brown, in his remarks
upon the Earl of Shaftesbury's characteristics,maintains that virtue consists
in its tendency to promote individual happiness.
3. There is a strong propensity in human nature to believe any other scheme
of moral and religious sentiments, than that which is according to godliness.
Men naturally love happiness, and as naturally hate holiness.
(N. Emmons, D. D.)
A mercenary motive
A Christian lady in America, who has earnestlyand prayerfully laboured to
carry the gospelto the Mongolianlaundrymen around her, at length
succeededin getting one of them to attend Sunday schooland church
regularly. The man was attentive and well-behaved, and the lady had great

13. hopes of him. She tried to interest others in his welfare, too, and induced her
friends to patronise his laundry. Visiting him at his home a few days ago, she
receiveda warm welcome. Johngave her to understand that he enjoyed very
much attending the Sunday school, information that was exceedingly
gratifying. Anxious, however, to receive more practicaldemonstration of the
influence of the schoolupon him, she askedhim if he did not think it did him
good. "Yi, yi!" came the convincing response, "washee folle whole
conglogation." The Chinaman's idea of getting goodis not an uncommon one;
. unhappily, it is the motive of many a church connection.
COMMENTARIES
Ellicott's Commentary for English Readers
(3) If any man teachotherwise.—Withoutconfining the reference strictly to
what had just been taught respecting the duty of Christian slaves, there is
little doubt but that some influential teaching, contrary to St. Paul’s, on the
subject of the behaviour and disposition of that unhappy class was in the
Apostle’s mind when he wrote the terrible denunciation contained in these
three verses againstthe false teachers ofEphesus. Schismatic and heretical
preachers and writers in all ages have sadly hindered the progress oftrue
religion; but in the days of St. Paul, when the foundation-stones of the faith
were being so painfully laid, there seems to have been a life-and-death contest
betweenthe teachers ofthe true and the false. In this passage St. Paullays
bare the secretsprings of much of this anti-Christian doctrine. There is little
doubt but that at Ephesus there existed then a school, professedlyChristian,
which taught the slave who had acceptedthe yoke of Christ to rebel against
the yoke of any earthly lord. Hence the indignation of St. Paul. “If any man
teachotherwise,” different to my interpretation of the rule of Christ, which
bids us bear all with brave patience, with loyal fortitude.

14. And consentnot to wholesome words, eventhe words of our Lord Jesus
Christ.—The Apostle, no doubt, was referring to well-knownsayings of the
Redeemer, suchas “Render unto Cæsarthe things that are Cæsar’s,”or
“Blessedare the meek, for they shall inherit the earth,” or “If any man will
follow me, let him take up his cross daily, and follow me;” “But I sayunto
you, resist not evil,” “Love your enemies, pray for them which despitefully use
you.” It was upon such sublime sayings as these—no doubt, current
watchwords in all the churches—it was upon the spirit of the Sermon on the
Mount that St. Paul based his teaching and grounded his advice to the slaves
in the flock of Christ. But the false teachers, who would be Timothy’s bitterest
and most determined foes at Ephesus, would not consentto these “wholesome
words,” though they were the words of the Lord Jesus Christ.
To the doctrine which is according to godliness.—Theseself-willedmen, in
consenting not to the sublime words of Christ, at the same time refused to
acquiesce in the doctrine which insisted upon a holy life: for Christian truth is
inseparable from purity, single-heartedness,self-forgetfulness,brave patience.
BensonCommentary
1 Timothy 6:3-5. If any man teachotherwise — Than strict, practicalholiness,
in all its branches;and consentnot to wholesome words — Υγιαινουσι λογοις,
literally, healing, or healthful words, words that have no taint of falsehood, or
tendency to encourage sin; and the doctrine which is according to godliness —
The sole designand direct tendency of which is to make people godly, and to
promote the glory of God, while it secures the salvationof men; he is proud —
Greek, τετυφωται, puffed up; which is the cause ofhis not consenting to this
doctrine; knowing nothing — As he ought to know; but doting — Greek,
νοστων, being sick, or distempered in his mind; about questions — Dotingly
fond of disputes; an evil, but common disease, especiallywhere practice is
forgotten. Such contend earnestlyfor singular phrases and favourite points of
their own; but every thing else, howeverlike the preaching of Christ and his
apostles, is all law and bondage, and carnal reasoning. And strifes of words,
whereofcometh envy — Of the gifts and successofothers;contention for the

15. pre- eminence. Such disputants seldomlike the prosperity of others, or to be
less esteemedthemselves;railings — Βλασφημιαι, evilspeakings, against
those that differ from them; evil surmisings — Or unjust suspicions easily
entertained againstothers;it not being their way to think wellof those that
hold opinions different from theirs. Perverse disputings —
Carried on contrary to conscience,by men wholly corrupted in their minds,
and destitute of the truth — Of the knowledge of, and faith in, the true
doctrine of the gospel;supposing that gain is godliness — That what promises
the greatestgainis the most worthy of their pursuit; or who reckonwhatever
produces most money to be the best religion. A far more common case than is
usually supposed. From such withdraw thyself — Shun all societywith them.
Matthew Henry's Concise Commentary
6:1-5 Christians were not to suppose that religious knowledge,orChristian
privileges, gave them any right to despise heathen masters, or to disobey
lawful commands, or to expose their faults to others. And such as enjoyed the
privilege of living with believing masters, were not to withhold due respect
and reverence, becausethey were equal in respectto religious privileges, but
were to serve with double diligence and cheerfulness, becauseoftheir faith in
Christ, and as partakers of his free salvation. We are not to consentto any
words as wholesome, exceptthe words of our Lord Jesus Christ; to these we
must give unfeigned consent. Commonly those are most proud who know
least;for they do not know themselves. Hence come envy, strife, railings, evil-
surmisings, disputes that are all subtlety, and of no solidity, betweenmen of
corrupt and carnalminds, ignorant of the truth and its sanctifying power, and
seeking their worldly advantage.
Barnes'Notes on the Bible
If any man teachotherwise - Any otherwise than that respectshould be shown
to masters;and that a more cheerful and ready service should be rendered
because they were Christians. It is evidently implied here that some might be
disposedto inculcate such views of religion as would produce discontentand a

16. spirit of insubordination among those who were held to servitude. Who they
were is not known, nor is it known what arguments they would employ to do
it. It would seemprobable that the arguments which would be employed
would be such as these:that God made all people equal; that all had been
redeemedby the same blood; that all true Christians were fellow-heirs of
heaven; and that it was wrong to hold a Christian brother in bondage, etc.
From undeniable principles it would seemthat they drew the inference that
slaves ought at once to asserttheir freedom; that they should refuse obedience
to their masters;and that the tendency of their teaching was, insteadof
removing the evil by the gradual and silent influence of Christian principles,
to produce discontent and insurrection. From some of the expressions here
used by the apostle, as characteristicofthese teachers, it would seemto be
probable that these persons were Jews. Theywere people given to subtle
disputations, and those who doted about questions and verbal disputes, and
who were intent on gain, supposing that that which conducedto mere worldly
prosperity was of course religion. These characteristicsapply well to Jewish
teachers.
And consentnot to wholesome words - Words conducing to a healthful state of
the church; that is, doctrines tending to produce order and a due observance
of the proprieties of life; doctrines leading to contentment, and soberindustry,
and the patient endurance of evils.
Even the words of our Lord Jesus Christ - The doctrines of the Saviour - all of
which tended to a quiet life, and to a patient endurance of wrongs.
And to the doctrine which is according to godliness - Which tends to produce
piety or religion; that is, the doctrine which would be most favorable to an
easyand rapid propagationof the gospel. The idea seems to be, that such a
state of insubordination and discontent as they would produce, would be
unfavorable to the promotion of religion. Who candoubt it?
Jamieson-Fausset-BrownBible Commentary
3. teachotherwise—thanI desire thee to "teach" (1Ti6:2). The Greek
indicative implies, he puts not a merely supposed case, but one actually

17. existing, 1Ti1:3, "Every one who teaches otherwise,"that is, who teaches
heterodoxy.
consentnot—Greek, "accede notto."
wholesome—"sound" (1Ti1:10): opposedto the false teachers'words,
unsound through profitless science andimmorality.
words of our Lord Jesus Christ—Paul's inspired words are not merely his
own, but are also Christ's words.
Matthew Poole's Commentary
If any man teachotherwise;if there be any person who either more publicly
or more privately shall take upon him to instruct people otherwise.
And consentnot to wholesome words:what he means by wholesome words his
next words show; they are called wholesome because theytend to prevent the
sicknessofsin, or to cure the soul of its spiritual distempers.
Even the words of our Lord Jesus Christ, and to the doctrine which is
according to godliness;words either spokenby Christ, or from Christ, or
tending to his honour and glory, or to the promoting of piety and godliness, or
which are according to the rule of godliness.
Gill's Exposition of the Entire Bible
If any man teachotherwise,.... Oranother doctrine, as the Syriac version
renders it; a doctrine different from what the apostle had now taught,
concerning the duty of servants to their masters;as did the false teachers, who
despiseddominion or government; not only civil government, and so spoke
evil of rulers and magistrates;and church government, and therefore reviled
the apostles, elders, andpastors of churches;but family government, and
encourageddisobedience to parents and masters; see 2 Peter2:10
or teachanother doctrine, from that of the Bible, of Christ and his apostles:

