1Tim 1:20 Blasphemers Delivered to Satan
bcbs...@yahoo.com
1Tim 1:20 of whom are Hymenaeus and Alexander, whom I delivered to Satan that they may learn not to blaspheme.
It is unclear who Alexander but we do know of Hymenaeus as he's mentioned in 2Tim 2:16-18 "But shun profane and idle babblings, for they will increase to more ungodliness. And their message will spread like cancer. Hymenaeus and Philetus are of this sort, who have strayed concerning the truth, saying that the resurrection is already past; and they overthrow the faith of some."
These kind of people, not being willing to listen to Biblical instruction, Paul hands over to Satan - which I take to mean in a similar sense as God handed Job over to Satan, though for a different purpose. And even as God had in a very limited sense handed Paul over to Satan at one point as he said, "a thorn in the flesh was given to me, a messenger of Satan to buffet me, lest I be exalted above measure." 2Cor 12:7, though I take it in a much more severe sense in the case of Hymenaeus and Alexander, much as Jesus also spoke of Jezebel of Rev 2:20-22"By her teaching she misleads my servants into sexual immorality and the eating of food sacrificed to idols. I have given her time to repent of her immorality, but she is unwilling. So I will cast her on a bed of suffering, and I will make those who commit adultery with her suffer intensely, unless they repent of her ways."
But what was so upsetting about the doctrine of Hymenaeus? I comment upon 2Tim 2:16-18 in this way:
If we are to avoid profane and idle babblings how do we identify them? Of course we have the example here in 2Tim 2 of the notion that the resurrection has already taken place, and thus there are no doubt a number of eschatological viewpoints which constitute such idle babblings. But as a general principle we may evaluate particular notions as to whether
1. they promote godliness, purity of heart, a good conscience and a sincere faith.
2. they are otherwise wholesome and edifying doctrines conformed to what the Bible clearly states. And by "clearly states" I mean that they are not overly dependent upon the meaning of particular words, but rather just as I've cross referenced Paul's command here to other parts of the Bible, so also such ideas are clear either in the context or otherwise throughout the Bible. Else people end up arguing over words to defend their particular point of view.
As such this places limits on Bible study discussions and Bible study applications. But in doing so it results in more edifying studies which result in godly applications. It may not satisfy everyone's idle curiosity. The Bible doesn't clearly answer all the questions we might want to ask of it. But it gives sufficient information to live the Christian life. If we find we have time for idle babblings, then maybe we're too idle.
2Tim 2:17 "And their message will spread like cancer. Hymenaeus and Philetus are of this sort"Elsewhere false teachings are illustrated as leaven. Concerning the false teachings of the group of the circumcision, for example, Paul writes to the Galatians, "You ran well. Who hindered you from obeying the truth? This persuasion does not come from Him who calls you. A little leaven leavens the whole lump." Gal 5:7-9 So also concerning the false teachings of the religious elite of Jesus' day, Then Jesus said to them, "Take heed and beware of the leaven of the Pharisees and the Sadducees." Matt 16:6
What's characteristic of leaven or cancer is its ability to become widespread. So also weeds grow quickly, but trees take time. Why is it that false doctrines tend to spread more quickly and are more readily accepted than the truth? I think it's simply because they pander to people's sinful human nature. You take Islam for example, if I may be so bold. Why has Islam become widespread? Among the many reasons, one reason which is measurably apparent today is because it panders to people's hatreds, even their violent passions, and for some - even among suicide bombers - their sexual passions as well. But realize that even among the Christian community false doctrines arise which play on people's sinful nature. For example concerning hating one another there are often such divisive doctrines arises giving an illegitimate basis for one Christian hating another. Even back in the time of the Reformation, Christians were murdering Christians over such doctrines as infant baptism and particular nuances concerning the doctrine of the Trinity which are not clear in the Bible.
Whatever is popular is seldom completely correct, because things often become popular because they cater to people's sinful nature. This is a warning also to churches which place an emphasis on "growth" in contrast to edification. Easy enough to achieve "growth" by planting some weeds, some leaven, some cancer. Edification however is a different matter. The truth is straight and narrow and difficult, and not many travel there.
2Tim 2:18 "who have strayed concerning the truth, saying that the resurrection is already past; and they overthrow the faith of some."First of all, how could they have possibly convinced people that the resurrection had already past? Afterall it's supposed to be a very visible event.
"For the Lord Himself will descend from heaven with a shout, with the voice of an archangel, and with the trumpet of God. And the dead in Christ will rise first. Then we who are alive and remain shall be caught up together with them in the clouds to meet the Lord in the air. And thus we shall always be with the Lord." 1Thess 4:16,17
Secondly it's supposed to be a physical resurrection. Just as Jesus was raised and his body was missing from the grave, so also after the resurrection if you were to dig up the Christian's grave you wouldn't find their body. Thus was Paul's point in 1Cor 15:16 "For if the dead do not rise, then Christ is not risen." And much of that chapter is devoted to the physical nature of the resurrection.
And in fact this is where these false teachers had gone astray. They believed only in a "spiritual" resurrection, not a physical one. In fact this is a belief held by some Christians today in which what constitutes "the resurrection" is simply the idea that when a Christian dies he goes to heaven while denying there be a physical resurrection to come. Thus the false teachers could have said that the "resurrection" has occurred but it was spiritual and so no one noticed it.
Much as they were mistaken, why was this such an abhorrent idea that Paul calls it a cancer and that it overthrows the faith of some. John takes note of a similar heresy in 1John 4:3 "every spirit that does not confess that Jesus Christ has come in the flesh is not of God. And this is the spirit of the Antichrist, which you have heard was coming, and is now already in the world." In this case, known as Docetism, there is a denial of the physical nature of Christ in his incarnation. Both of these false teachings give a flavor of the gnostic influences trying to infiltrate the early church. Their basic tenet being that anything physical is inherently evil and therefore Christ could not have been a physical man, nor the resurrection physical if it were to bring us to completion.
I think the basic reason why these doctrines are so abhorrent is because of the implications their basic tenet leads to. They could argue that, as Paul says, "if the dead do not rise, then Christ is not risen. And if Christ is not risen, your faith is futile; you are still in your sins!" 1Cor 15:16,17 So also if Christ hadn't come in the flesh, then neither could he have died for our sins. Thus their basic tenet destoys the faith which Paul preached saying, "What I received I passed on to you as of first importance: that Christ died for our sins according to the Scriptures, that he was buried, that he was raised on the third day according to the Scriptures." 1Cor 15:3,4