Commentary on the Apostle Paul's First Letter to Timothy

By COGwriter

While the Apostle Paul was in prison, he wrote two letters to the prophetic evangelist Timothy of Ephesus in Asia Minor.

The late Dr. Charles Ryrie estimated that this letter was written in 63 A.D. (Ryrie, p. 1472)

The late COG evangelist John Ogwyn, in his commentary of this book, said the epistles to Timothy were often focused on organization in the church. He said some of what is in it is in opposition to the independent movement which has negatively affected the Church of God.

Now to chapter 1:

1 Paul, an apostle of Jesus Christ, by the commandment of God our Savior and the Lord Jesus Christ, our hope,

So, the letter start off by pointing to the fact that it was Jesus who made Paul an apostle. The Apostle Paul, in his writings, often brings out his title and role, because apparently there were many who discounted it. Essentially, because Paul was not one of the original disciples or apostles. Various ones decided back then, just like most do now, that if someone does not get a title in a certain human way, that they ignore it.

But, Paul not only mentions his position and from whom, in his letter to the Corinthians add:

5 For I consider that I am not at all inferior to the most eminent apostles. 6 Even though I am untrained in speech, yet I am not in knowledge. But we have been thoroughly manifested among you in all things. (2 Corinthians 11:5-6)

So, there were two issues: 1) is Paul an apostle and 2) if he is, is he inferior to the other ones? And you see Paul's responses--despite what many felt--God appointed him.

In this Laodicean age, such issues still happen--many do not accept how God works when appointing apostles and prophets.

Many people, when they read the Bible, seem to think to themselves that they would not have rejected God's authority as many in the Bible are shown to have done. Yet, in this age, most actual Christians have done the same thing. Related to church government, check out the online article: The Bible, Peter, Paul, John, Polycarp, Herbert W. Armstrong, Roderick C. Meredith, and Bob Thiel on Church Government.

Getting back to the first verse, notice that we are to have HOPE in the Lord Jesus Christ. That hope is our own as well that of others and the Kingdom of God.

We have hope that comes from the word of God. And as we have taught before, true hope overcomes fear.

1:2

2 To Timothy, a true son in the faith: Grace, mercy, and peace from God our Father and Jesus Christ our Lord.

It is not just Timothy who should be true in the faith. Plus we all need, "Grace, mercy, and peace from God our Father and Jesus Christ our Lord."

1:3

3 As I urged you when I went into Macedonia -- remain in Ephesus that you may charge some that they teach no other doctrine, 4 nor give heed to fables and endless genealogies, which cause disputes rather than godly edification which is in faith.

John Ogwyn mentioned he had a lot of experience with people who spent a lot of time on technical points that they thought were so important, yet missed spiritual things in their life. I have ran across that too. We actually lost one person long ago because we taught that the descendants of Gad were mainly in Switzerland, whereas this man insisted that they were mainly the nation of Germany.

He, like many others, not only did not accept proper church governance, he also did not care enough for the importance of the commissions Jesus gave His faithful to proclaim in Matthew 24:14 & 28:19-20.

That said, many Protestants have issues with the Ten Commandments. Yet, notice what Paul wrote Timothy:

1:5

5 Now the purpose of the commandment is love from a pure heart, from a good conscience, and from sincere faith,

While many consider that the purpose of the commandments was to be a burden, they seem not to understand that the Apostle Paul wrote about them--they have to do with love--love towards God and love towards our fellow human beings. Christians are to be those expressing love from a pure heart with sincere faith. Christians are to keep the ten commandments.

Jesus basically confirmed that when asked:

34 But when the Pharisees heard that He had silenced the Sadducees, they gathered together. 35 Then one of them, a lawyer, asked Him a question, testing Him, and saying, 36 "Teacher, which is the great commandment in the law?"

37 Jesus said to him, "'You shall love the Lord your God with all your heart, with all your soul, and with all your mind.' 38 This is the first and great commandment. 39 And the second is like it: 'You shall love your neighbor as yourself.' 40 On these two commandments hang all the Law and the Prophets." (Matthew 22:34-40)

Jesus' half-brother James wrote:

8 If you really fulfill the royal law according to the Scripture, "You shall love your neighbor as yourself," you do well; 9 but if you show partiality, you commit sin, and are convicted by the law as transgressors. 10 For whoever shall keep the whole law, and yet stumble in one point, he is guilty of all. 11 For He who said, "Do not commit adultery," also said, "Do not murder." Now if you do not commit adultery, but you do murder, you have become a transgressor of the law. 12 So speak and so do as those who will be judged by the law of liberty. (James 2:8-13)

The Apostle John was inspired to write:

2 By this we know that we love the children of God, when we love God and keep His commandments. 3 For this is the love of God, that we keep His commandments. And His commandments are not burdensome. (1 John 5:2-3)

Early Christians kept the Ten Commandments and in the end times, the Beast-Antichrist power will not, but will basically directly and indirectly violate them all (see The Ten Commandments: The Decalogue, Christianity, and the Beast).

While some may try to reason around what Paul wrote regarding obeying the commandments, it is a fact that early Christians did believe that they needed to keep the Ten Commandments (for detailed proof, see also The Ten Commandments and the Early Church). And real Christians believe that today.

1:6

6a from which some, having strayed,

Actually, most who claim Christianity have highly strayed mightily from the Ten Commandments. See also, the free eBook: Hope of Salvation: How the Continuing Church of God Differs from Protestantism.

And so, to a degree, have real Christians strayed (1 John 1:8-10).

Continuing in 1 Timothy 1:

6b have turned aside to idle talk,

Many Protestant leaders falsely assert that the Ten Commandments have been done away. Yet, most Greco-Roman Catholics and Protestants who claim to keep them have also relied on "idle talk"--often false traditions like the Pharisees did to reason around fully keeping them. Jesus dealt with the supposedly educated religious leaders in His day:

1 Then the scribes and Pharisees who were from Jerusalem came to Jesus, saying, 2 "Why do Your disciples transgress the tradition of the elders? For they do not wash their hands when they eat bread." {These were idle words}

3 He answered and said to them, "Why do you also transgress the commandment of God because of your tradition? 4 For God commanded, saying, 'Honor your father and your mother'; and, 'He who curses father or mother, let him be put to death.' 5 But you say, 'Whoever says to his father or mother, "Whatever profit you might have received from me is a gift to God" — 6 then he need not honor his father or mother.' Thus you have made the commandment of God of no effect by your tradition. 7 Hypocrites! Well did Isaiah prophesy about you, saying:

8 "These people draw near to Me with their mouth,
And honor Me with their lips,
But their heart is far from Me.
9 And in vain they worship Me,
Teaching as doctrines the commandments of men.'" {The Greco-Roman Catholics and Protestants do this a lot}

10 When He had called the multitude to Himself, He said to them, "Hear and understand: 11 Not what goes into the mouth defiles a man; but what comes out of the mouth, this defiles a man."

12 Then His disciples came and said to Him, "Do You know that the Pharisees were offended when they heard this saying?"

13 But He answered and said, "Every plant which My heavenly Father has not planted will be uprooted. 14 Let them alone. They are blind leaders of the blind. And if the blind leads the blind, both will fall into a ditch."

15 Then Peter answered and said to Him, "Explain this parable to us."

16 So Jesus said, "Are you also still without understanding? 17 Do you not yet understand that whatever enters the mouth goes into the stomach and is eliminated? 18 But those things which proceed out of the mouth come from the heart, and they defile a man. 19 For out of the heart proceed evil thoughts, murders, adulteries, fornications, thefts, false witness, blasphemies. 20 These are the things which defile a man, but to eat with unwashed hands does not defile a man." (Matthew 15:1-20)

The Pharisees missed the point of aspects of the law. One way they did this was to focus on idle talk--traditions that were not in the Bible. Jesus was basically saying that not washing one's hands before eating was not something of theological concern, but that people should be more concerned about matters such as evil thoughts and lusts. More on traditions can be found in the article Tradition and Scripture: From the Bible and Church Writings).

1:7

7 desiring to be teachers of the law, understanding neither what they say nor the things which they affirm.

