Give No Occasion for Reproach - 1st Timothy 5:9-16

 Give No Occasion for Reproach 1st Timothy 5:9-16

If you’re like me, you sometimes think about what it would have been like to be around Jesus when He was here on planet earth.

To say that it would have been fascinating is a gross understatement.

To see His miracles and hear His teaching would have been exhilarating.

In Matthew 13:17 Jesus said to His disciples, “for assuredly, I say to you that many prophets and righteous men desired to see what you see and did not see it, and to hear what you hear, and did not hear it.”

So, there’s not doubt that it would have been fascinating to be around Jesus but it also would have been very uncomfortable at times.

The reason why I say that is because His teaching would often unmask everyone’s shortcomings and hypocrisy and heart condition.

Jesus could see into everyone’s heart and I’m sure that created awkwardness and discomfort many times.

Let’s look at an example in Matthew 15 by way of introduction.

vv. 1-2

There are two things to understand about this verse:  #1) The issue was not washing hands for the purpose of cleanliness.

I’m sure the disciples would wash their hands before eating if their hands were dirty from handling fishing nets and slimy fish, etc.

So that wasn’t the issue.

The issue was ceremonial washings, which is the second thing to understand about this verse.

The phrase “the tradition of the elders” refers to a set of non-biblical rules that had come about since the time of the Babylonian captivity.

These rules were not in the law of God and that’s why I referred to them as non-biblical rules.

They weren’t necessarily unbiblical or anti-biblical; they were just non-biblical.

This was one of the rules in that tradition.

Before eating, the elders mandated that you had to wash your hands in a series of ceremonial washings.

This wasn’t a commandment in Scripture.

Nothing is said about the necessity of everyone carrying out some kind of ceremonial washing before eating.

Yet, that’s what the scribes and Pharisees were worked up about when they came to Jesus on this occasion.

They wanted to know why the disciples of Jesus didn’t follow the tradition of the elders.

I’m sure they had the same concern about Jesus, but they probably weren’t willing to address that directly.

v. 3

That was the crux of the issue.

They ended up transgressing the commandments of God because of their tradition.

The scribes and Pharisees had embraced the tradition of the elders, so they expected everyone else to follow those man-made religious rules and regulations.

And in their zeal to keep the man-made religious rules and regulations, they ended up violating the word of God.

And the worst part about it was that, from what Jesus says here, it wasn’t accidental.

They were purposely looking for loopholes around the word of God and they found a convenient “out” by following the tradition of the elders.

Oh beloved, do you realize how our hearts are inclined to do this exact same thing?

We set up our religious standards and expect everyone else to follow them.

When they don’t, we view them as unspiritual or far less spiritual than ourselves.

And worst of all, we end up becoming so focused on our rules and regulations and standards that we don’t pay close attention to what God has really said in His word.

Thus, we end up failing to keep the commands of God because of our own set of rules.

Not only is this true on an individual level, it’s also true on a larger level in organized religion.

It is scandalous how organized religion, I’m talking about Christian religion, has set aside the word of God for its own rituals and liturgical furnishings.

So often the word of God can’t even be found in the midst of all the religious trappings.

And tragically, there are many people who don’t have the knowledge to know the difference between what is biblical and what is merely religious.

As a result, they assume that all the religious rituals they are engaging in are somehow fulfilling biblical mandates.

There are millions of people in that very condition.

They are following organized religion, going through all the motions, fulfilling all the rituals, carrying out all the liturgy, and all the while they think they are pleasing God.

Yet, in many cases, the very things they are doing are actually contrary to the word of God.

For example, if someone partakes of the Lord’s Supper because he or she is wanting to gain eternal life by eating the literal body and blood of Jesus, that is a religious ritual that is not merely neutral but is actually unbiblical.

That’s just one example and there are many more.

What’s even worse is when people substitute man-made religious activities in place of God’s commands so they don’t have to keep God’s commands.

For example, there are many people who believe that as long as they make confession to a priest, they don’t have to deal with their sins before God and other people.

That is substituting a man-made practice in place of God’s word.

That’s just one example and there are many more.

It is very easy for our hearts to play the switching game in which we put our own religious doings in place of God’s commands.

That’s exactly what was happening in this situation here in Matthew 15.