18. and consentnot to wholesome words:such as the doctrines of the Gospel;they
are food to the saints, milk for babes, and meat for strong men; they are sweet
and savoury food to a spiritual taste;they are nourishing, and the means of a
spiritual growth; they are salutary and healthful; they have no corruption,
taint, or poison in them:
even the words of our Lord Jesus Christ; the doctrines which he preached
when on each, who was anointed with the Spirit of God without measure, to
preach the Gospel, and by whom all the doctrines of grace and truth came;or
the doctrines relating to Christ, to his person, offices, grace, righteousness,
sacrifice and satisfaction;to what he is, has done, does, and will do.
And to the doctrine which is according to godliness. The whole Gospelis the
mystery of godliness;it is the truth that is after it, and it has a tendency to
promote true godliness in heart and life: even such is the nature of the more
distinguishing doctrines of it, which are chargedwith licentiousness;as the
doctrine of eternal and personalelection;for though it is not of works, but of
grace, yetholiness is a means fixed in election, and an end securedby it; it is
the source and spring of all real holiness;holiness of heart is an evidence of it
to believers themselves;and holiness of life is an evidence of it to the world;
nor cananything more powerfully engage mento it than the consideration
that they are chosenof God to grace and glory. The covenantof grace, which
is absolute and unconditional, provides for both internal and external
holiness;and the promises of it, under the influence of grace, powerfully
operate in the minds of believers, to the cleansing of them from all impurity of
flesh and spirit, and to the perfecting of holiness in the fear of the Lord: and
so the doctrines of free justification, by the righteousness ofChrist, which
does not make void the law, nor discourage goodworks;and of Christ's
bearing the sins of his people, and making satisfactionforthem, that they
being dead to sin might live unto righteousness;and of redemption of them by
the blood of Christ from sin, Satan, and the law, which is done that they might
be a peculiar people, zealous of goodworks;and of the effectualcalling of
them, which is with an holy calling;and of their final perseverance in grace
and holiness, are all of them doctrines according to godliness, and greatly
encourage andpromote it: now, whoeverdoes not accede to these truths, and

19. acquiesce in them, but differs from them, and teaches the reverse of them, he
is a false teacher, and is all that the apostle says in the next words.
Geneva Study Bible
{5} If any man teachotherwise, and consentnot to wholesome words, eventhe
words of our Lord Jesus Christ, and to the doctrine which is according to
godliness;
(5) He severelycondemns and excommunicates or casts out of the Church as
proud men, those who do not content themselves with Christ's doctrine, (that
is to say, the doctrine of godliness)but wearyboth themselves and others, in
vain questions (for all other things are vain), because they do not content
themselves in Christ's doctrine. He condemns them as lying deceivers, because
they savour or sound of nothing but vanity: as mad men, because theytrouble
themselves so much in matters of nothing: as evil plagues, because theycause
greatcontentions, and corrupt men's minds and judgment. To be short, he
condemns them as profane and wicked, becausethey abuse the precious name
of godliness and religion, for the sake ofwickedgain.
EXEGETICAL(ORIGINAL LANGUAGES)
Meyer's NT Commentary
1 Timothy 6:3-5. Descriptionof the heretics.
εἴ τις ἑτεροδιδασκαλεῖ]Onἑτεροδιδασκαλεῖν, comp. 1 Timothy 1:3; εἴ τις
often occurs in the epistle for ὅστις or the like; comp. 1 Timothy 3:5, 1
Timothy 5:8; the thought is given in its most comprehensive form.
καὶ μὴ προσέρχεται κ.τ.λ.]defines ἑτεροδιδασκαλεῖνmore exactly,
characterizing it as opposedto the pure doctrine of the gospel, as a preaching
therefore of heresy(not merely “of a doctrine which has not the quality of
being pious” (!), Hofmann).

20. προσέρχεσθαι is used of mental agreement, and is equivalent to “agree with”
(de Wette, Wiesinger, van Oosterzee);comp. Philo, de Gigantt. p. 289:μηδενὶ
προσέρχεσθαι γνώμῃ τῶν εἰρημένων. On ὑγιαίνουσι λόγοις, comp. 1 Timothy
1:10. Hofmann arbitrarily explains the word by: “devote oneselfto a thing;
employ one’s pains on it.” If προσέχεται is the correctreading, then it is to be
explained: “and does not hold fast by sound words.” The genitive τοῦ κυρίου
ἡμ. Ἰ. Χρ. gives the source from which the λόγοι proceed. Καὶ τῇ κατʼ
εὐσέβειαν διδασκαλίᾳ]anepexegetic addition to what preceded. The
expressionis not, with Leo and Wiesinger, to be explained by: doctrina ad
pietatem ducens; κατά rather expresses the relation of correspondence,
suitability (van Oosterzee). Byεὐσέβεια is meant Christian piety.—1 Timothy
6:4. τετύφωται]comp. 1 Timothy 3:6.[199]With this word begins the
apodosis, whichWegscheider, Mack, andothers find expressedonly in
ἀφίστασο ἀπὸ τ. τοιούτων, whichwords we can hardly considergenuine.
μηδὲν ἐπιστάμενος (comp. 1 Timothy 1:7), the participle is not to be resolved
into “although;” all the more that τετύφωται conveys a suggestionof
dumbness. Their knowledge,onwhich they, presume, is limited to fables, and
does not penetrate into the truth.
ἀλλὰ νοσῶν περὶ ζητήσεις καὶ λογομαχίας]νοσῶν, in contrastwith ὑγιαίνουσι
λόγοις in 1 Timothy 6:3.
Περὶ ζητήσεις κ.τ.λ. gives the sickness ofwhich he is ill (comp. Plato, Phaedr.
p. 288:ὁ νοσῶν περὶ λόγων ἀκοήν;Winer, p. 379 [E. T. p. 506]). Luther, not
clear:“diseasedin questions;” Stier, correct:“diseasedwith.”
On ζητήσεις, comp. 1 Timothy 1:4; the addition of λογομαχίαι denotes more
exactly the nature of the ζητήσεις. Calvin: λογομαχίαςnominat contentiosas
disputationes de verbis magis, quam de rebus, vel (ut vulgo loquuntur) sine
materia aut subjecto. The word (occurring only in later Greek)is ἅπ. λεγ., the
verb λογομαχεῖν, 2 Timothy 2:14.

21. Hitherto he has described the “condition of soul among the
ἑτεροδιδασκαλοῦντες” (Wiesinger);the consequencesoftheir ζητ. and λογομ.,
particularly the destructive tendencies, are given in what follows:ἐξ ὧν
γίνεται κ.τ.λ.]φθόνος, ἔρις,[200]ΒΛΑΣΦΗΜΊΑΙ, form a climax.
ΒΛΑΣΦΗΜΊΑΙ and ὙΠΌΝΟΙΑΙ ΠΟΝΗΡΑΊ are wrongly understood by
Chrysostomof conduct towards God. On the latter expression, equivalent to
“wickedsuspicion” (Luther), see Wisd. 3:24; the word is ἍΠ. ΛΕΓ. in the N.
T. Hofmann wishes to separate ΠΟΝΗΡΑΊ from ὙΠΌΝΟΙΑΙ, and to connect
it with the next word, “because ὙΠΟΝΟΕῖΝ initself means suspecting evil.”
But, on the one hand, ὙΠΟΝΟΕῖΝ has often the simple meaning “conjecture”
(e.g. Acts 13:25;also in classic Greek);and, on the other hand, “the suspicion
of something evil,” and “the evil, wickedsuspicion,” are by no means identical
things.—1 Timothy 6:5. διαπαρατριβαί]This word and ΠΑΡΑΔΙΑΤΡΙΒΑΊ
(according to the usual reading) are not equivalent, as Heydenreich thinks;
see Winer, p. 96 [E. T. p. 126]. The distinction betweenΠΑΡΑΤΡΙΒΉ and
ΔΙΑΤΡΙΒΉ is to be maintained. ΔΙΑΤΡΙΒΉ means, in regard to time: “its
consumption, pastime, occupation;” with the prefix ΠΑΡΑ there is added the
idea of idle, useless, so that ΠΑΡΑΔΙΑΤΡΙΒΉ denotes the useless occupation
of time. The word ΠΑΡΑΤΡΙΒΉ (only in later Greek)means: “wrangling,
dispute;” ΔΙΑ serves to intensify the meaning, hence ΔΙΑΠΑΡΑΤΡΙΒΉ is
equivalent to “continuous or violent wraingling” (de Wette). Luther
translated it: “scholastic disputes.” As the idea of strife has been given already
by ἔρις, we might be inclined to considerthe Rec. to be the original reading,
were the evidence for it not too weak. The same may be said of the reading
διατριβαί, whichHofmann, without sufficient ground, maintains to be “what
was originally written.” At any rate, the idea “continual wrangling” is not so
identical with that of “strife” (ἜΡΙς) as to prevent them from being used
together.[201]Reiche paraphrasesthe reading ΔΙʼ Ἃ ΠΑΡΑΤΡΙΒΑΊ as
equivalent to per quae, nempe vitia morbosque animi vs 4, exoriuntur rixae et
certamina, etc.; but ΔΙʼ Ἅ is not equivalent to per quae, and the previous ἐξ ὧν
is againstthis construction.