Just like the Pharisees of old, all the theological seminaries of the world do this. The same is true of many things in theological journals--which mainly are humans citing other humans about how they interept something. People think these leaders are smart and trustworthy, yet notice something the Apostle Paul wrote about those type of leaders:

13 For such are false apostles, deceitful workers, transforming themselves into apostles of Christ. 14 And no wonder! For Satan himself transforms himself into an angel of light. 15 Therefore it is no great thing if his ministers also transform themselves into ministers of righteousness, whose end will be according to their works. (2 Corinthians 11:13-15)

1:8

8 But we know that the law is good if one uses it lawfully, 9 knowing this: that the law is not made for a righteous person, but for the lawless and insubordinate, for the ungodly and for sinners, for the unholy and profane, for murderers of fathers and murderers of mothers, for manslayers, 10 for fornicators, for sodomites, for kidnappers, for liars, for perjurers, and if there is any other thing that is contrary to sound doctrine, 11 according to the glorious gospel of the blessed God which was committed to my trust.

Now, do not think that the above was not meant for you. Remember the Apostle Paul also wrote:

23 for all have sinned and fall short of the glory of God, (Romans 3:23)

Remember the Apostle John wrote that Christians are liars if they will not admit that they sin (1 John 1:10).

So, yes, you are capable of sin, and yes you need the law of God. The Apostle John wrote:

8 If we say that we have no sin, we deceive ourselves, and the truth is not in us. 9 If we confess our sins, He is faithful and just to forgive us our sins and to cleanse us from all unrighteousness. 10 If we say that we have not sinned, we make Him a liar, and His word is not in us. (1 John 1:8-10)

Now, how do we know that these sins have anything to do with the law and the commandments? Notice the following:

172 My tongue shall speak of Your word,
For all Your commandments are righteousness. (Psalms 119:172)

4 Whosoever committeth sin transgresseth also the law: for sin is the transgression of the law. (1 John 3:4, KJV)

Since the commandments are righteousness, obviously sinning by violating them is unrighteousness.

1:12

Paul also admitted that he was a sinner:

12 And I thank Christ Jesus our Lord who has enabled me, because He counted me faithful, putting me into the ministry, 13 although I was formerly a blasphemer, a persecutor, and an insolent man; but I obtained mercy because I did it ignorantly in unbelief.

Yes, as a repentant sinner, Paul obtained mercy. You can too. The Apostle James noted that "Mercy triumphs over judgmen" (James 2:13)--and God's mercy will do that for those that repent.

1:14

14 And the grace of our Lord was exceedingly abundant, with faith and love which are in Christ Jesus.

Grace is favor and also includes unmerited pardon. But not only are we to be forgiven, we need to practice our faith and give love.

It is through that grace you are saved:

4 But God, who is rich in mercy, because of His great love with which He loved us, 5 even when we were dead in trespasses, made us alive together with Christ (by grace you have been saved), 6 and raised us up together, and made us sit together in the heavenly places in Christ Jesus, 7 that in the ages to come He might show the exceeding riches of His grace in His kindness toward us in Christ Jesus. 8 For by grace you have been saved through faith, and that not of yourselves; it is the gift of God, 9 not of works, lest anyone should boast. 10 For we are His workmanship, created in Christ Jesus for good works, which God prepared beforehand that we should walk in them. (Ephesians 2:4-10)

Yes, it is because of God's grace and favor we are saved. But also notice that those so saved "are His workmanship, created in Christ Jesus for good works."

1:15

15 This is a faithful saying and worthy of all acceptance, that Christ Jesus came into the world to save sinners, of whom I am chief.

Do not think that God cannot forgive you and save you. Paul is suggesting he is a bigger sinner than you are, but that he will be saved.

Remember that the Apostle Paul persecuted true Christians and watched them die. Your sins, if you are willing to confess them to God and repent, are no worse than those of the Apostle Paul.

1:16

16 However, for this reason I obtained mercy, that in me first Jesus Christ might show all longsuffering, as a pattern to those who are going to believe on Him for everlasting life.

Notice that one of the reasons that Paul attained favor was to be an example of suffering for other believers. Therefore,

1:17

17 Now to the King eternal, immortal, invisible, to God who alone is wise, be honor and glory forever and ever. Amen.

God is King, God is eternal, God is immortal, and to us God is invisible.

No physical thing can properly convey what God looks like, hence all idolatrous representations of Him are false and misleading.

We have a free ebook on God available titled Mysteries of God. What is God?

And when Paul writes that God alone is wise, he does not mean that humans cannot have any wisdom, he is pointing out that humans do not have wisdom that compares to God's. On that basic topic, Paul wrote:

20 Where is the wise? Where is the scribe? Where is the disputer of this age? Has not God made foolish the wisdom of this world? 21 For since, in the wisdom of God, the world through wisdom did not know God, it pleased God through the foolishness of the message preached to save those who believe. 22 For Jews request a sign, and Greeks seek after wisdom; 23 but we preach Christ crucified, to the Jews a stumbling block and to the Greeks foolishness, 24 but to those who are called, both Jews and Greeks, Christ the power of God and the wisdom of God. 25 Because the foolishness of God is wiser than men, and the weakness of God is stronger than men. (1 Corinthians 1:20-25)

The world does not appreciate God's wisdom. But God is wiser than ALL humans combined. Remember that when you, at least subtly, doubt God, His ways, or His plan for you.

1:18

18 This charge I commit to you, son Timothy, according to the prophecies previously made concerning you, that by them you may wage the good warfare,

The Study Bible commented as follows:

in keeping with the previous prophecies about you This phrase suggests that Timothy's role and mission were affirmed through prophetic words, possibly during his commissioning or ordination (1 Timothy 4:14).

Norman Edwards, who was once a board member of the Global Church of God wrote:

• 23 verses show that prophesying is a gift of the Holy Spirit which Christians should seek and use in Christian congregations as instructed (Acts 2:17, 18; 19:6; Romans 12:6; 1 Corinthians 11:4, 5; 12:10, 28; 14:1, 3, 4, 5, 6, 22, 24, 31, 39; Ephesians 4:11; 1 Thessalonians 5:20; 1 Timothy 1:18; 4:14; Revelation 19:10; 22:9). (Edwards N. New Testament Sabbaths and Prophets. Shepherd’s Voice, Fall 2016).

1:19

19 having faith and a good conscience, which some having rejected, concerning the faith have suffered shipwreck, 20 of whom are Hymenaeus and Alexander, whom I delivered to Satan that they may learn not to blaspheme.

Having a good conscience means you have really repented of your sins and are not intending to commit them again. It appears that Hymenaeus and Alexander had at least problems with their words, so Paul disfellowshiped them.

They did not maintain faith, but true Christians are supposed to. More on faith can be found in our free eBook: Faith for Those God has Called and Chosen.

Chapter 2

Now to chapter 2.

Political leaders and political talk are major items in the news.

Since we in the churches of God historically have not been carnal election voters (see Should a Christian Vote?), what are Christians supposed to do about leaders?

Pray for them!

2:1-3

1 Therefore I exhort first of all that supplications, prayers, intercessions, and giving of thanks be made for all men, 2 for kings and all who are in authority, that we may lead a quiet and peaceable life in all godliness and reverence. 3 For this is good and acceptable in the sight of God our Savior,

Notice that it is GOOD to pray for political leaders! The Bible does not hint anywhere that it is good to vote for them.

More on voting can be found in the article: Should a Christian Vote?

Continuing with the end of verse 3 into 4:

3 ... God our Savior, 4 who desires all men to be saved and to come to the knowledge of the truth.

Now, you might think that your political leaders are so horrible, so corrupt, so perverted, so mean, etc., that you should not pray for them. Yet, the word of God not only tells you to pray for them, it also states that God desires all to be saved, which suggests in this context, even political leaders.

Now, related to God's plan to give all an opportunity for salvation, check out the free ebook: Universal OFFER of Salvation, Apokatastasis: Can God save the lost in an age to come? Hundreds of scriptures reveal God’s plan of salvation.

2:5

5 For there is one God and one Mediator between God and men, the Man Christ Jesus,

John Ogwyn mentioned that the Church of Rome keeps wondering about making Mary the co-redemptix, making her the go-between, the mediator between humans and Jesus.

