Tertullian — Commentary on Scripture

Drink no longer water, but use a little wine for thy stomach's sake and thine often infirmities.

Whether, moreover, the apostle had any acquaintance with xerophagies-(the apostle) who had repeatedly practised greater rigours, "hunger, and thirst, and fists many," who had forbidden "drunkennesses and revellings" -we have a sufficient evidence even from the case of his disciple Timotheus; whom when he admonishes, "for the sake of his stomach and constant weaknesses," to use "a little wine," from which he was abstaining not from rule, but from devotion-else the custom would rather have been beneficial to his stomach-by this very fact he has advised abstinence from wine as "worthy of God," which, on a ground of necessity, he has dissuaded.

1 Timothy 6:3

If any man teach otherwise, and consent not to wholesome words, even the words of our Lord Jesus Christ, and to the doctrine which is according to godliness;

I might be thought to have laid down this position to remedy distrust in my case, or from a desire of entering on the contest in some other way, were there not reasons on my side, especially this, that our faith owes deference to the apostle, who forbids us to enter on "questions," or to lend our ears to new-fangled statements, or to consort with a heretic "after the first and second admonition," not, (be it observed, ) after discussion.

1 Timothy 6:4-5

He is proud, knowing nothing, but doting about questions and strifes of words, whereof cometh envy, strife, railings, evil surmisings,

The apostle forbids us to enter into hypothetical questions, or to lend our ears to newfangled statements or to consort with a heretic “after the first and second admonitions.” We do not enter into these discussions. Discussion has been inhibited in this way by designating admonition as the purpose of dealing with a heretic. The first reason, too, is because he is not a Christian. The instruction is given in order that he might not, after the manner of a Christian, seem to require correction again and again and “before two or three witnesses.” The impression could be created that he ought to be corrected, for the very reason that he is not to be disputed with. The second reason is that a controversy over the Scriptures can, clearly, produce no other effect than to upset either the stomach or the brain.

1 Timothy 6:8

And having food and raiment let us be therewith content.

On the other hand, this worldly concupiscence (to which I referred) has, as its causes, glory, cupidity, ambition, want of sufficiency; through which causes it trumps up the "necessity" for marrying,-promising itself, forsooth, heavenly things in return-to lord it, (namely,) in another's family; to roost on another's wealth; to extort splendour from another's store to lavish expenditure which you do not feel! Far be all this from believers, who have no care about maintenance, unless it be that we distrust the promises of God, and (His) care and providence, who clothes with such grace the lilies of the field; who, without any labour on their part, feeds the fowls of the heaven; who prohibits care to be taken about to-morrow's food and clothing, promising that He knows what is needful for each of His servants-not indeed ponderous necklaces, not burdensome garments, not Gallic mules nor German bearers, which all add lustre to the glory of nuptials; but "sufficiency," which is suitable to moderation and modesty, Presume, I pray you, that you have need of nothing if you "attend upon the L…

On the other hand, this worldly concupiscence (to which I referred) has, as its causes, glory, cupidity, ambition, want of sufficiency; through which causes it trumps up the "necessity" for marrying,-promising itself, forsooth, heavenly things in return-to lord it, (namely,) in another's family; to roost on another's wealth; to extort splendour from another's store to lavish expenditure which you do not feel! Far be all this from believers, who have no care about maintenance, unless it be that we distrust the promises of God, and (His) care and providence, who clothes with such grace the lilies of the field; who, without any labour on their part, feeds the fowls of the heaven; who prohibits care to be taken about to-morrow's food and clothing, promising that He knows what is needful for each of His servants-not indeed ponderous necklaces, not burdensome garments, not Gallic mules nor German bearers, which all add lustre to the glory of nuptials; but "sufficiency," which is suitable to moderation and modesty, Presume, I pray you, that you have need of nothing if you "attend upon the Lord; " nay, that you have all things, if you have the Lord, whose are all things.

1 Timothy 6:10 · 2 passages

For the love of money is the root of all evil: which while some coveted after, they have erred from the faith, and pierced themselves through with many sorrows.

Of that, therefore, which we have not the smallest need to seek after, because the Lord did not seek after it either, we ought to endure without heart-sickness the cutting down or taking away. "Covetousness," the Spirit of the Lord has through the apostle pronounced "a root of all evils." Let us not interpret that covetousness as consisting merely in the concupiscence of what is another's: for even what seems ours is another's; for nothing is ours, since all things are God's, whose are we also ourselves.

If we think over the rest of faults, tracing them from their generations, let us begin with covetousness, "a root of all evils," wherewith, indeed, some having been ensnared, "have suffered shipwreck about faith.