22. ΔΙΕΦΘΑΡΜΈΝΩΝ ἈΝΘΡΏΠΩΝ ΤῸΝ ΝΟῦΝ]Regarding this accus., see
Winer, p. 205 [E. T. p. 287];comp. 2 Timothy 3:8 (Xenophon, De Exped. Cyri,
iv. 259:διεφθαρμένοι τοὺς ὀφθαλμούς):“whose understanding is destroyed.”
καὶ ἀπεστερημένων τῆς ἀληθείας]“who have been robbed of the truth.” This
and the previous participial clauses indicate that formerly the heretics had
their understanding sound, and were in possessionofthe truth, but that they
had lostboth these jewels, according to 1 Timothy 4:1, by the influence of
demons. It should never have been denied that they who are thus described
were actualheretics.
The next clause adds another peculiar characteristic, whichproves the
διεφθαρμένωνκ.τ.λ.:νομιζόντωνπορισμὸνεἶναι τὴν εὐσέβειαν] πορισμός
(only here and at 1 Timothy 6:6; comp. Sir 13:19; Sir 14:2) is equivalent to
“means of gain,” i.e. a business bringing gain; Luther: “trade.”
Wegscheiderwronglyexplains εὐσέβεια as equivalent to Ἡ ΚΑΤʼ
ΕὐΣΈΒΕΙΑΝ ΔΙΔΑΣΚΑΛΊΑ. The idea is to be kept in its proper meaning;
although that which the heretics made to appear ΕὐΣΈΒΕΙΑwas not
ΕὐΣΈΒΕΙΑ, but only the appearance of it (2 Timothy 3:5 : ΜΌΡΦΩΣΙΝ
ΕὐΣΕΒΕΊΑς), by means of which they soughtto make earthly gain (Titus
1:11).
As to the construction, it seems most natural to make the substantive at the
beginning of the verse dependent on ἘΞ ὯΝ ΓΊΝΕΤΑΙ, 1 Timothy 6:4, along
with the substantives before it. Hofmann, on the contrary, thinks it curious,
“that besides the bad things already mentioned, there should also be named
those with whom they occur;” and he wishes rather to regardΠΟΝΗΡΑῚ
ΔΙΑΤΡΙΒΑΊ (which he reads)as in apposition to ΖΗΤΉΣΕΙς ΚΑῚ
ΛΟΓΟΜΑΧΊΑς, just as in Jam 3:8, where the nominative stands in

23. apposition to the previous accusative as a kind of exclamation. This
constructionis possible, but it is by no means necessary, and from the
structure of the sentence not even probable.
The lastremark furnishes the apostle with an opportunity for a digressionon
Christian contentment.[202]
[199]Hofmann thinks that τετύφωται does nothere, as in 1 Timothy 3:6,
contain the idea of darkness, since “Paulmeans to express regarding the
schismatics anopinion, not in regardto their moral, but in regardto their
spiritual condition.” This opinion is contradicted by the factthat in what
follows νοσῶν κ.τ.λ. manifestly denotes a moral fault.
[200]Clemens Al. Stromata, vii. p. 759:ὑπὸ δοξοσοφίας ἐπῃρμένοι ἐρίζοντες
πελοῦσι.
[201]Oecumenius explains the expressionἀπὸ μεταφορᾶς τῶνψωραλέων
προβάτων, and Chrysostomsays likewise:καθάπερτὰ ψωραλέα τῶν
προβάτωνπαρατριβόμενα νόσου καὶ τὰ ὑγιαίνοντα ἐμπίμπλησιν, οὕτω καὶ
οὗτοι οἱ πονηροὶ ἄνδρες.—The meaning “provocations” (Mack), andthis
other: “wickedand hurtful meetings or clubs” (Heinrichs), canhe assigned
neither to παραδιατριβαίnor to διαπαρατριβαί.
[202]Hofmann’s opinion, that the deductions following are not occasionedby
the conduct of the heretics, but by Timothy’s conduct, are not warranted by
the exhortation in 1 Timothy 6:11 : ταῦτα φεῦγε.
Expositor's Greek Testament

24. 1 Timothy 6:3-21. Thoughts about the right use of wealthare suggestedby the
slave problem, a mischievous attitude towards which is associatedwith false
doctrine. If a man possesseshimself, he has enough. This possessionis eternal
as well as temporal. This is my lessonfor the poor, for you as a man of God
(and I solemnly adjure you to learn and teachit), and for the rich.
Cambridge Bible for Schools andColleges
3. teachotherwise]More fully R.V., teachetha different doctrine, but even
this does not completely give the force; for the ‘different’ is not so much
‘different from what has just been laid down,’ as ‘different from the one true
deposit, the creedof all my gospeland all your life;’ and helps to form the
meaning now attachedto heterodoxy, lit. ‘opinions different from established
truth.’ The close ofthe Epistle takes up the opening where this word has
occurredbefore there has been time to lay down any teaching, 1 Timothy 1:3.
Lewin renders here ‘if any man teachwhat is heterodox.’
wholesome words]Again taking up his opening phrase 1 Timothy 1:10, where
see note. Sound is the best English equivalent, if we do not stay on the most
modern and ‘cant’ sense ofthe word, but go back to its early vigour, so as to
appreciate St Paul’s contrasthere with the ‘sicklyquestionings’ of the false
teacher, 1 Timothy 6:4. See Appendix, K.
our Lord Jesus Christ] This exactorder of the words so familiar to us in St
Paul’s other writings occurs only here and 1 Timothy 6:14 throughout these
Epistles according to the true text. An imitator would surely, as we see by the
various readings so often attempted, have takenpains to make the well-known
formula a marked feature. It may be also noted that the agedsaint, so near
the end of his ‘goodfight,’ does not presume familiarly on his Saviour’s
intimacy, so as to use the one name ‘Jesus’with tripping fluency. It is still
‘Christ Jesus,’‘Jesus Christ,’‘The Lord.’ See note on 1 Timothy 1:1.

25. the doctrine … according to godliness]Two characteristic words ofthese
Epistles combined in a phrase which might be taken as their keynote—‘Holy
Truth—True Holiness.’See previous notes on the words and especiallythe
note on the central doctrinal passage1 Timothy 3:16.
3–10. A further warning againstfalse Teachers. Theircovetousness
From the 3rd verse to the 16th St Paul once againresumes two of the chief
topics of the Epistle—false teachers’perverteddoctrine, and Timothy’s own
true unswerving life; in eachcase with a new thought, (1) of the debasing
motive of traffic in godliness, (2)of the inspiring motive of the Master’s
appearing. He then, 1 Timothy 6:17-19, gives one further direction (suggested
perhaps by 1 Timothy 6:10) of pastoralfaithfulness towards the rich; and in a
last abrupt and touchingly natural outburst throws himself upon his son
Timothy, and gathers up all his fears and hopes on the one chiefestsubjectin
the brief appealof 1 Timothy 6:20-21, from which he can no longerkeepback
the misused name of the monster evil—‘knowledge—falselynamed, Gnosis—
the Misnomer,’1 Timothy 6:3-10, unsound teaching, especiallyfor gain.
Bengel's Gnomen
1 Timothy 6:3. Ἑτεροδιδασκαλεῖ,teachotherwise)The antithesis is, teach, in
1 Timothy 6:2. The conclusionthus corresponding to the beginning of the
discussion, ch. 1 Timothy 1:3.—μὴ προσέρχεται, accede [consent]not) Seneca
has, “accedereopinioni,” to accede orconsentto an opinion: and so others, as
we find in Pricæus.
Pulpit Commentary
Verse 3. - Teachethfor teach, A.V.; a different doctrine for otherwise, A.V.;
consentethfor consent, A.V.; sound for wholesome, A.V. Teachetha different
doctrine (ἑτεροδιδασκαλεῖ);see above, 1 Timothy 1:3, note. Consenteth
(προσέρχεται);very common in the New Testament, in the literal sense of
"coming to" or "approaching," but only here in the metaphorical sense of