The Bible, with a Roman Catholic translation, teaches:

5 For there is one God, and one mediator of God and men, the man Christ Jesus: 6 Who gave himself a redemption for all, a testimony in due times. (1 Timothy 2:5-6, DRB)

The biblical fact that there is ONE mediator, who is Jesus, means that there is not another, like Mary. This historically has been the teaching in the true Church of God (and this was also confirmed, for example, in 1705 via William Gibson, September 8, 1705; Cited in Dugger AN, Dodd CO, pp. 275-277).

The Fundamentals of Catholic Dogma states in its section about Mary being the Mediatrix, “Express scriptural proofs are lacking” (Ott, p. 214).

Thus, Roman Catholics who do not wish to deviate from what the Bible teaches would do well not to promote non-biblical titles and attributes to Mary. Furthermore, the Fundamentals of Catholic Dogma teaches:

The mystical interpretation…became prominent in the West in the late Middle Ages...Express testimonies, though few in number, to Mary’s position as mediatrix of grace are found since the eighth century. (Ott, p. 214)

Notice that calling Mary the mediatrix of grace was not from the Bible, was espoused by few, and that no one really started promoting it until the 8th century. Surely this shows that it WAS NOT a belief of the early church. The fact that Lúcia of Fatima said the apparition there in 1917 wanted it promoted surely shows that she was not keeping with the teachings of the Bible nor the practices of the early church. (More on the apparitions can be found in the article Mary, the Mother of Jesus and the Apparitions.)

While the Bible states that all should considered that Mary is blessed, nowhere in the Bible, nor the writings of those considered to be early (prior to the third century) "Church Fathers" do we see veneration for Mary.

The idea of a female 'mediatrix' is not new and appears to be of pagan origins:

Semiramis, as the female divinity, was called Baalti. This word translated into English means "MY LADY". In Latin it would be translated "MEA DONNA". This name became the name "MADONNA" which is the name by which Mary is often called. "MEDIATRIX", is another name for Mary, she received that title from "Mylitta" (Mediatrix), which was one of the names of the Mother Goddess of Babylon. (Wheeler C. Behold a White Horse. Xulon Press, 2009, p. 294)

Mullissu is a goddess who is the wife of the Assyrian god Ashur. Mullissu may be identical with the Mesopotamian goddess Ninlil...Mullissu, who was identified with Ishtar of Nineveh in Neo-Assyrian Empire times, is usually identified with Ishtar. Also proposed to be Mullissu is a goddess whom Herodotus called Mylitta and identified with Aphrodite. The name Mylitta may derive from Mulliltu or Mulitta, names related to Mullissu. (Wikipedia, viewed 12/19/13)

But she, as the mother of grace and mercy, as the celestial "Dove," as "the hope of the whole world," (BRYANT) was averse to blood, and was represented in a benign and gentle character. Accordingly, in Babylon she bore the name of Mylitta--that is, "The Mediatrix." (Hislop A. Two Babylons. 1858. Loizeaux Brothers, 2nd American edition 1959, p. 157)

The concept of a female mediatrix did not come from the Bible, Jesus, nor the original apostles.

2:6

6 who gave Himself a ransom for all, to be testified in due time,

Notice that Jesus gave Himself as a ransom FOR ALL, to be testified in due time. After the second resurrection, at that due time, nearly all who ever lived will accept that Jesus died as a ransom for them.

2:7

7 for which I was appointed a preacher and an apostle -- I am speaking the truth in Christ and not lying -- a teacher of the Gentiles in faith and truth.

Paul was appointed by God, God had someone lay hands on him (Acts 9:11-17), people did not believe him, but he said he was not lying. All of that is also true about me--including that various people on the internet falsely accuse me of lying.

Paul also wrote:

28 And God has appointed these in the church: first apostles, second prophets, third teachers, ... (1 Corinthians 12:28)

Notice that it is God who apppoints, but as Paul also wrote Timothy, God also then uses the laying on of human hands.

2:8

8 I desire therefore that the men pray everywhere, lifting up holy hands, without wrath and doubting;

Christians are to pray and believe. We have a free eBook on prayer: Prayer: What Does the Bible Teach? and one on faith: Faith for Those God has Called and Chosen. Just holding hands up in the air, which is now publicly done by a lot of evangelicals, is not what Paul was referring to--nor Jesus who said:

5 "And when you pray, you shall not be like the hypocrites. For they love to pray standing in the synagogues and on the corners of the streets, that they may be seen by men. Assuredly, I say to you, they have their reward. 6 But you, when you pray, go into your room, and when you have shut your door, pray to your Father who is in the secret place; and your Father who sees in secret will reward you openly. 7 And when you pray, do not use vain repetitions as the heathen do. For they think that they will be heard for their many words. (Matthew 6:5-7)

Protestant evangelicals, dancing around with their hands in the air while supposedly praying, are not following the words of Jesus here.

2:9

9 in like manner also, that the women adorn themselves in modest apparel, with propriety and moderation, not with braided hair or gold or pearls or costly clothing, 10 but, which is proper for women professing godliness, with good works.

The term "propriety" refers to rules of polite, not provocative, public behavior.

Woman are to be dressed in modest apparel. They are not supposed to dress like seductresses. Three times the Book of Proverbs declares that a seductress is an "immoral woman" (Proverbs 2:16, 5:20, 7:5, NKJV).

Paul also wrote that "young women: are "to be discreet, chaste ... that the word of God may not be blasphemed" (Titus 2:4-5)--hence not displaying immodesty.

Now, let's look at something about from the Book of Proverbs:

6 For the Lord gives wisdom; ... (Proverbs 2:6)

16 To deliver you from the immoral woman, From the seductress who flatters with her words, 17 Who forsakes the companion of her youth, And forgets the covenant of her God. 18 For her house leads down to death, And her paths to the dead; (Proverbs 2:16-18)

The wisdom God gives is to help both men and women! No Christian woman would want God to label her as an immoral woman. Do not forget your covenant with God! So, dress and act properly.

Men and women can consider styles and fashion, but should not try to dress in ways society now considers to be sexy/seductive. This basically means you should not wear clothes that are too tight or are sheer enough in inappropriate places to see through (unless there is a slip or something not see-through under it). Also, your underwear should normally not be seen and your clothes should cover up a sufficient amount of skin. All types of revealing and seductively intended clothing (or lack thereof) is not appropriate.

Apostle Paul also wrote:

23 ... our unpresentable parts have greater modesty, 24 but our presentable parts have no need (1 Corinthians 12:23-24)

And be careful as modern Western society has tried to suggest that some of a women's "unpresentable parts" are to be publicly presented--which is wrong.

Even if many you know are dressing wrongly, that is nor an excuse for you to do so. The Bible warns:

2 You shall not follow a crowd to do evil; (Exodus 23:2)

Women dressing modestly also makes it easier for men to follow the instructions that Jesus gave as well as something the Apostle Paul gave them about treating women:

27 "You have heard that it was said to those of old, 'You shall not commit adultery.' 28 But I say to you that whoever looks at a woman to lust for her has already committed adultery with her in his heart. (Matthew 5:27-28)

1 Do not rebuke an older man, but exhort him as a father, younger men as brothers, 2 older women as mothers, younger as sisters, with all purity (1 Timothy 5:1-2).

That said, if you are interested in getting married, a potential husband does not need to see you dressing seductively in public to be attracted. So, other than wanting to fit in with an evil crowd, there is no reason a woman should dress like an immoral woman in public.