The scribes and Pharisees had come up with a man-made practice that trumped the command of God.

v. 4

Jesus pulls together two commands from Hebrew Scripture that told the people how God wanted them to relate to and treat their parents.

The first command, “Honor your father and your mother,” is found in Exodus 20:12 and Deuteronomy 5:16, and the second command, “He who curses father or mother, let him be put to death,” is found in Exodus 21:17.

In both cases God was communicating how one ought to relate to his or her parents.

Respect should be shown toward parents and care given to them when they are in need.

It is obvious that is what God expected when He gave those two commands.

How could someone claim to be honoring his parents if he is willing to let them go without the basic necessities of life, when they are unable to provide for themselves?

How could someone claim to be obeying God if he is willing to let his parents go without the basic necessities of life, when they are unable to provide for themselves?

That was the point Jesus was driving home.

If God said to honor your parents and one of the ways you honor your parents is by making sure they don’t go without the basic necessities of life, that means that you have a God-given responsibility to help your parents when they are unable to provide for themselves.

That should have been clear enough.

But the scribes and Pharisees had taken something that was very clear and they had trumped it by something that, at first glance, sounded far more important.

v. 5

Do you see what was going on here?

These religious leaders were basically saying to their parents, “I know you are old and don’t have any way to support yourself, but I can’t help you out because I have devoted all my resources to the Lord.”

Doesn’t that sound spiritual?

“Mom, I’d really like to help you out but everything is already committed to the Lord.”

That’s how the scribes and Pharisees got around their responsibility to obey God by honoring their parents.

And their example had spread throughout much of Jewish society so that many others were following that same example and saying the same thing to their parents.

The result was that people felt like that justified their neglect of their parents who were in need, as Jesus points out in the next verse.

v. 6

Jesus wasn’t confused by their supposed spirituality.

It may sound more spiritual to say that your resources are devoted to God but if you say that with the result that you are disobeying the word of God, that’s not spiritual at all.

The people were using that approach to get around something they didn’t want to do.

They didn’t want to use their financial resources to help out their parents who were in need, so it was very convenient to say that they had made a vow to God that everything belonged to Him.

And think about this, beloved: There was even a verse to which they could point which declared that any vow made to God could not be violated.

Numbers 30:2 says that.

So here’s how the people reasoned: If I make a vow that all my resources belong to God, then they can’t be used for anything but service to Him and not as a resource of financial assistance for my parents.

Not only does that sound spiritual, it also sounds complicated.

After all, they based their actions on the statement in Numbers 30:2 that a vow to God cannot be violated.

So it sounded like they had biblical support for their actions.

Do you see how complicated we can make things when we desire to get around something we don’t want to do?

We are just like this sometimes.

We don’t want to make the sacrifice to be the kind of husband we ought to be or wife we ought to be or employee we ought to be or whatever, so we say things such as, “I can’t do that for you because I need to have my devotions and prayer time.”

Isn’t that convenient?

Or we can even twist it around the other way.

We can say, “I’d like to go to church for worship and instruction but I have a responsibility to provide for my family, so I better put in some overtime instead.”

Or, “I’d like to go to church for worship and instruction but I have a responsibility to take care of myself as the temple of the Holy Spirit, so I’d better sleep in and spend the rest of the day relaxing by the river.”

Oh how deceitful we can be in our hearts!

When we desire to get around something we don’t want to do, we can be very creative in our ways of rationalizing and justifying.

And when we do, we are making the word of God of no effect.

We are, in essence, canceling out the authority of the word of God by our own manipulation and by our own contriving.

When we behave like that, there is a word for us.

Jesus uses it in the next verse.

v. 7

Even though we can make our reasoning sound very spiritual, when we use supposed scriptural reasoning to get around something God wants us to do but we don’t want to do, we are being hypocrites.

Hypocrisy is when we pretend to be what we are not.

It's important that we understand that definition.

Hypocrisy is not failure to be all that we want to be or should be as Christians.

We all fall short of that.

Hypocrisy is deliberate manipulation of things to cloak ourselves in spirituality when our hearts really aren’t interested in obeying the Lord at that point.

Hypocrisy is saying, “I’d like to be a better husband (or wife) but my God-given obligations take up too much of my time and energy.”

Hypocrisy is saying, “I’d like to give faithfully and generously to the Lord’s work but if I don’t have all the things my neighbors have, then I might be a poor testimony to them.”