26. "assenting to." The steps seemto he, first, approaching a subject with the
mind with a view of considering it; and then consenting to it - coming over to
it. The term προσήλυτος, a convert to Judaism, and the phrase from Irenaeus
('Fragm.,' 2.), quoted by Ellicott, Οὐ τοῖς τῶν Ιουδαίωνδόγμασι
προσέρχονται, "Theydo not fall in with, or agree to, the doctrines of the
Jews,"sufficiently illustrate the usage ofthe word here. Sound (ὑγιαίνουσι)
see 1 Timothy 1:10, note. Godliness (ἐυσεβεία);see 1 Timothy 2:2, note.
Vincent's Word Studies
Teachotherwise (ἑτεροδιδασκαλεῖ)
See on 1 Timothy 1:3.
Consent(προσέρχεται)
Lit. draw nigh. To approach as one who confidingly accepts another's proffer.
Hence, to assentto. Comp. Acts 10:28;1 Peter2:4; Hebrews 4:16; Hebrews
10:22. Often in lxx, and habitually in the literal sense. The figurative sense,
Sir. 1:27, 30;4:15; 6:26. oP. The phrase only here.
Of our Lord, etc.
Either concerning our Lord, or spokenby him. Probably the latter, according
to N.T. usage, in which word of the Lord or word of Godcommonly means the
word that proceeds from God. The phrase words of our Lord Jesus Christ
only here.
Doctrine which is according to godliness (τῇ κατ εὐσέβειαν διδασκαλίᾳ)
The phrase only here. See on 1 Timothy 1:10. For εὐσέβεια, on 1 Timothy 2:2.
PRECEPTAUSTIN RESOURCES

27. ALBERT BARNES
Verse 3
If any man teachotherwise - Any otherwise than that respectshould be shown
to masters;and that a more cheerful and ready service should be rendered
because they were Christians. It is evidently implied here that some might be
disposedto inculcate such views of religion as would produce discontentand a
spirit of insubordination among those who were held to servitude. Who they
were is not known, nor is it known what arguments they would employ to do
it. It would seemprobable that the arguments which would be employed
would be such as these:that God made all people equal; that all had been
redeemedby the same blood; that all true Christians were fellow-heirs of
heaven; and that it was wrong to hold a Christian brother in bondage, etc.
From undeniable principles it would seemthat they drew the inference that
slaves ought at once to asserttheir freedom; that they should refuse obedience
to their masters;and that the tendency of their teaching was, insteadof
removing the evil by the gradual and silent influence of Christian principles,
to produce discontent and insurrection. From some of the expressions here
used by the apostle, as characteristicofthese teachers, it would seemto be
probable that these persons were Jews. Theywere people given to subtle
disputations, and those who doted about questions and verbal disputes, and
who were intent on gain, supposing that that which conducedto mere worldly
prosperity was of course religion. These characteristicsapply well to Jewish
teachers.
And consentnot to wholesome words - Words conducing to a healthful state of
the church; that is, doctrines tending to produce order and a due observance
of the proprieties of life; doctrines leading to contentment, and soberindustry,
and the patient endurance of evils.
Even the words of our Lord Jesus Christ - The doctrines of the Saviour - all of
which tended to a quiet life, and to a patient endurance of wrongs.

28. And to the doctrine which is according to godliness - Which tends to produce
piety or religion; that is, the doctrine which would be most favorable to an
easyand rapid propagationof the gospel. The idea seems to be, that such a
state of insubordination and discontent as they would produce, would be
unfavorable to the promotion of religion. Who candoubt it?
WILLIAM BARCLAY
FALSE TEACHERS AND FALSE TEACHING (1 Timothy 6:3-5)
6:3-5 If any man offers a different kind of teaching, and does not apply
himself to sound words (it is the words of our Lord Jesus Christ I mean) and
to godly teaching, he has become inflated with pride. He is a man of no
understanding; rather he has a diseasedaddictionto subtle speculations and
battles of words, which can be only a source of envy, strife, the exchange of
insults, evil suspicions, continual altercations ofmen whose minds are corrupt
and who are destitute of the truth, men whose belief is that religionis a means
of making gain.
The circumstances oflife in the ancient world presented the false teacherwith
an opportunity which he was not slow to take. On the Christian side, the
Church was full of wandering prophets, whose very wayof life gave them a
certain prestige. The Christian service was much more informal than it is
now. Anyone who felt he had a messagewas free to give it; and the door was
wide open to men who were out to propagate a false and misleading message.
On the heathen side, there were men calledsophists (compare Greek #4680),
wise men, who made it their business, so to speak, to sell philosophy. They had
two lines. They claimedfor a fee to be able to teachmen to argue cleverly;
they were the men who with their smooth tongues and their adroit minds were
skilled in "making the worse appearthe better reason." Theyhad turned
philosophy into a way of becoming rich. Their other line was to give
demonstrations of public speaking. The Greek had always beenfascinatedby

29. the spokenword; he loved an orator;and these wandering sophists went from
town to town, giving their oratoricaldemonstrations. Theywent in for
advertising on an intensive scale and even went the length of delivering by
hand personalinvitations to their displays. The most famous of them drew
people literally by the thousand to their lectures;they were in their day the
equivalent of the modern pop star. Philostratus tells us that Adrian, one of the
most famous of them, had such a popular powerthat, when his messenger
appearedwith the news that he was to speak, eventhe senate and the circus
emptied, and the whole population flockedto the Athenaeum to hear him.
They had three greatfaults.
Their speeches were quite unreal. They would offer to speak onany subject,
howeverremote and recondite and unlikely, that any member of the audience
might propose. This is the kind of question they would argue; it is an actual
example. A man goes into the citadel of a town to kill a tyrant who has been
grinding down the people; not finding the tyrant, he kills the tyrant's son;the
tyrant comes in and sees his dead son with the sword in his body, and in his
grief kills himself; the man then claims the reward for killing the tyrant and
liberating the people; should he receive it?
Their thirst was for applause. Competition betweenthem was a bitter and a
cut-throat affair. Plutarch tells of a travelling sophist calledNigerwho came
to a town in Galatia where a prominent oratorresided. A competition was
immediately arranged. Nigerhad to compete or lose his reputation. He was
suffering from a fishbone in his throat and had difficulty in speaking;but for
the sake ofprestige he had to go on. Inflammation set in soonafter, and in the
end he died. Dio Chrysostom paints a picture of a public place in Corinth with
all the different kinds of competitors in full blast: "You might hear many poor
wretches ofsophists shouting and abusing eachother, and their disciples, as
they call them, squabbling, and many writers of books reading their stupid
compositions, and many poets singing their poems, and many jugglers
exhibiting their marvels, and many soothsayers giving the meaning of
prodigies, and a thousand rhetoricians twisting lawsuits, and no small number
of traders driving their severaltrades." There you have just that interchange
of insults, that envy and strife, that constantwordy altercationof men with
decadentminds that the writer of the Pastorals deplores. "Asophist," wrote

30. Philostratus, "is put out in an extempore speechby a serious-looking audience
and tardy praise and no clapping." "Theyare all agape," saidDio
Chrysostom, "for the murmur of the crowd.... Like men walking in the dark
they move always in the direction of the clapping and the shouting." Lucian
writes: "If your friends see you breaking down, let them pay the price of the
suppers you give them by stretching out their arms and giving you a chance of
thinking of something to say in the intervals betweenthe rounds of applause."
The ancient world well knew just the kind of false teacherwho was invading
the Church.
Their thirst was for praise, and their criterion was numbers. Epictetus has
some vivid pictures of the sophist talking to his disciples after his
performance. "'Well, what did you think of me today?' 'Upon my life, sir, I
thought you were admirable.' 'What did you think of my best passage?'
'Which was that?' 'Where I describedPan and the Nymphs.' 'Oh, it was
excessivelywelldone.'" "'A much largeraudience today, I think,' says the
sophist. 'Yes, much larger,' responds the disciple. 'Five hundred, I should
guess.''O, nonsense!It could not have been less than a thousand.' 'Why, that
is more than Dio ever had. I wonder why it was? Theyappreciatedwhat I
said, too.''Beauty, sir, canmove a stone.'" These performing sophists were
"the pets of society." Theybecame senators, governors, ambassadors. When
they died monuments were erectedto them, with inscriptions such as, "The
Queen of Cities to the King of Eloquence."
The Greeks were intoxicatedwith the spokenword. Among them, if a man
could speak, his fortune was made. It was againsta backgroundlike that that
the Church was growing up; and it is little wonder that this type of teacher
invaded it. The Church gave him a new area in which to exercise his
meretricious gifts and to gain a tinsel prestige and a not unprofitable
following.
THE CHARACTERISTICS OF THE FALSE TEACHER (1 Timothy 6:3-5
continued)
Here in this passageare setout the characteristicsofthe false teacher.