Some have wondered if the Bible prohibits women from somehow braiding their hair. Here is what the old Radio Church of God published on this:

Peter wrote that women should not adorn themselves with plaited or braided hair, which, among the Greeks, was a custom in which costly jewelry and also wreaths were intertwined with the hair. The Bible prohibition of such a practice becomes plain when one considers that a woman's hair was given her to be a glory and an honor (I Cor. 11:15). The addition of costly or distracting and unnaturally bulky adornments took away from the natural and intended beauty God imparted to women. There is no scriptural prohibition against the use of a flower or other modest adornment worn in the hair. (Letter 902, 1960)

Furthermore, note that:

braided hair—literally, "plaits," that is, plaited hair: probably with the "gold and pearls" intertwined (1Pe 3:3). Such gaud is characteristic of the spiritual harlot (Re 17:4). (Jamieson-Fausset-Brown Bible Commentary)

Probably, the “gold” is supposed to be twined among the plaits of the hair. These elaborate adornments, so likely to catch the eye at divine worship, were quite inconsistent with Christian simplicity, besides being calculated to distract the attention of their fellow worshippers, male as well as female. (Ellicott's Commentary for English Readers)

Or gold, or pearls - It is not to be supposed that all use of gold or pearls as articles of dress is here forbidden; but the idea is, that the Christian female is not to seek these as the adorning which she desires, or is not to imitate the world in these personal decorations. It may be a difficult question to settle how much ornament is allowable, and when the true line is passed. But though this cannot be settled by any exact rules, since much must depend on age, and on the relative rank in life, and the means which one may possess, yet there is one general rule which is applicable to all, and which might regulate all. It is, that the true line is passed when more is thought of this external adorning, than of the ornament of the heart. Any external decoration which occupies the mind more than the virtues of the heart, and which engrosses the time and attention more, we may be certain is wrong. The apparel should be such as not to attract attention; such as becomes our situation; such as will not be particularly singular; such as shall leave the impression that the heart is not fixed on it. It is a poor ambition to decorate a dying body with gold and pearls. It should not be forgotten that the body thus adorned will soon need other habiliments, and will occupy a position where gold and pearls would be a mockery. (Barnes' Notes on the Bible)

So, no, the Bible does not prohibit any hair braiding. The New Testament was warning about vanity promoting expensive appearance, not the wearing of a ring or simply braided hair.

The Bible also allows people to wear gold. The admonition related to gold in 1 Timothy is a reference to a massive amount of gold in the hair.

Related to jewelry, here is what the old Radio Church of God published about that:

Many women have asked if God forbids them to wear jewelry. They have heard the teaching that God forbids Christians to wear any jewelry or wedding rings. This belief was the common teaching of the last century, but it has been retained by only a few denominations. This doctrine stemmed from the principle that because the wearing of jewelry, rings and other adornments was abused by the world, jewelry and adornments were sinful of themselves and should never be worn.

   The Bible teaches that the material things are not sin, but it is the improper use of them that is wrong. It is the act of abuse, or misuse, that is a sin or violation of God’s law. There are two texts in the New Testament relating to the use of adornments for Christians, I Timothy 2:9-10 and I Peter 3:3-5. Neither text even mentions wedding rings, and neither one condemns the proper use of jewelry, as some suppose. ...

   The wearing of gold ornaments and pearls in connection with costly array is forbidden by the apostles. Gold and pearls are not sin: for God sanctified the use of gold in the temple. But their great expense was not becoming to Christian women who were to put their treasures into spiritual traits of character which God views as of much greater worth. These two verses contain no prohibition on wearing a moderate amount of relatively inexpensive, but not "cheap" adornment. A string of inexpensive pearls would not be violating the principles which the apostle lays down. For women to bedeck themselves with cheap objects for vanity is just as wrong as to put one's treasure in expensive jewelry.

   The "putting on of apparel" mentioned by Peter is explained by Paul to include unappropriate or lavish clothing worn for vain glory. In these verses the principle is always that women should be temperate in the expense of their adornments and modest in their apparel. The fact that only specific, costly or unnatural adornments are mentioned clearly implies that the apostles NEVER meant to forbid all jewelry. Since no word is said about wedding rings, although wearing them was a universal practice of that day, neither Paul nor Peter meant to forbid them. Christians have a perfect right to wear them. The origin of wedding rings does not stem from pagan religious practices, despite the fanciful cavemen stories of captured women and club-wielding men.

   As absolute proof that Christian women may wear jewelry, Peter says that his description aptly pictures "the holy women also, who trusted in God, adorned themselves being in subjection unto their own husbands." Yet those women wore jewelry! (Gen. 24:47, 53). And God blessed Israel of old with adornments (Ezek. 16:9-14).

LETTER ANSWERING DEPARTMENT

Letter Number: 902

Publication Date: 1960

Woman should dress modestly. That does not just mean not seductively, but also not flaunting wealth, etc.

2:11

11 Let a woman learn in silence with all submission. 12 And I do not permit a woman to teach or to have authority over a man, but to be in silence. 13 For Adam was formed first, then Eve.

John Ogywn commented that God gives different people different roles. But being a preacher or minister is not one for women.

The Apostle Paul also wrote:

34 Let your women keep silent in the churches, for they are not permitted to speak; but they are to be submissive, as the law also says. 35 And if they want to learn something, let them ask their own husbands at home; for it is shameful for women to speak in church. (1 Corinthians 14:34-35).

The above does not mean that women can never talk. What Paul is teaching is that women are not supposed to be the ones giving sermons.

The New Testament also shows:

3:1 This is a faithful saying: If a man desires the position of a bishop, he desires a good work. 2 A bishop then must be blameless, the husband of one wife, temperate, sober-minded, of good behavior, hospitable, able to teach (1 Timothy 3:1-2).

5 For this reason I left you in Crete, that you should set in order the things that are lacking, and appoint elders in every city as I commanded you-- 6 if a man is blameless, the husband of one wife, having faithful children not accused of dissipation or insubordination (Titus 1:5-6).

Thus, the New Testament does not support the concept of women being elders/bishops over a church as only males are shown to be in those specific roles.

But as other scriptures show, the Bible does not prevent women from having important roles in the church, such being helpers, deaconesses, or even prophetesses (see Women and the New Testament Church).

Yet, the pride of many women will not let them accept this. Pride is lying to oneself, normally about oneself.

Consider also:

14 And Adam was not deceived, but the woman being deceived, fell into transgression. 15 Nevertheless she will be saved in childbearing if they continue in faith, love, and holiness, with self-control.

Like men (cf. Acts 24:25; 2 Peter 1:6), women also need self-control, as well as love, faith, and holiness.

Here is a link to a related sermon: 1 Timothy 1-2: God Wants All Saved, Be Modest.

Chapter 3

Now to chapter 3, some of which we quoted towards the end of chapter 2:

3:1

1 This is a faithful saying: If a man desires the position of a bishop, he desires a good work. 2 A bishop then must be blameless, the husband of one wife, temperate, sober-minded, of good behavior, hospitable, able to teach;

We in the CCOG have been criticized for not ordaining more men. Unlike most other COG groups, we have refused to ordain any man who is divorced and remarried. But we believe that although divorced people can serve in many ways, and they do in the CCOG, being ordained is not one of them.

That said, you have two other deviations in the Greco-Roman Catholic churches.

In the Roman Catholic Church, other than certain exceptions it has made for the accepting of former Anglican priests (and some others) their priests and bishops cannot be married. In the second verse of 1 Timothy 4, there was a prophecy from the Apostle Paul warning about those who forbid to marry, yet the Church of Rome has been one to wrongly do this.

Notice these passages from the Roman Catholic approved Rheims New Testament, as well as something from Paul's epistle to Titus:

1. FAITHFUL saying. If a man desire a Bishops office, he desireth a good work.
2. It behoveth therefore a Bishop to be irreprehensible, the husband of one wife,
sober, wise, comely, chaste, a man of hospitality, a teacher,
3. Not given to wine, no fighter, but modest, no quarreler, not covetous,
4. Well ruling his own house, chaving his children subject with all charity.
5. But if a man know not to rule his own house: how shall he have care of the Church of
God? (1 Timothy 3:1-5).

5. For this cause left I thee in Crete, that thou shouldest reform the things that are
wanting, and shouldst ordain priests by cities, as I also appointed thee:
6. If any be without crime, the husband of one wife, having faithful children, not in the
accusations of riot, or not obedient.
7. For a Bishop must be without crime, as the steward of God: not proud, not angry, nor
given to wine, no striker, nor covetous of filthy lucre (Titus 1:5-7).

Note that the term translated as priest in verse 4, presbyter, simply means elder--though the Church of Rome prefers the term priest. Also notice that the Bishop is also allowed to be married.

Paul specifically confirmed that the apostles had a wife and that he had a right to have a wife in the first century when he wrote:

4. Have not we power to eat and drink?
5. Have we not power to lead about a woman a sister, as also the rest of the Apostles, and
our Lords brethren, and Cephas?
6. Or I only and Barnabas have not we power to do this? (1 Corinthians 9:4-6, DRB).