1 Timothy 6:12

Fight the good fight of faith, lay hold on eternal life, whereunto thou art also called, and hast professed a good profession before many witnesses.

In like manner, O blessed, consider whatever is hard in your present situation as an exercise of your powers of mind and body. You are about to enter a noble contest in which the living God acts the part of superintendent and the Holy Spirit is your trainer, a contest whose crown is eternity, whose prize is angelic nature, citizenship in heaven for ever and ever.

1 Timothy 6:13

I give thee charge in the sight of God, who quickeneth all things, and before Christ Jesus, who before Pontius Pilate witnessed a good confession;

What is this deposit? Is it so secret as to be supposed to characterize a new doctrine? or is it a part of that charge of which he says, "This charge I commit unto thee, son Timothy? " and also of that precept of which he says, "I charge thee in the sight of God, who quickeneth all things, and before Jesus Christ who witnessed a good confession under Pontius Pilate, that thou keep this commandment? " Now, what is (this) commandment and what is (this) charge? From the preceding and the succeeding contexts, it will be manifest that there is no mysterious hint darkly suggested in this expression about (some) far-fetched doctrine, but that a warning is rather given against receiving any other (doctrine) than that which Timothy had heard from himself, as I take it publicly: "Before many witnesses" is his phrase.

1 Timothy 6:14

That thou keep this commandment without spot, unrebukeable, until the appearing of our Lord Jesus Christ:

Similarly, concerning Onesiphorus, does he also write to Timothy: "The Lord grant unto him that he may find mercy in that day; " unto which day and time he charges Timothy himself "to keep what had been committed to his care, without spot, unrebukable, until the appearing of the Lord Jesus Christ: which in His times He shall show, who is the blessed and only Potentate, the King of kings and Lord of lords," speaking of (Him as) God It is to these same times that Peter in the Acts refers, when he says: "Repent ye therefore, and be converted, that your sins may be blotted out, when the times of refreshing shall come from the presence of the Lord; and He shall send Jesus Christ, which before was preached unto you: whom the heaven must receive until the times of restitution of all things, which God hath spoken by the mouth of His holy prophets.

1 Timothy 6:16 · 4 passages

Who only hath immortality, dwelling in the light which no man can approach unto; whom no man hath seen, nor can see: to whom be honour and power everlasting. Amen.

There is a certain emphatic saying by John, “No man has seen God at any time”; meaning, of course, at any previous time. But he has indeed taken away all question of time, by saying that God has never been seen. The apostle confirms this statement. For, speaking of God, he says, “Whom no man has seen, nor can see,” because the man indeed would die who should see him. But the very same apostles testify that they had both seen and “handled” Christ. Now, if Christ is himself both the Father and the Son, how can he be both the Visible and the Invisible?… It is evident that he was always seen from the beginning, who became visible in the end; and that he, on the contrary, was not seen in the end who had never been visible from the beginning; and that accordingly there are two—the Visible and the Invisible. It was the Son, therefore, who was always seen.… For the Father acts by mind and thought, while the Son, who is in the Father’s mind and thought, gives effect and form to what he sees.

What, again, if He was One who was "crowned with glory and honour," and He Another by whom He was so crowned, -the Son, in fact, by the Father? Moreover, how comes it to pass, that the Almighty Invisible God, "whom no man hath seen nor can see; He who dwelleth in light unapproachable; " "He who dwelleth not in temples made with hands; " "from before whose sight the earth trembles, and the mountains melt like wax; " who holdeth the whole world in His hand "like a nest; " "whose throne is heaven, and earth His footstool; " in whom is every place, but Himself is in no place; who is the utmost bound of the universe;-how happens it, I say, that He (who, though) the Most High, should yet have walked in paradise towards the cool of the evening, in quest of Adam; and should have shut up the ark after Noah had entered it; and at Abraham's tent should have refreshed Himself under an oak; and have called to Moses out of the burning bush; and have appeared as "the fourth" in the furnace of the Babylonian monarch (although He is there called the Son of man),-unless all these events had happened a…