31. (i) His first characteristic is conceit. His desire is not to display Christ, but to
display himself There are still preachers and teachers who are more
concernedto gain a following for themselves than for Jesus Christ, more
concernedto press their own views than to bring to men the word of God. In a
lecture on his old teacherA. B. Bruce, W. M. Macgregorsaid:"One of our
own Highland ministers tells how he had been puzzled by seeing Bruce again
and againduring lectures take up a scrapof paper, look at it and then
proceed. One day he caughtat the chance of seeing whatthis paper contained,
and discoveredon it an indication of the words:'O, send out thy light and thy
truth,' and thus he realized with awe that into his classroomthe professor
brought the majestyand the hopefulness of worship." The greatteacherdoes
not offer men his own farthing candle of illumination; he offers them the light
and the truth of God.
(ii) His concernis with abstruse and recondite speculations. There is a kind of
Christianity which is more concernedwith argument than with life. To be a
member of a discussioncircle or a Bible study group and spend enjoyable
hours in talk about doctrines does not necessarilymake a Christian. J. S.
Whale in his book Christian Doctrine has certainscathing things to say about
this pleasantintellectualism: "We have as Valentine saidof Thurio, 'an
exchequer of words, but no other treasure.'Instead of putting off our shoes
from our feetbecause the place whereonwe stand is holy ground, we are
taking nice photographs of the Burning Bush from suitable angles:we are
chatting about theories of the Atonement with our feeton the mantelpiece,
instead of kneeling down before the wounds of Christ." As Luther had it: "He
who merely studies the commandments of God (mandata Dei)is not greatly
moved. But he who listens to God commanding (Deum mandantem), how can
he fail to be terrified by majesty so great?" As Melanchthon had it: "To know
Christ is not to speculate about the mode of his Incarnation, but to know his
saving benefits." Gregoryof Nyssa drew a revealing picture of Constantinople
in his day: "Constantinople is full of mechanics and slaves, who are all of
them profound theologians,preaching in the shops and the streets. If you
want a man to change a piece of silver, he informs you wherein the Son differs
from the Father;if you ask the price of a loaf, you are told by way of reply
that the Son is inferior to the Father; and if you enquire whether the bath is

32. ready, the answeris that the Son is made out of nothing." Subtle
argumentation and glib theologicalstatements do not make a Christian. That
kind of thing may well be nothing other than a mode of escape from the
challenge of Christian living.
(iii) The false teacheris a disturber of the peace. He is instinctively
competitive; he is suspicious of all who differ from him; when he cannotwin
in an argument he hurls insults at his opponent's theologicalposition, and
even at his character;in any argument the accentof his voice is bitterness and
not love. He has never learnedto speak the truth in love. The source of his
bitterness is the exaltation of self; for his tendency is to regard any difference
from or any criticism of his views as a personalinsult.
(iv) The false teachercommercializes religion. He is out for profit. He looks on
his teaching and preaching, not as a vocation, but as a career. One thing is
certain--there is no place for careerists inthe ministry of any Church. The
Pastorals are quite clearthat the labourer is worthy of his hire; but the motive
of his work must be public service and not private gain. His passionis, not to
get, but to spend and be spent in the service ofChrist and of his fellow-men.
JOSEPHBENSON
Verses 3-5
1 Timothy 6:3-5. If any man teachotherwise — Than strict, practicalholiness,
in all its branches;and consentnot to wholesome words — υγιαινουσι λογοις,
literally, healing, or healthful words, words that have no taint of falsehood, or
tendency to encourage sin; and the doctrine which is according to godliness —
The sole designand direct tendency of which is to make people godly, and to
promote the glory of God, while it secures the salvationof men; he is proud —
Greek, τετυφωται, puffed up; which is the cause ofhis not consenting to this

33. doctrine; knowing nothing — As he ought to know; but doting — Greek,
νοστων, being sick, or distempered in his mind; about questions — Dotingly
fond of disputes; an evil, but common disease, especiallywhere practice is
forgotten. Such contend earnestlyfor singular phrases and favourite points of
their own; but every thing else, howeverlike the preaching of Christ and his
apostles, is all law and bondage, and carnal reasoning. And strifes of words,
whereofcometh envy — Of the gifts and successofothers;contention for the
pre- eminence. Such disputants seldomlike the prosperity of others, or to be
less esteemedthemselves;railings — βλασφημιαι, evil speakings, againstthose
that differ from them; evil surmisings — Or unjust suspicions easily
entertained againstothers;it not being their way to think wellof those that
hold opinions different from theirs. Perverse disputings —
Carried on contrary to conscience,by men wholly corrupted in their minds,
and destitute of the truth — Of the knowledge of, and faith in, the true
doctrine of the gospel;supposing that gain is godliness — That what promises
the greatestgainis the most worthy of their pursuit; or who reckonwhatever
produces most money to be the best religion. A far more common case than is
usually supposed. From such withdraw thyself — Shun all societywith them.
WILLIAM BURKITT
Verse 3
Observe here, 1. The solemn charge which the Holy Ghost by St. Paul gives to
Timothy, to teachand press these relative duties of servants towards their
masters, with greatzealand affectionate earnestness,These things teachand
exhort: as if our apostle had said, "Theyare duties of greatmoment, therefore
teachand press them earnestly."
Doubtless there is much of the pleasure and will of God in these commands,
and the honour and glory of God is much concernedin them, otherwise the

34. Spirit of Godhad never been so earnestin the pressing of them; the powerof
holiness in nothing discovers itself more conspicuouslythan in the
performance of relative duties: we are no more really than what we are
relatively; relative holiness is the brightest ornament of religion.
Observe, 2. The high characterwhich St. Paul gives of this doctrine, which
urges the practice of these relative duties: he calls what he says and writes
about it, Wholesome words, eventhe words of our Lord Jesus Christ.
Learn thence, That the words written by St. Paul in this and his other epistles,
are the words of our Lord Jesus Christ, that is, words agreeable to his mind
and will, written with an eye to his glory, promoting his honour,
correspondentwith and suitable to his practice when here on earth.
Observe, 3. The odious characterwherewithhe brands those false and
flattering teachers, whichpreached contrary doctrine to what Jesus Christ by
his apostles haddelivered; he charges them with pride, ignorance, envy, strife,
railing, evil surmising, and with supposing that gain was godliness;that is,
their end in professing godliness was this, that they might make gain of it, and
get preferment by it, making use of religion only as a block to take horse:but
to make use of religion in policy, for worldly advantage sake,is the way to be
damned with a vengeance forreligion sake.
Observe lastly, St. Paul's advice to Timothy to withdraw from these men,
From such withdraw thyself; hold no communion with them, maintain no
disputes with them, for they dote about questions, and strive about words.
Note here, from St. Paul bidding Timothy withdraw himself from them, that it
is very evident that he speaks ofpersons who were then in being, the Gnostic
heretics, according to some; the judiazing teachers, in the opinion of others;
that is, they of the circumcision, who taught things which they ought not, for
filthy lucre sake.
Whoeverthey were, St. Paul's admonition to Timothy, to withdraw himself
from such, teaches us that hereticalseducers are to be shunned and avoided,
rather than disputed with, as unfit for our Christian communion, and
common conversation.

35. CALVIN
Verse 3
3If anyone teachethdifferently The word ἑτεροδιδασκαλεῖ, being a
compound, may also, not improperly, be translated, teachethother things Yet
there is no ambiguity as to the meaning; for he condemns all those who do not
agree with this manner of teaching, although they do not openly and avowedly
oppose sound doctrine. It is possible that he who does not profess any wicked
or open error may yet, by endeavoring to insinuate himself by means of silly
babbling, corrupt the doctrine of godliness;for, when there is no progress,
and no edification in the doctrine itself, there is already a departure from the
ordinance of Christ. Now although Paul does not speak ofthe avowed
supporters of wickeddoctrines, but of vain and irreligious teachers, who, by
their ambition or covetousness, disfigure the plain and simple doctrine of
godliness, yet we see with what sharpness and severity he attacks them. Nor
need we wonder at this; for it is almost impossible to tell how much injury is
done by preaching that is hypocritical and altogetherframed for the purposes
of ostentationand of idle display. But who they are that are blamed by him,
appears more clearly from what immediately follows —
And consentethnot to sound words This clause is intended to explain the
former. It frequently happens that such men as are here described, carried
awayby foolishcuriosity, despise everything that is useful and solid, and thus
indulge in wanton freaks, like unruly horses. And what is this but to reject the
sound words of Christ? for they are called“sound” or “healthful,” because
they give health to us, or are fitted to promote it.
And to the doctrine which is according to godliness This has the same
meaning with the former clause;for the “doctrine” will not be consistentwith

36. “godliness,”if it do not instruct us in the fear and worship of God, if it do not
edify our faith, if it do not train us to patience, humility, and all the duties of
that love which we owe to our fellowmen. Whoever, therefore, does not strive
to teachusefully, does not teachas he ought to do; and not only so, but that
doctrine is neither godly nor sound, whatevermay be the brilliancy of its
display, that does not tend to the profit of the hearers.
STEVEN COLE
ReligionFor Fun And Profit (1 Timothy 6:3-5)
RelatedMedia
00:00