While Polycrates confirmed this for the second century when he wrote

Among these are Philip, one of the twelve apostles, who fell asleep in Hierapolis; and his two aged virgin daughters, and another daughter, who lived in the Holy Spirit and now rests at Ephesus...All these observed the fourteenth day of the passover according to the Gospel, deviating in no respect, but following the rule of faith. And I also, Polycrates, the least of you all, do according to the tradition of my relatives, some of whom I have closely followed. For seven of my relatives were bishops; and I am the eighth. And my relatives always observed the day when the people put away the leaven. I, therefore, brethren, who have lived sixty-five years in the Lord (Eusebius. Church History. Book V, Chapter 25).

Polycrates probably would not have been one of a line of bishops if all bishops and church leaders practiced celibacy. Note that since the Apostle Philip had at least three daughters, he could not have practiced celibacy.

Now everyone is aware that Peter had a wife (see Matthew 8:14), but did you know that even Judas had a wife (cf. Acts 1:20, Psalm 109:8-9)?

Hippolytus notes that in the third century, celibacy was not required for the clergy (and least not by his rival, Roman Bishop Callistus):

About the time of this man, bishops, priests, and deacons, who had been twice married, and thrice married, began to be allowed to retain their place among the clergy (Hippolytus. Refutation of All Heresies, Book IX, Chapter VII. Excerpted from Ante-Nicene Fathers, Volume 5. Edited by Alexander Roberts & James Donaldson. American Edition, 1886. Online Edition Copyright © 2005 by K. Knight).

Even The Catholic Encyclopedia acknowledges that from the beginning, celibacy was not a requirement for church leaders:

Turning now to the historical development of the present law of celibacy, we must necessarily begin with St. Paul's direction (1 Timothy 3:2, 12, and Titus 1:6) that a bishop or a deacon should be "the husband of one wife". These passages seem fatal to any contention that celibacy was made obligatory upon the clergy from the beginning (Thurston H. Transcribed by Christine J. Murray. Celibacy of the Clergy. The Catholic Encyclopedia, Volume III. Copyright © 1908 by Robert Appleton Company. Online Edition Copyright © 2003 by K. Knight. Nihil Obstat, November 1, 1908. Remy Lafort, S.T.D., Censor. Imprimatur. +John Cardinal Farley, Archbishop of New York).

Celibacy became an ideal for the clergy in the East gradually, as it did in the West. In the fourth century we still find St. Gregory Nazianzen's father, who was Bishop of Nanzianzos, living with his wife, without scandal. But very soon after that the present Eastern rule obtained. It is less strict than in the West. No one can marry after he has been ordained priest (Paphnutius at the first Council of Nicaea maintains this; the first Canon of the Synod of Neocaesarea in 314 or 325, and Can. Apost., xxvi. The Synod of Elvira about 300 had decreed absolute celibacy for all clerks in the West, Can. xxxiii, ib., pp. 238-239); priests already married may keep their wives (the same law applied to deacons and subdeacons: Can. vi of the Synod in Trullo, 692), but bishops must be celibate. As nearly all secular priests were married this meant that, as a general rule, bishops were chosen from the monasteries, and so these became, as they still are, the road through advancement may be attained (Fortesque A. Transcribed by Marie Jutras. Eastern Monasticism. The Catholic Encyclopedia, Volume X. Copyright © 1911 by Robert Appleton Company. Online Edition Copyright © 2003 by K. Knight. Nihil Obstat, October 1, 1911. Remy Lafort, S.T.D., Censor. Imprimatur. +John Cardinal Farley, Archbishop of New York).

Here is a statement from that Synod of Elvira (about 305 A.D.) that is a little different than the above indicates:

We decree that all bishops, priests, and deacons, and all clerics engaged in ministry are forbidden entirely to live with their wives and to beget children: whoever shall do so shall be deposed from clerical dignity. (Bacchiocchi S. THE CATHOLIC PRIESTS CHILD SEX-ABUSE SCANDAL. Endtime Issues No. 82, 4 April 2002)

Thus the celibacy requirement for clergy did not come to be an enforced issue until the fourth century. It, however, contradicts the biblical teaching on this matter and has never been a requirement for the true Church of God.

When the subject came up in the fourth century, a Greco-Roman bishop denounced it:

Paphnutius then was bishop of one of the cities in Upper Thebes: he was a man of such eminent piety, that extraordinary miraclas were done by him. In the time of the persecution he had been deprived of one of his eyes. The emperor honoured this man exceedingly, and often sent for him to the palace, and kissed the part where the eye had been torn out. So devout was the emperor Constantine. Having noticed this circumstance respecting Paphnutius, I shall explain. another thing which was wisely ordered in consequence of his advice, both for the good of the church and the honour of the clergy. It seemed fit to the bishops to introduce a new law into the church, that those who were in holy orders, I speak of bishops, presbyters, and deacons, should have no conjugal intercourse with the wives which they had married prior to their ordination. And when it was proposed to deliberate on this matter, Paphnutius having arisen in the midst of the assembly of bishops, earnestly entreated them not to impose so heavy a yoke on the ministers of religion: asserting that " marriage is honourable among all, and the nuptial bed undefiled;" so that they ought not to injure the church by too stringent restrictions. " For all men," said he, " cannot bear the practice of rigid continence ; neither perhaps would the chastity of each of their wives be preserved." He termed the intercourse of a man with his lawful wife chastity. It would be sufficient, he thought, that such as had previously entered on their sacred calling should abjure matrimony, according to the ancient tradition of the church: but that none should be separated from her to whom, while yet unordained, he had been legally united...The whole assembly of the clergy assented to the reasoning of Paphnutius (Socrates Scholasticus. Book 1, Chapter XI. A History of the Church in Seven Books: From the Accession of Constantine, A.D. 305, to the 38th Year of Theodosius II, Inluding a Period of 140 Years. Published by S. Bagster, 1844. Original from Harvard University, pp. 53-54)

So as late as the early fourth century, the idea of required celibacy was opposed by most of the clergy. Note: Some have questioned the above account. But here is what one Orthodox scholar, L. Cleenewerch has written on that:

“This statement would seem to settle the matter now as it did then, if it was not for the fact that the Paphnutius story is now under suspicion of being a legend invented by Socrates himself ... It should be admitted, though, that the reasons for rejecting the ‘Paphnutius intervention’ are rather weak: the improbability of his presence at the Council, and the suspected sympathy of Socrates for the Novatians who opposed the lex continentiae. Yet, Socrates Scholasticus is recognized as a reliable and intellectually honest historian”, pp. 374,375.)

It also appears that celibate orders are unbiblical and not really part of the earliest traditions. Noted historian Latourette wrote:

"Although it has been prominent in the churches in which the majority of Christians have been enrolled, monasticism was unknown in the first two centuries of Christianity...In a least one place in the New Testament those who forbade Christians to marry ... were deemed untrue to the faith". (Latourette K.S. A History of Christianity, Volume 1: Beginnings to 1500. Harper Collins, San Francisco, 1975, p. 223).

The Church of Rome has long had problems with priests and celibacy as the following Roman Catholic source admits:

September 5, 2018 ...

In the 11th century, there was a serious crisis that mirrors our present one. Rampant corruption manifested itself in widespread clerical immorality and homosexual practices. Pope Gregory VII and his collaborators, coming from a monastic tradition, purified the Church thoroughly, stringently enforcing the apostolic practice of clerical celibacy and creating the morally purified Church of the high medieval period.

By the 16th century, immorality had crept back into the ranks of the clergy, as members of the hierarchy, including a few popes, engaged regularly in activities that contravened their vows. https://aleteia.org/2018/09/05/when-did-priestly-celibacy-begin-anyway/

Clerical celibacy was NOT the apostolic practice.