What, again, if He was One who was "crowned with glory and honour," and He Another by whom He was so crowned, -the Son, in fact, by the Father? Moreover, how comes it to pass, that the Almighty Invisible God, "whom no man hath seen nor can see; He who dwelleth in light unapproachable; " "He who dwelleth not in temples made with hands; " "from before whose sight the earth trembles, and the mountains melt like wax; " who holdeth the whole world in His hand "like a nest; " "whose throne is heaven, and earth His footstool; " in whom is every place, but Himself is in no place; who is the utmost bound of the universe;-how happens it, I say, that He (who, though) the Most High, should yet have walked in paradise towards the cool of the evening, in quest of Adam; and should have shut up the ark after Noah had entered it; and at Abraham's tent should have refreshed Himself under an oak; and have called to Moses out of the burning bush; and have appeared as "the fourth" in the furnace of the Babylonian monarch (although He is there called the Son of man),-unless all these events had happened as an image, as a mirror, as an enigma (of the future incarnation)? Surely even these things could not have been believed even of the Son of God, unless they had been given us in the Scriptures; possibly also they could not have been believed of the Father, even if they had been given in the Scriptures, since these men bring Him down into Mary's womb, and set Him before Pilate's judgment-seat, and bury Him in the sepulchre of Joseph.

The apostle confirms this statement; for, speaking of God, he says, "Whom no man hath seen, nor can see; " because the man indeed would die who should see Him.

Of the Father, however, he says to Timothy: "Whom none among men hath seen, nor indeed can see; "and he accumulates the description in still ampler terms: "Who only hath immortality, and dwelleth in the light which no man can approach unto." It was of Him, too, that he had said in a previous passage: "Now unto the King eternal, immortal, invisible, to the only God; " so that we might apply even the contrary qualities to the Son Himself-mortality, accessibility-of whom the apostle testifies that "He died according to the Scriptures," and that "He was seen by himself last of all," -by means, of course, of the light which was accessible, although it was not without imperilling his sight that he experienced that light.

1 Timothy 6:20 · 2 passages

O Timothy, keep that which is committed to thy trust, avoiding profane and vain babblings, and oppositions of science falsely so called:

Nothing that was proclaimed before many witnesses could be kept secret. Nor can they [the Gnostic heretics] interpret as evidence of some hidden gospel Paul’s desire that Timothy should entrust “these things to faithful men, fit to teach others.” “These things” meant the things of which he was then writing. To refer to things hidden in their minds he would have said “those,” as of something absent, not “these.”

But here is, as we have said, the same madness, in their allowing indeed that the apostles were ignorant of nothing, and preached not any (doctrines) which contradicted one another, but at the same time insisting that they did not reveal all to all men, for that they proclaimed some openly and to all the world, whilst they disclosed others (only) in secret and to a few, because Paul addressed even this expression to Timothy: "O Timothy, guard that which is entrusted to thee; " and again: "That good thing which was committed unto thee keep.

2 Corinthians 1:3 · 2 passages

Blessed be God, even the Father of our Lord Jesus Christ, the Father of mercies, and the God of all comfort;

Now, if the title of Father may be claimed for (Marcion's) sterile god, how much more for the Creator? To none other than Him is it suitable, who is also "the Father of mercies," and (in the prophets) has been described as "full of compassion, and gracious, and plenteous in mercy.

If, owing to the fault of human error, the word God has become a common name (since in the world there are said and believed to be "gods many" ), yet "the blessed God," (who is "the Father) of our Lord Jesus Christ," will be understood to be no other God than the Creator, who both blessed all things (that He had made), as you find in Genesis, and is Himself "blessed by all things," as Daniel tells us.

2 Corinthians 1:8

For we would not, brethren, have you ignorant of our trouble which came to us in Asia, that we were pressed out of measure, above strength, insomuch that we despaired even of life:

"I die daily," (says he); that is, undoubtedly, in the perils of the body, in which "he even fought with beasts at Ephesus," -even with those beasts which caused him such peril and trouble in Asia, to which he alludes in his second epistle to the same church of Corinth: "For we would not, brethren, have you ignorant of our trouble which came to us in Asia, that we were pressed above measure, above strength, insomuch that we despaired even of life." Now, if I mistake not, he enumerates all these particulars in order that in his unwillingness to have his conflicts in the flesh supposed to be useless, he may induce an unfaltering belief in the resurrection of the flesh.

2 Corinthians 1:21

Now he which stablisheth us with you in Christ, and hath anointed us, is God;

But if repentance is a thing human, its baptism must necessarily be of the same nature: else, if it had been celestial, it would have given both the Holy Spirit and remission of sins. But none either pardons sins or freely grants the Spirit save God only. Even the Lord Himself said that the Spirit would not descend on any other condition, but that He should first ascend to the Father.

2 Corinthians 1:22

Who hath also sealed us, and given the earnest of the Spirit in our hearts.

What shall we say then? Has not the flesh even now (in this life) the spirit by faith? so that the question still remains to be asked, how it is that the animate (or natural) body can be said to be sown? Surely the flesh has received even here the spirit-but only its "earnest; " whereas of the soul (it has received) not the earnest, but the full possession.