37. 00:00
Religious false teachers downthrough the centuries have known something in
common, namely, that religion can be fun and profitable—for them, at least.
They have proved that you can make a goodliving in the religionbusiness.
Some, like ReverendIke, openly flaunt their materialistic greed. His creedis,
“I don’t want pie in the sky when I die; I want cashin the stashhere and
now!” Asked how much his church is worth, Ike replies, “A lot of money. This
is a very successful, prosperous, multimillion-dollar operation, and I’m very

38. happy to saythat.” He also claims not to know his personalsalary, but
explains, “It’s whateverI need.” (Newsweek, Dec.20, 1982.)
Others promoting the so-called“Wordof Faith” teaching or “Health and
Wealth gospel” tellpeople that it’s God’s will for all His people to be
financially successful. Theyquote verses to back up their teaching and flaunt
their own wealthas proof positive. As you know, Jim Bakkeris doing time for
defrauding his constituents and illegally using ministry funds to support his
lavish lifestyle. But many others are still aggressivelypromoting this false and
damaging teaching.
In our day when false teachers abound perhaps more than at any other time
in history, and when, due to the mass media, they have greateraccessto more
people than everbefore, how can you be discerning so as not to be led astray?
How can you distinguish a false teacherfrom a true one?
Paul gives an answerin 1 Timothy 6:3-5. It is not a comprehensive answer, of
course, which would require developing a thorough understanding of the
whole Bible. But it’s an answerthat exposedthe false teachers in Ephesus;
and if they would take heed, it would keepmany unsuspecting people in our
day from falling into false teaching. Paul is saying that ...
Teachers who promote gain rather than godliness are not from God.
Sound doctrine—spiritually healthy doctrine—is not focusedon personal
gain, either for the teacheror the pupil, but on godliness. Ofcourse, godliness
is actually a means of greatgain, as Paul is quick to point out (v. 6). But in
verse 5 Paul is talking about the gain of self-seeking and personalfulfillment.
It is using religionfor selfishends.
Have you ever wonderedhow the cults ensnare so many people? Basically,
they identify unmet felt needs that people have and then offer ways to meet
those needs apart from the living and true God. They usually prey on people
who profess to be Christians, but who are untaught or unstable in their walk
with God. Forexample, in her book, My Turn (excerpted in Newsweek
[10/23/89]), NancyReagantells how she got linked up with astrologerJoan
Quigley. Mrs. Reaganwas upsetover the assassinationattempt on her

39. husband’s life. To calm her fears, she had tried prayer and had talked with
religious leaders, such as Billy Graham and Donn Moomaw (her pastor).
But then one afternoon her friend Merv Griffin mentioned this astrologer,
who claimed that she could have warnedthe Reagansin advance about the
fateful March30th, when the president was shot. Mrs. Reagancalledher and
the astrologerrespondedwith the warmth and compassionthe First Lady
needed. This began many months of counsel, which costMrs. Reagan
dearly—she won’t disclose how much, but just says that “it wasn’tcheap.”
When Mr. Reaganfound out about it, his response was, “Ifit makes you feel
better, go ahead and do it. But be careful. It might look a little odd if it ever
came out.” In other words, the bottom line is not whether it conforms you to
God’s Word of truth, but rather, “How does it make you feel and how does it
look to others?”
What Mrs. Reagandid has been done by millions of professing Christians in
our country. They have not diligently sought the Lord and judged their own
sins in order to grow in godliness. Trials come into their lives and they don’t
know how to deal with them. All they know is that they are not at peace.
Along comes some false teaching that offers them a solution. It mingles
enough Bible to make it sound Christian. They buy into it, never realizing that
they are seeking personalgainor happiness rather than godliness. That’s how
false teachings gainmomentum. So Paul’s teaching here that teachers who
promote gain rather than godliness are not of the Lord is quite relevant in our
day, and we would do well to hearhim closely.
We aren’t sure historically just who these false teachers were. Theycould
have been the Gnostics, who prided themselves on their esoteric “knowledge.”
They may have been “Sophists,” menwho chargedfor giving entertaining,
oratoricallectures. But whoeverthey were, Paulshows four ways that they
promoted gain rather than godliness. These errors apply to the false teachers
of our day.
1. False teacherspromote gain through wrong content.
Note (v. 3), “different doctrine,” “sound words,” “doctrine conforming to
godliness”;(v. 4), “disputes about words”;(v. 5) “the truth.” The content of

40. their teaching was in error. As we have seenin 1 Timothy, doctrine matters
greatly! JonathanEdwards observed, “The ideas and images in men’s minds
are the invisible powers that constantlygovern them.” What you think always
affects how you behave. Satan always begins his attacks through wrong
thinking. Wrong theologyleads to wrong living.
We live in an anti-theologicalday. Some pastors of successfulchurches even
boast, “We’re not into theology!” They emphasize management, methodology,
and technique. They analyze their targetaudience and design church
programs to attractthis demographically-defined swathof the population by
meeting their felt needs. But as seminary professor, James Means, argues,
“Every greatmovement and ministry in Christendom has been fueled—nay,
driven—by theology, not by hot new technologyor MadisonAvenue
technique” (“FocalPoint,” April-June, 1994, p. 8).
You may not even be aware ofit, but you have a theology. If I were to ask how
many of you have read a theologicalbook in the past year (or in your
lifetime), the number would probably be quite small. You may not be able to
articulate your theology, and you may even be bored by the subject. But even
so, you do have a theology, and your theology, to a large extent, determines
your behavior. What you think about God, human nature, sin, salvation,
judgment, and other biblical themes greatlyaffects how you live eachday.
In our day, the prevailing theologyis man-centered, heavily subjective and
relative. By man-centered, I mean that people conceive ofGod as the servant
of mankind. He is not the sovereign, omnipotent, Creator-Godwho fashioned
man for His purpose. Rather, He is a sort of Cosmic Aladdin’s genie who
exists to make man happy. “Do you have problems in your life? Try God! He
will meet all your needs and give you a happy life!” The emphasis is on man’s
needs rather than on God’s glory.
Here’s how this works out in life: You have a guy who has lived a self-
centered, sinful life. Then, personaltragedy strikes. His response is, “How
could a loving God let this happen to me?” He’s saying, “If God exists, He
should be there to serve me and make me happy. It doesn’t matter that God is
sovereignor that I have sinned and deserve His judgment. All that matters is

41. me, and I’m in a jam now, so God, You help me!” God isn’t central; man is.
And that wrong theologydetermines how the personreacts when problems
hit.
MostAmerican theologyis not only man centered, but also subjective and
relative. What I mean is that one’s experience of God takes precedenceover
the objective truth about God. God is not seenas an objective, absolute Being
with certain unchangeable attributes and with absolute moral laws which
stem from His nature. Instead, God is howeveryou experience Him. So
professing Christians say things like, “If you’re into a God who judges sin,
that’s okayfor you. But my God is a God of grace and love.” Personalfeelings
and experience are central, not objective revealedtruth.
Note the two pegs Paul uses to measure sound (“healthy”) theologyby (v. 3):
A. Sound doctrine centers on the Lord Jesus Christ.
Sound doctrine always points to the centrality of Jesus Christ and His
sacrificialdeath on the cross. “ChristJesus as Lord” (2 Cor. 4:5), “Christ is
all” (Col. 3:11), “Christ crucified” (1 Cor. 1:23), “Christ the power of God
and the wisdom of God” (1 Cor. 1:24), “Christ in you, the hope of glory” (Col.
1:27), “everyman complete in Christ” (Col. 1:28)--the centrality and
supremacy of Christ are the themes Paul majored on. Whether he lived or
died, Paul’s goalwas that Christ would be exalted (Phil. 1:20). Sound theology
does not centeron man, but on God and His eternal purpose in Christ.
B. Sound doctrine conforms to godliness.
That is, it is not subjective and relative, it is not “God, howeveryou may
experience Him.” “Godliness,” a dominant theme in the pastoralepistles,
means conductin line with God and His revealedtruth (see Titus 1:1),
especiallyas revealedand taught by the Lord Jesus Christ. Thus whenever
you hear someone promoting man-centeredtheology, where God exists to
please man, and subjective, relativistic theology, beware!They are promoting
gain, not godliness, through wrong content.
2. False teacherspromote gain through wrong motives.