The Roman Catholic Church in the 20th century put this out in a paper:

HOLY VIRGINITY and that perfect chastity which is consecrated to the service of God is without doubt among the most precious treasures which the Founder of the Church has left in heritage to the society which He established. This assuredly was the reason why the Fathers of the Church confidently asserted that perpetual virginity is a very noble gift which the Christian religion has bestowed on the world. They rightly noted that the pagans of antiquity imposed this way of life on the Vestals only for a certain time; and that, although in the Old Testament virginity is ordered to be kept and preserved, it is only a previous requisite for marriage ... Further, the Fathers of the Church, such as Cyprian, Athanasius, Ambrose, John Chrysostom, Jerome, Augustine, and many others, have sung the praises of virginity. And this doctrine of the Fathers, augmented through the course of centuries by the Doctors of the Church and the masters of asceticism, helps greatly either to inspire in the faithful of both sexes the firm resolution of dedicating themselves to God by the practice of perfect chastity and of persevering thus till death, or to strengthen them in the resolution already taken...And while this perfect chastity is the subject of one of the three vows which constitute the religious state, and is also required by the Latin Church of clerics in major orders (Pope Pius XII. Sacra Virginitas, Encyclical on Consecrated Virginity. Promulgated on March 25, 1954).

Thus, the Roman Church, though admitting that permanent virginity is not a biblical position, wants to insist on this.

1 Timothy 4:1-3 warns that some will forbid marriage, which is what the Roman Church seems to be doing here.

I would also add here, that telling the faithful to have fish, and not other meats on Friday, seems to be related to the second statement in 1 Timothy 4 (a related article of interest The New Testament and Unclean Meats).

Even in the 21st century, the Church of Rome has admitted that celibacy was not the original position of the Apostles and that it might change back:

Pope Benedict XVI's choice as the church's top official for priests has said that celibacy "is not a dogma," and that the Catholic church "can reflect" on the subject.

The explosive character of the issue, however, was reflected in a "clarification" issued in the name of the cardinal by the Vatican Press Office Dec. 4.

Cardinal Claudio Hummes, 72, of Sao Paulo, Brazil, was nominated prefect of the Congregation for Clergy Oct. 31. He made the comments as he left for Rome in an interview with the Brazilian publication Estado de Sao Paulo.

"Even if celibates are part of our history and of Catholic culture, the church can reflect on the question of celibacy, because it's not a dogma but a disciplinary norm," Hummes said.

Hummes, a Franciscan, recalled that several apostles were married, and that the discipline of priestly celibacy in the Western church developed several centuries after the institution of the priesthood itself..."In the church, it has always been clear that the obligation of celibacy for priests is not a dogma, but a disciplinary norm. It is also clear that this is true for the Latin church, but not for the Oriental rites, where it is normal that priests are married in the communities in union with the Catholic church..." (Allen JL. Curial cardinal says celibacy can be discussed. National Catholic Reporter, Dec 15, 2006).

Thus, celibacy can be concluded to be an unbiblical requirement that Rome imposed outside of the Bible.

In 2017, the then Pope Francis seeming authorized debate on celibacy for the priesthood. But it is still the policy of the Church of Rome.

Now, what about the Eastern Orthodox Catholic Church?

Well, they do allow their priests to be married.

But, once their libidos start to dimish, and if they are at least 50 years of age, they are allowed to become bishops, but ONLY if they depart from their wives.

Then, the Orthodox priests who covet being a bishop must betray their wives to do so. They should also consider that the Bible warns:

13“This is another thing you do: you cover the altar of the LORD with tears, with weeping and with groaning, because He no longer regards the offering or accepts it with favor from your hand. 14“Yet you say, ‘For what reason?’ Because the LORD has been a witness between you and the wife of your youth, against whom you have dealt treacherously, though she is your companion and your wife by covenant. 15“But not one has done so who has a remnant of the Spirit. And what did that one do while he was seeking a godly offspring? Take heed then to your spirit, and let no one deal treacherously against the wife of your youth. 16“For I hate divorce,” says the LORD, the God of Israel, “and him who covers his garment with wrong,” says the LORD of hosts. “So take heed to your spirit, that you do not deal treacherously.” (Malachi 2:13-16, NASB)

What the Orthodox priests do to become bishops is treacherous.

This is absurd and wrong.

They are NOT holding to the beliefs of the Bible nor that of the original catholic church.

3:3

3 not given to wine, not violent, not greedy for money, but gentle, not quarrelsome, not covetous;

So, heavy drinkers, violent men, and greedy men are not supposed to be ordained. This is consistent with the following passages in the Hebrew scriptures:

19 Listen now to my voice; I will give you counsel, and God will be with you: Stand before God for the people, so that you may bring the difficulties to God. 20 And you shall teach them the statutes and the laws, and show them the way in which they must walk and the work they must do. 21 Moreover you shall select from all the people able men, such as fear God, men of truth, hating covetousness; and place such over them to be rulers of thousands, rulers of hundreds, rulers of fifties, and rulers of tens. (Exodus 18:19-21)

2 “The Spirit of the Lord spoke by me,
And His word was on my tongue.
3 The God of Israel said,
The Rock of Israel spoke to me:
‘He who rules over men must be just,
Ruling in the fear of God. (2 Samuel 23:2-3)

3:4

4 one who rules his own house well, having his children in submission with all reverence 5 (for if a man does not know how to rule his own house, how will he take care of the church of God?);

Roman Catholic priests, and bishops are clearly unqualified to be bishops as they are supposed to be celibate and not have children to raise.

By the way, bishop means basically overseer or pastor. Partially because of the governmental abuses of Greco-Roman Catholic bishops over the centuries, those in the Churches of God have tended not to use the title bishop much, though it is a appropriate.

As far as the Church of God itself goes, 1 Timothy 3:4 is another place were we see that title/description/name of the church being called that.

3:6

6 not a novice, lest being puffed up with pride he fall into the same condemnation as the devil.

Pride is a problem for many, which is one reason that novices are not to be ordained. The other is that since Paul wrote that the ordained should be apt to teach, a novice, by definition has not had a lot of time to develop the depth of knowledge, wisdom, and grace to teach.

Anyway, because of 1 Timothy 3:6, we have often held off ordaining people, many in Africa, but also other lands, even though we will allow them to be hosts of a congregation or area first.

3:7

7 Moreover he must have a good testimony among those who are outside, lest he fall into reproach and the snare of the devil.

Someone known as a liar and thief, to cite two examples, would not be ordained. That said, many falsehoods were said about Jesus, as well as in this century, CCOG leaders. We do not let lies from Satan's conspirators stop us from ordaining someone.

3:8

8 Likewise deacons must be reverent, not double-tongued, not given to much wine, not greedy for money, 9 holding the mystery of the faith with a pure conscience. 10 But let these also first be tested; then let them serve as deacons, being found blameless.

The requirements are similar for deacons as they are for elders and bishops. Again, this "first be tested" is part of why we refrain from quickly ordaining leaders who are new to the faith.

3:11

11 Likewise, their wives must be reverent, not slanderers, temperate, faithful in all things.

Yes, one's spouse has an impact on whether or not one should be ordained.

3:12

12 Let deacons be the husbands of one wife, ruling their children and their own houses well.

Two points: 1) As with elders/bishops, a candidate to be a deacon is to rule their children and house well.

2) The Church of Rome does allow its deacons to be married, like the above points to. Yet, it does not accept the reality that it is best for their priests and bishops to be married.

3:13

13 For those who have served well as deacons obtain for themselves a good standing and great boldness in the faith which is in Christ Jesus.

The deacon and martyr Stephen did that in Acts 6 and 7.

3:14

14 These things I write to you, though I hope to come to you shortly; 15 but if I am delayed, I write so that you may know how you ought to conduct yourself in the house of God, which is the church of the living God, the pillar and ground of the truth.

The true church of the living God, is the pillar and ground of the truth. In the church age, this best describes the Philadelphian remnant of the Church of God (Revelation 3:7-13; see also Why is there a Philadelphian remnant of the true Christian Church of God?) and not the bulk of the groups as they are Laodicean (Revelation 3:14-22).

3:16a

16 And without controversy great is the mystery of godliness: God was manifested in the flesh,

This is a major mystery to the world as the bulk of the world's churches do not understand that Jesus really was fully manifested in the flesh--see also the free eBook: Mysteries of God. What is God? Here are some excerpts from it .

Although trinitarians do not word it exactly that way, their view of Jesus not fully coming in the flesh is warned against by the Apostle John:

7 Many deceivers have gone out into the world, people who do not confess Jesus Christ came in the flesh. This is the deceiver and the Antichrist. (2 John 7, EOB)

7 For many seducers are gone out into the world, who confess not that Jesus Christ is come in the flesh: this is a seducer and an antichrist. (2 John 7, DRB)

This passage does not mean an antichrist would not believe that there was a Jesus. Even many false Christians (Matthew 7:21-23; 24:4-5) and atheists acknowledge the historical fact of Jesus, as do the demons (James 2:19). This passage in 2 John is saying that an antichrist teaching is that Jesus was not truly human when incarnate.