42. Paul doesn’t mince words--he says that these false teachers were motivatedby
conceitor pride (v. 4). They claimed to have knowledge. Theyapparently went
to greatlengths to expound the nuances of various words and to give their
insights on controversialquestions (v. 4). But Paul says that they actedout of
pride and they didn’t understand anything. They loved a following. They
thrived on being up front and displaying their knowledge. Theyprided
themselves on being the experts.
Godly teaching always humbles our pride and exalts the Savior. False
teaching trifles with God and builds up man. Charles Simeon, a godly
Anglican pastor who was usedgreatly by God almost two centuries ago, had
three aims in his preaching: to humble the sinner; to exalt the Savior; and, to
promote holiness. I once sharedthis in a sermon and explained that those
were the things I keepin mind as I prepare sermons. Theyare fairly evident
goals, if you read your Bible. But I was takenaback when severalpeople in
the church who were in full-time ministry criticized those objectives. They
were takenin by the false teaching that says that a main need is to build
everyone’s self-esteem, so they disagreedthat we ought to endeavorto humble
sinners!
This wrong motive of pride is tied up with the man-centered theologyI
mentioned earlier. False teaching starts with man, centers on man, and builds
up man. The reasonit thrives is that because ofour sin, we are all prone to
exalt ourselves againstGodand to acceptany teaching that makes us feel good
(subjective theology)without confronting our sin. We don’t want to be
stripped of our self-reliance, to admit that we are lost and destitute in
ourselves unless God is gracious to us.
But biblical theologystarts with, centers in, and finishes with the cross of
Jesus Christ. And one of the centralfacts of the cross is “that no one should
boast” (Eph. 2:8-9; 1 Cor. 1:18-31). When we understand the cross, we can
only sing with gratitude (Augustus Toplady, “Rock ofAges”),
Nothing in my hand I bring,
Simply to Thy cross I cling;

43. Naked, come to Thee for dress,
Helpless, look to Thee for grace;
Foul, I to the fountain fly,
Washme, Savioror I die!
Thus Paul shows that false teachers promote gain through wrong content and
wrong motives.
3. False teacherspromote gain through wrong conduct.
Out of the man’s wrong contentand wrong motives develop wrong conduct.
Pride leads to envy, strife, abusive language, evil suspicions, and constant
friction betweenmen of depraved mind and deprived of the truth (vv. 4-5a).
Their conduct stems from their motives. Since they promote themselves more
than Christ, they’re competitive towards others. They put down others to
build themselves up. They are always engagedin controversy. But their goalis
not to build Christ’s kingdom, but their own. So they dominate people
through intimidation rather than shepherd people out of love.
We would be in error to conclude from verses 4 & 5 that all theological
controversyis wrong. Some people are so prone to peace and unity that they
condemn as divisive anyone who refutes theologicalerroror exposes false
teachers. Butthat is precisely what Paul is forcefully doing here: refuting
error by exposing and attacking these false teachers. Some say, “We shouldn’t
criticize or bring up negatives;just teachright doctrine.” But that’s naive and
not biblical. Paul not only attackedfalse teaching and false teachers (as he
does here); he also told Titus (1:9) that a qualification for elders is that they
“be able both to exhort in sound doctrine and to refute those who contradict.”
But the difference betweenPaul’s methods and those of the false teachers was
that Paul’s attacks onfalse doctrine were not selfishly oriented, whereas the
false teachers were promoting self. Paul wasn’t out for personalglory, to
make a name for himself (1 Thess. 2:6). He wanted God’s truth, especiallyas
centeredon the gospel, to prevail. With John the Baptist, Paul could honestly
say, “[Jesus]must increase, but I must decrease” (John3:30). He had the good

44. of God’s flock in mind whenever he confronted error. Wheneverwe must
correcterror or confront false teachers, we needto examine our hearts and
root out any pride or self-seeking to make sure that our goalis biblical love.
Thus false teachers promote gain through wrong content, wrong motives, and
wrong conduct. Finally,
4. False teacherspromote gain through wrong values.
“Who suppose that godliness is a means of gain” (v. 5). (The KJV “gainis
godliness” is not correct.)That is, these false teachers were living for material
values above spiritual values. They treasured the temporal above the eternal.
Instead of being prophets of God, they were making a profit on God.
Apparently, they were living well off their “ministries” and flaunting it.
As Paul has just shown(1 Tim. 5:17-18), it is proper for a man who labors in
the gospelto be adequatelysupported by the gospel. But it is wrong for a man
in the ministry to focus on money or to profiteer from the gospel. I’ve always
been bothered by pastors who negotiate their salarypackageas those in the
world do, or who move to a new church because ofa pay increase, unless their
current situation does not provide for their needs (not their wants!). It is
wrong for all believers to live for this world’s values. “Do not love the world,
nor the things in the world. If anyone loves the world, the love of the Father is
not in him” (1 John 2:15).
In This Was John Calvin (Baker, pp. 164-165)Thea Van Halsema tells the
story of Cardinal Sadolet, a high-ranking RomanCatholic official who had
tried to coaxGeneva back to Rome, who passedincognito through Geneva. He
wanted to have a look at the famous Protestantreformer. He stoodamazed in
front of the simple house on Canon Street. Did the famous Calvin live in this
little place? He knocked. Calvinhimself, in a plain black robe, answeredthe
door. Sadoletwas dumbfounded. Where were the servants who should have
been scurrying about to do their master’s bidding? Even the bishops of Rome
in that day lived in mansions surrounded by wealth and servants.
Archbishops and cardinals lived in palaces like kings. And here was the most
famous man in the whole ProtestantChurch, in a little dark house, answering
his owndoor.

45. Pope Pius IV said of John Calvin when he died, “The strength of that heretic
came from the fact that money was nothing to him.” In the Church of Rome
at that time, such an attitude was unheard of (ibid., p. 164). Quite often, you
can spot a false teacherby his wrong values. If he is living for the things of
this world, it should send up a red flag.
Conclusion
Thus Paul is saying that teachers who promote gain rather an godliness are
not from the Lord. They may do it through wrong content, wrong motives,
wrong conduct, or wrong values. But in one form or another, they are saying
that you should pursue personalgain, not godliness.
There are many false teachers and many forms of false teaching in our day.
One widespreadheresygoes by different names: “the health and wealth
gospel,” “the word-faith teaching,” “name it and claim it,” or, “positive
confession.”Hank Hanegraaffof the Christian ResearchInstitute says that it
may be the greatestthreatto the church from within (Christian Research
Journal, Winter/Spring, 1990, p. 31). I would contend that psychologyis by
far the greatestthreatto the church from within, but the word-faith teaching
is certainly dangerous and not sound doctrine.
The main messagegoeslike this: Godwills your prosperity and health. All
poverty and sicknesscome from the devil. If you are not wealthy or if you are
sick, it’s because you have not made a positive confessionoffaith. When we
speak a word in faith, it must come to pass. Since God has promised to answer
the prayer of faith, we canvirtually command God and He will do it,
especiallywith regard to physical healing or material prosperity, which are
His will.
I don’t have time to go into the details of how these false teachers twistthe
Scriptures. But the heart of their error stems from a man-centeredtheology.
God exists to make everyone be happy and feel good. And man cancontrol
God. If you simply ask in faith, God must do it, because He’s promised (so
they say). They deny what the Bible plainly teaches, thatGod uses sickness,
suffering, and poverty in the lives of some of His most faithful saints. And they
make everything dependent on man, because faith, not the sovereignGod, is

46. the key. I’ve heard of people who hold this teaching telling dying Christians
that if they just had faith, God would heal them. That’s not only cruel; it’s
hypocritical. I’ve yet to see any 200 year-oldproponents of this teaching! It’s
emphasis is on personalgain, not godliness.
There are many people who claim to be Christians, but they are simply using
God for personal gain. As long as God treats them well, as long as they feel
good, as long as life is reasonablycomfortable, they come to church and live as
Christians. But they aren’t judging their sins by Scripture and seeking to
grow in godliness. And as soonas some tragedy or trial hits, they fall away.
The problem is, God was never centralin their lives. They weren’t seeking
Him and submitting to Jesus as Lord. Rather, God was a convenient means to
achieve their goalof personalhappiness and success. But selfwas at the center
of their lives.
Maybe you’re wondering, “Doesn’tGod promise to meet our needs?” The
answeris a conditional “yes”:“Seek firstHis kingdom and righteousness, and
all these things will be added unto you” (Matt. 6:33). If you’re seeking first
personalhappiness or gain, then you’re deluded if you think you’re following
Jesus. You’re just into religion for fun and profit. We should submit to Him
and obey Him because He is the living Lord who gave Himself for our sins.
Whether we enjoy a relatively trouble-free life or go through terrible
suffering, we persevere because we know that He alone is the living and true
God. May we all be on guard againstall teaching promoting gain, and may we
commit ourselves to enthrone Jesus as Lord and to grow in godliness.
THOMAS CONSTABLE'
Verses 3-5

47. The apostle first described the actions of the false teachers ( 1 Timothy 6:3),
then their attitudes ( 1 Timothy 6:4 a), third the fruits of their ministry ( 1
Timothy 6:4-5 a), and then their motivation ( 1 Timothy 6:5 b).
"As Paul elaborates onthose who teach"otherwise,"it becomes clearagain
(cf. 1 Timothy 1:4-7) that the problem is not simply that of disseminating
factual errors;it is rather a failure of the heart that involves willful rejection
of God"s pattern." [Note:Idem, The Letters . . ., p393.]
The false teachers in Ephesus advocateddoctrine that was different from
what Scripture and the apostles taught. They disagreedwith the teachings of
the Lord Jesus Christthat fosteredspiritual health in those who heard and
responded to them. Furthermore they rejectedthe doctrine that conforms to
and results in godly behavior. These are three overlapping rather than
distinctly different activities (cf. 1 Timothy 1:3; 1 Timothy 1:10; 1 Timothy
3:16; 1 Timothy 4:6-10). [Note:See Lpez.]
"When it meets "the truth," the corrupted mind sees andseeks only
objections;when it meets what differs from this truth, it sees andseeks
reasons foraccepting this difference." [Note:Lenski, p702.]
"It is little wonder, then, that missionaries ofthe cults are so resistant to the
gospeland so easilyangeredin theologicaldiscussions. Corruptminds and
argumentative dispositions go hand in hand with opposition to the gospel."
[Note:Towner, 1-2Timothy . . ., p136.]
Paul regardedthese men as guilty and blameworthy. Their error was not an
innocent one. It sprang from improper attitudes: the desires to exalt selfand
to hoard money selfishly. Compare the religious hucksters of the Ephesian

48. Artemis cult as Luke described them in Acts 19:23-41. Suchmotivation
demonstrated that they really understood "nothing" (i.e, nothing that is truly
important). This motivation also led them to an unhealthy interest in
controversies andterminology. This interest produced all kinds of selfish and
divisive behavior and attitudes that were not loving and edifying ( 1 Timothy
1:5). Contrast the elder qualifications in 1 Timothy 3:2-12.
"Conceitleads to a love for controversy. Those who think well of their
opinions like to argue them with others. Where a spirit of controversyseizes a
family, office, or institution, all sense ofcommunity and unity disappears."
[Note:Lea, p170. Cf. Earle, p383.]
"The indictment of the false teachers is thus multifaceted and comprehensive.
It begins with their heterodoxy ( 1 Timothy 6:3), which is correlatedwith their
conceitand lack of realunderstanding ( 1 Timothy 6:4 a) and their sick
interest in mere controversy( 1 Timothy 6:4 b), turns to the maliciousness of
life that flows from these characteristics(1 Timothy 6:4 c), roots all this in
spiritual blindness ( 1 Timothy 6:5 a), and ends with their materialistic
motivation ( 1 Timothy 6:5 b). It is given to warn the church againstsuch
people. [Note: Knight, The Pastoral. . ., pp252-53.]
The Love of Money
Sermon by J. Ligon Duncan on October17, 2004
1 Timothy 6:3-10
DownloadAudio

49. The Lord’s Day
Morning
October17, 2004
I Timothy 6:3-10
“The Love of Money”
Dr. J. Ligon Duncan
III
I invite you to turn with me to I Timothy, chaptersix. As
you do so, I’d just draw your attention to how the wonderful text from the
Psalms that we’ve just heard the choir sing ties in with not only our Callto
Worship and our opening song of praise to God, but how it ties into the
passage
we’re going to read now in terms of trusting in God’s providence for His
provision, and also with our Stewardship theme and the discussionon the
back
panel of the worship bulletin. The Lord just brought all those things together
for us in our worship today, and wellworth our further reflection on this
Lord’s Day.
We have been in I Timothy for a number of weeksnow.
We’re studying not only through I Timothy, but through all the Pastoral
Epistles, that is, I and II Timothy and Titus. Those PastoralEpistles have
been calledthat for a number of years because they are epistles, orletters,

50. from Paul, who was a veteran pastor, an apostle, elder, missionary and church
planter, writing to two young men who were church planting in local
congregations, andwriting to them about pastoralmatters relating to life in
the localcongregation. We have stressedoverand over that Paul is interested
to set forth healthy priorities for life and ministry togetherin the local
church, and he is not merely giving advice–althoughhe has much wisdom,
and
every right to give wise counseland advice–he is actually setting down the
pattern and the principles for ministry and life togetherin the local
congregationthat he expects to see workedout in every Christian
congregation
in every time and in every culture. And so what Paul is saying to these
congregations in Asia Minor in the first century is equally relevant and
applicable to us today.
Now, we’re back to a passagein which Paul is
speaking about false teaching again. Last week he had a word in I Timothy
6:1-2
to those in this localChristian congregationwho were slaves. Theywere
actually in the condition of slavery, and he had some words to them about
what
their attitude was to be in life. And we discoveredas we studied it last week
that there are principles for us to learn, even out of his instructions to those
who are enslaved in this localcongregation. Butnow he’s back to false
teachers

51. again, here in verses three through ten. Well, this must be about the fifth
time already in this book that Paul has spokenabout false teaching. He must
think that it’s a fairly significant issue to return to it over and over like he
does.
Let me just outline the passagefor you before we
read it, so that you canfollow along his train of thought.
If you look at verse three, Paul says some words
that characterize sounddoctrine. He wants to give you a description of what
sound doctrine looks like, so that you can know sound doctrine when you see
it,
and you candistinguish it from false doctrine when you see it.
Secondly, if you look at verse four, he speaks about
the characteroffalse teachers. He explains two or three characteristics that
are evident in the lives and in the habits of those who are false teachers.
Then, if you look againat verses four and five, he
will describe for you the results of false teaching. In verse one he will have
told you that sound teaching leads to godliness. Well, in verses four and five
he’ll show you what false teaching leads to.
Fourthly, in verse five he will tell you one of the
key motivations for false teachers. And my friends, I think one of the things
that’s going to strike you today is how contemporary Paul’s words are. Paul is
speaking about one of the key motivations for false teachers in his day; well,
you will not have to look far to see this same motivation for false teachers in

52. our day.
Fifthly, if you look at verse six, he will contrast
the gain, the realgain that Christian godliness brings, with the false gain
that false prophets suggest.
And then finally, in verses seventhrough ten you’ll
see a sixth thing, a sixth principle that he sets forth, and it’s really a
warning. It’s a warning againstwhat he says is one of the key roots of evil in
the lives of men and women.
So, having outlined somewhatof the direction of
Paul’s argument, let’s look to the Lord in prayer before we read His word and
hear it proclaimed, and ask for His help to understand it, and the Spirit’s aid
in applying it. Let’s pray.
Lord God, this is Your word. We know that Your
word is truth, and that You mean it to be a lamp to our feetand a light to our
way. By the grace ofYour Holy Spirit, we pray that we would understand it;
but
more than that, we pray that our hearts would be conformed to it; that our
lives
would be changedby it; that we would begin to live the truth; and that we
would
show the truth in the way that we live. We ask these things in Jesus’name.
Amen.
Let’s hear God’s word in I Timothy, chapter six, verse
three.

53. “If any one advocates a different doctrine, and does not agree with sound
words,
those of our Lord Jesus Christ, and with the doctrine conforming to godliness,
he is conceitedand understands nothing; but he has a morbid interest in
controversialquestions an disputes about words, out of which arise envy,
strife, abusive language, evilsuspicions, and constantfriction betweenmen of
depraved mind and deprived of the truth, who suppose that godliness is a
means
of gain. But godliness actuallyis a means of greatgain, when accompaniedby
contentment. For we have brought nothing into the3 world, so we cannot take
anything out of it either. And if we have food and covering, with these we
shall be content. But those who want to getrich fall into temptation and a
snare and many foolish and harmful desires which plunge men into ruin and
destruction. Forthe love of money is a rootof all sorts of evil, and some by
longing for it have wandered awayfrom the faith, and pierced themselves
with
many a pang.”
Amen, and thus ends this reading
of God’s holy, inspired and inerrant word. May He add His blessing to it.
Well, here we have Paul againspeaking about false
teachers, but once again we’re not off the hook. If we say, “Well, I’m not a
teacher, so I can’t be a false teacher,” or“I’m not a false teachereven though

54. I’m a Sunday Schoolteacher,”or“I’m not a false teacher, eventhough I’m a
minister, so this passagedoesn’tapply to me”…well, you’re going to be
disappointed, because this passagedoes apply to us. Even as Paul gives us as
Christians who sit under the teaching and preaching of God’s word (or who
should, regularly); even as he gives us instructions about how to distinguish
true teaching from false teaching, because we wantto be nourished by the
truth,
not led astray by falsehood, and so his words are applicable to all of us in
that way; even so, as he talks about one of the greatcharacteristics ofthese
false teachers, he touches on a very important issue for the Christian life:
our attitude towards material wealth. What a timely thing for us to be
thinking
about, even as we approachthe seasonofthe year when we think about our
commitment to the church’s work and worship; and more broadly, to our
stewardshipof everything that God has given us, since He is the ownerof all
things and everything we have we’ve receivedfrom Him.
I. Sound doctrine is in accord
with Jesus’teaching, apostolic,and leads to holiness.
Paul begins by telling us what sound doctrine
looks like, in order that we will be able to distinguish betweensound teaching
and false teaching. Look at what he says in verse three:
“If anyone advocates a different doctrine and does not
agree with sound words, those of our Lord Jesus Christ, and with the doctrine