The original Christian belief was that Jesus had emptied Himself of His divinity, became fully human, was tempted, and allowed Himself to actually be put to death in order to be our Saviour.

Mystery of Christ

Traditional Roman Catholics generally believe:

It is impossible to believe explicitly in the mystery of Christ, without faith in the Trinity ... Wherefore just as, before Christ, the mystery of Christ was believed explicitly by the learned, but implicitly and under a veil, so to speak, by the simple, so too was it with the mystery of the Trinity. And consequently, when once grace had been revealed, all were bound to explicit faith in the mystery of the Trinity (The Summa Theologica of St. Thomas Aquinas. Second and Revised Edition, 1920. Literally translated by Fathers of the English Dominican Province. Online Edition Copyright © 2003 by Kevin Knight. Nihil Obstat. F. Innocentius Apap, O.P., S.T.M., Censor. Theol. Imprimatur. Edus. Canonicus Surmont, Vicarius Generalis. Westmonasterii. APPROBATIO ORDINIS. Nihil Obstat. F. Raphael Moss, O.P., S.T.L. and F. Leo Moore, O.P., S.T.L. Imprimatur. F. Beda Jarrett, O.P., S.T.L., A.M., Prior Provincialis Angliæ).

However, one can believe in Christ and know the mystery about Him without belief in the Greco-Roman trinity. Consider further that the Roman Catholics also teach that their trinity did not clearly come from the Bible and cannot be fully understood:

In Scripture there is as yet no single term by which the Three Divine Persons are denoted together.... The Vatican Council has explained the meaning to be attributed to the term mystery in theology. It lays down that a mystery is a truth which we are not merely incapable of discovering apart from Divine Revelation, but which, even when revealed, remains “hidden by the veil of faith and enveloped, so to speak, by a kind of darkness” (Const., “De fide. cath.”, iv). (Joyce G.H. The Blessed Trinity. The Catholic Encyclopedia, Volume XV Copyright © 1912 by Robert Appleton Company).

Thus, the Roman Catholic Church teaches that the trinity is a mystery and not a biblical term, but only a supposedly revealed doctrine. The truth is that the concept of a trinity is not a mystery at all but is a well-documented doctrine adopted from paganism and apparitions that had Imperial enforcement.

The Apostle Paul specifically wrote of the “mystery of Christ”:

1 For this reason I, Paul, the prisoner of Christ Jesus for you Gentiles — 2 if indeed you have heard of the dispensation of the grace of God which was given to me for you, 3 how that by revelation He made known to me the mystery (as I have briefly written already, 4 by which, when you read, you may understand my knowledge in the mystery of Christ), 5 which in other ages was not made known to the sons of men, as it has now been revealed by the Spirit to His holy apostles and prophets: 6 that the Gentiles should be fellow heirs, of the same body, and partakers of His promise in Christ through the gospel, (Ephesians 3:1-6, NJKV, OSB)

Since the mystery of Christ had been revealed by the Spirit by the time of the Apostle Paul (the Epistle to the Ephesians was written c. 61 A.D.), and the trinity did not come to have major acceptance even among the Greco-Roman Catholics until the 4th century, knowledge of the trinity is not, nor was it ever, needed to believe in the mystery of Christ.

Part of the mystery of Christ is not only how He emptied Himself of His divinity to become human, but that God’s plan through his apostles and prophets was always to one day reach Gentiles to be fellow heirs with Israelites with His Spirit (see also the free book, online at ccog.org, titled Universal OFFER of Salvation, Apokatastasis: Can God save the lost in an age to come? Hundreds of scriptures reveal God’s plan of salvation). That is a mystery to many.

Paul further connected the will of God to make the mystery known to the Gentiles, as well as to make known the mystery that Christians have Christ in us:

27 To them God willed to make known what are the riches of the glory of this mystery among the Gentiles: which is Christ in you, the hope of glory. (Colossians 1:27, NJKV, OSB)

2 Continue earnestly in prayer, being vigilant in it with thanksgiving; 3 meanwhile praying also for us, that God would open to us a door for the word, to speak the mystery of Christ, for which I am also in chains, 4 that I may make it manifest, as I ought to speak. (Colossians 4:2-4, NJKV, OSB)

The Book of Acts teaches that God “opened the door of faith to the Gentiles” (Acts 14:27), which was a mystery to many of the Jews.
One is not a true Christian simply by claiming Christ or calling Him ‘Lord’ (cf. Matthew 7:21-23). Having Jesus live His life through His Spirit in us is the only way one is a true Christian (cf. Romans 8:9). Yet, that is a mystery to many. That Spirit of Christ is available to Gentiles and Israelites (Galatians 3:28-29).

Here is another mystery of Christ:

10 For if when we were enemies we were reconciled to God through the death of His Son, much more, having been reconciled, we shall be saved by His life. (Romans 5:10, NKJV, OSB)

How is that a mystery? Because many do not realize that Jesus’ death does not save us, but it allows for salvation. It is by Jesus’ life as our High Priest, our obedience to Him (Hebrews 5:9), our accepting Him (Acts 2:38-39) and striving to imitate Him (1 Corinthians 11:1) is what, through grace, will save us.

8 For by grace you have been saved through faith, and that not of yourselves; it is the gift of God, 9 not of works, lest anyone should boast. 10 For we are His workmanship, created in Christ Jesus for good works, which God prepared beforehand that we should walk in them. (Ephesians 2:8-10, NKJV, OSB)

Yes, like Jesus, Christians are to walk in good works.

The mystery of Christ has to do with Him emptying Himself of His divinity to become human (Philippians 2:5-7), the calling of Gentiles and Israelites, the giving of the Spirit, how the Father and Son are one (John 17:22), He was truly flesh on the earth (2 John 7), that Jesus lives in the lives of those who are converted, and since He is the firstborn of many brethren (Romans 8:29), that we may be glorified/deified with Him once He returns (John 17:10; Romans 8:17,29;2 Thessalonians 1:10).

The trinity is NOT a mystery of Christ.

3:16b:

Justified in the Spirit, Seen by angels, Preached among the Gentiles, Believed on in the world, Received up in glory.

Yes, Jesus, who never sinned (Hebrews 4:15), was justified (cf. James 2:24). Yes, scripture shows He was seen by angels (e.g. Matthew 4:11; c.f. Acts 1:9-11).

And received up in glory. The Apostle Peter mentioned "the God of our fathers, glorified His Servant Jesus" (Acts 3:13).

We in the CCOG also preach Him among Gentiles (cf. Roman 11:25; see also What About Romans 11:25 and the Full Number of the Gentiles?).

Chapter 4

4:1

1 Now the Spirit expressly says that in latter times some will depart from the faith, giving heed to deceiving spirits and doctrines of demons,

Doctrines of demons would include observing demonic holidays as opposed to biblical holy days, accepting deceiving messages that contradict the Bible from apparitions, and accepting private prophecies and traditions of men over the word of God. Doing such things are part of Satan's Plan.

4:2

2 speaking lies in hypocrisy, having their own conscience seared with a hot iron,

Teaching that certain traditions of men do not contradict the Bible, when they know otherwise, would be one way some have spoken lies in hypocrisy. Their consciences are seared so much that they will not change nor properly accept and teach the word of God.

4:3a

3a forbidding to marry,

Celibacy rules of the Roman Church, as well as the no wives rule in the Eastern Orthodox Church, is consistent with this.

4:3b

3b and commanding to abstain from foods which God created to be received with thanksgiving by those who believe and know the truth.

Rules such as fish, and not other meat on Fridays, from the Church of Rome, would be consistent with that.

4:4

4 For every creature of God is good, and nothing is to be refused if it is received with thanksgiving; 5 for it is sanctified by the word of God and prayer.

The word sanctified means to be set apart for some type of use. Which animals are set apart by the word of God to eat?

Well, we can find that out by looking at the lists in the Books of Leviticus and Deuteronomy. Here is the list from Leviticus:

1 Now the Lord spoke to Moses and Aaron, saying to them, 2 "Speak to the children of Israel, saying, 'These are the animals which you may eat among all the animals that are on the earth: 3 Among the animals, whatever divides the hoof, having cloven hooves and chewing the cud — that you may eat. 4 Nevertheless these you shall not eat among those that chew the cud or those that have cloven hooves: the camel, because it chews the cud but does not have cloven hooves, is unclean to you; 5 the rock hyrax, because it chews the cud but does not have cloven hooves, is unclean to you; 6 the hare, because it chews the cud but does not have cloven hooves, is unclean to you; 7 and the swine, though it divides the hoof, having cloven hooves, yet does not chew the cud, is unclean to you. 8 Their flesh you shall not eat, and their carcasses you shall not touch. They are unclean to you.

9 'These you may eat of all that are in the water: whatever in the water has fins and scales, whether in the seas or in the rivers — that you may eat. 10 But all in the seas or in the rivers that do not have fins and scales, all that move in the water or any living thing which is in the water, they are an abomination to you. 11 They shall be an abomination to you; you shall not eat their flesh, but you shall regard their carcasses as an abomination. 12 Whatever in the water does not have fins or scales — that shall be an abomination to you.

13 'And these you shall regard as an abomination among the birds; they shall not be eaten, they are an abomination: the eagle, the vulture, the buzzard, 14 the kite, and the falcon after its kind; 15 every raven after its kind, 16 the ostrich, the short-eared owl, the sea gull, and the hawk after its kind; 17 the little owl, the fisher owl, and the screech owl; 18 the white owl, the jackdaw, and the carrion vulture; 19 the stork, the heron after its kind, the hoopoe, and the bat.

20 'All flying insects that creep on all fours shall be an abomination to you. 21 Yet these you may eat of every flying insect that creeps on all fours: those which have jointed legs above their feet with which to leap on the earth. 22 These you may eat: the locust after its kind, the destroying locust after its kind, the cricket after its kind, and the grasshopper after its kind.

23 But all other flying insects which have four feet shall be an abomination to you.

24 'By these you shall become unclean; whoever touches the carcass of any of them shall be unclean until evening; 25 whoever carries part of the carcass of any of them shall wash his clothes and be unclean until evening: 26 The carcass of any animal which divides the foot, but is not cloven-hoofed or does not chew the cud, is unclean to you. Everyone who touches it shall be unclean. 27 And whatever goes on its paws, among all kinds of animals that go on all fours, those are unclean to you. Whoever touches any such carcass shall be unclean until evening. 28 Whoever carries any such carcass shall wash his clothes and be unclean until evening. It is unclean to you.

29 'These also shall be unclean to you among the creeping things that creep on the earth: the mole, the mouse, and the large lizard after its kind; 30 the gecko, the monitor lizard, the sand reptile, the sand lizard, and the chameleon. 31 These are unclean to you among all that creep. Whoever touches them when they are dead shall be unclean until evening. 32 Anything on which any of them falls, when they are dead shall be unclean, whether it is any item of wood or clothing or skin or sack, whatever item it is, in which any work is done, it must be put in water. And it shall be unclean until evening; then it shall be clean. 33 Any earthen vessel into which any of them falls you shall break; and whatever is in it shall be unclean: 34 in such a vessel, any edible food upon which water falls becomes unclean, and any drink that may be drunk from it becomes unclean. 35 And everything on which a part of any such carcass falls shall be unclean; whether it is an oven or cooking stove, it shall be broken down; for they are unclean, and shall be unclean to you. 36 Nevertheless a spring or a cistern, in which there is plenty of water, shall be clean, but whatever touches any such carcass becomes unclean. 37 And if a part of any such carcass falls on any planting seed which is to be sown, it remains clean. 38 But if water is put on the seed, and if a part of any such carcass falls on it, it becomes unclean to you.

'And if any animal which you may eat dies, he who touches its carcass shall be unclean until evening. 40 He who eats of its carcass shall wash his clothes and be unclean until evening. He also who carries its carcass shall wash his clothes and be unclean until evening.

41 'And every creeping thing that creeps on the earth shall be an abomination. It shall not be eaten. 42 Whatever crawls on its belly, whatever goes on all fours, or whatever has many feet among all creeping things that creep on the earth — these you shall not eat, for they are an abomination. 43 You shall not make yourselves abominable with any creeping thing that creeps; nor shall you make yourselves unclean with them, lest you be defiled by them. 44 For I am the Lord your God. You shall therefore consecrate yourselves, and you shall be holy; for I am holy. Neither shall you defile yourselves with any creeping thing that creeps on the earth. 45 For I am the Lord who brings you up out of the land of Egypt, to be your God.

You shall therefore be holy, for I am holy.

46 'This is the law of the animals and the birds and every living creature that moves in the waters, and of every creature that creeps on the earth, 47 to distinguish between the unclean and the clean, and between the animal that may be eaten and the animal that may not be eaten.'" (Leviticus 11:1-47)

In the New Testament, the Apostle Peter quotes the part of Leviticus 11:45 about Christians being holy (1 Peter 1:14-15). We are not to eat unclean animals to be so. And notice that unclean animals are identified in the word of God not to be eaten.

Jesus, Himself, referred to serpents snakes as something not to eat in Luke 11:11-12. The Book of Revelation, the last book of the Bible, points to frogs (Revelation 16:13) as unclean as well as certain birds and beasts (Revelation 18:2). See also: The New Testament Church, History, and Unclean Meats.

The Apostle Paul was not teaching that Christians, like Timothy, were to eat unclean animals. And no early Christian thought that is what what Paul was advocating--even the Church of Rome did not believe Christians should eat unclean animals until a Bishop of Rome in the late 2nd century allegedly decided that was acceptable--see The New Testament Church, History, and Unclean Meats.

4:6

6 If you instruct the brethren in these things, you will be a good minister of Jesus Christ, nourished in the words of faith and of the good doctrine which you have carefully followed.

Paul wanted Timothy to teach what Paul was writing as well as what he previously taught him. That is part of what this article on Timothy is doing.

4:7

7 But reject profane and old wives' fables, and exercise yourself toward godliness.

There are a lot of opinions, tales, fables, rumors, and conspiracy theories these days that are to be rejected. Christians should move toward godliness.

Now Paul switches to talking about physical exercise.

4:8

8 For bodily exercise profits a little, but godliness is profitable for all things, having promise of the life that now is and of that which is to come.

Notice the following comment from the old Radio Church of God:

This sounds like a negative statement, but a more proper rendering of this verse into English from the inspired Greek is, “For bodily exercise profits for a little time” (see marginal reference). This is a positive statement ! Bodily exercise does profit for the “little time” of our physical existence on this earth. As long as we are physical human beings, physical exercise will profit this physical body. God wants us to be healthy and physically fit. (Luker D. Physical Exercise Does Profit! Good News, August 1966)

And while we are to, "seek first the kingdom of God and His righteousness" (Matthew 6:33) and focus on the spiritual (cf. 2 Corinthians 5:7), as we are to "exercise yourself toward godliness" (1 Timothy 4:7), God inspired the Apostle John to write:

2 Beloved, I pray that you may prosper in all things and be in health, just as your soul prospers. (3 John 2)

Exercise helps people live longer and live better. Notice something from the US Centers for Disease Control:

Active people generally live longer and are at less risk for serious health problems like heart disease, type 2 diabetes, obesity, and some cancers. For people with chronic diseases, physical activity can help manage these conditions and complications. accessed 07/27/19 https://www.cdc.gov/physicalactivity/about-physical-activity/index.html

The evidence is clear—physical activity fosters normal growth and development, can reduce the risk of various chronic diseases, and can make people feel better, function better, and sleep better. Some health benefits start immediately after activity, and even short bouts of physical activity are beneficial. accessed 07/27/19 https://www.cdc.gov/physicalactivity/basics/index.htm

Jesus condemned laziness in Matthew 25:26.

Exercise can help improve human health.

But the other point that Paul was referring to seems to be that there are some who focus way too much on the physical and not enough on the spiritual. Our physical bodies will persih, but godliness will be profitable in the age that is to come.

4:9

9 This is a faithful saying and worthy of all acceptance.

It is faithful to tell Christians that bodily exercse helps a bit in this life, but that godliness is more important in this life and the next one.