Should I stop?

Hypocrisy is when we don’t want to do what God wants us to do in a specific area of life, so we come up with a clever spiritual reason to get around doing it.

Jesus could see right through that, which is why I said earlier that it would have been very awkward and uncomfortable to be around Him at times.

On this occasion He confronted the unwillingness of the people of His day to care for their elderly parents and a very similar issue is addressed in our text in 1st Timothy 5.  (Let’s turn there together.)

Please follow along as I read verses 3-16, though we already covered verses 3-8.

vv. 3-16

We began to consider this section of Scripture in the last message and we saw that this was an issue that was very significant for the 1st century church, when there was no such thing as Social Security or pensions or retirement accounts, etc.

Therefore, the Holy Spirit of God guided Paul to give Timothy instructions about caring for godly widows who have no family members to take care of them.

If there are believing family members, those family members need to realize their responsibility to care for their widowed mom or grandmother.

If they refuse, the Holy Spirit has this to say.

v. 8

It was both Greek and Roman law that children had to care for their aged parents, which is why Paul says that someone who refuses to care for his parents is worse than an unbeliever.

Even unbelievers in that day were expected to care for their widowed mom or grandmother and they did.

So, it’s understandable that God would expect His own people to do the same thing.

However, there are times when a widow has no believing family members to take care of her and then the church should take up that responsibility.

But guidelines were and are needed for those in leadership in the church to know which widows should be taken on the list of those receiving financial support.

Verses 3-8 give us to general qualifications and they can be summed up in two qualifications: genuine need and genuine character.

For a widow to be supported by the church, she must have a genuine need and she must be a godly woman who is not just “milking the system.”

In addition to those general qualifications, Paul adds some more specifics.

v. 9

Two specific qualifications are added in this verse.

First of all, a widow needed to be 60 years or older to be put on the list of those who would be supported by the church.

Back in that day 60 was considered retirement age for many because life was much harder on people than it is on many of us today.

In Philemon verse 9 Paul referred to himself as “Paul, the aged” and he was probably about 60 years old.

We don’t usually think of a man who is 60 as “an old man.”

At least, you better not call me that:-)

Paul referred to himself as aged because life in the 1st century had taken its toll on him and even at the age of 60 he was considered old.

That’s probably the reason behind this statement in verse 9 about 60 being the age that qualifies a widow to be put on the support list of the church. -------- The 2nd specific qualification given is that the widow had to have “been the wife of one man.”

We encountered this same phrase in reverse back in chapter 3 where elders and deacons are required to be “the husband of one wife” and we saw then that the phrase doesn’t really stipulate how many times a person has been married.

It’s a character trait.

A man can be an elder if his wife dies and he marries another woman.

That doesn’t disqualify him because the point is that he must be a man who is singularly devoted to his wife.

In the same way, this statement here is describing a woman who was exemplary in her devotion to her husband.

It’s not saying that if she was widowed twice, that disqualifies her from being supported.

The issue is character and that comes out further in the next verse.

v. 10

These are the kinds of character traits that had to be present in the widow’s life for her to be considered for placement on the list of those receiving financial support.

The opening phrase is the general statement and the rest of the verse gives some examples.

She must be a woman who has a reputation for good works or deeds.

Then Paul lists some examples and it’s important that we realize that he’s just give examples.

We miss the point if we make this some kind of “check list.” ------ The first example is “if she has brought up children.”

Again, this is not saying that if she and her husband were unable to have children, that disqualifies her from consideration for support.

In fact, you could argue that if she was not able to have children, that would make her even more qualified.

After all, Paul has already said earlier in the passage that the children and even the grandchildren have a responsibility to support their widowed mom or grandmother.

So, if a widow had no children, it seems that would put her at the top of list as someone who is genuinely in need. --------- There’s also another interesting angle about this statement.

If she has raised children who follow the Lord, the assumption of the passage is that those children would care for her and that probably means that Paul has in mind a widow whose children don’t follow the Lord and don’t care for their mom.

The reason why I mention this is because one commentator said that “this views the godly widow as a Christian mother who has nourished or reared children that have followed the Lord.”

If that’s really what it’s saying, it’s a contradiction of what Paul said earlier about those children caring for their mom.

And it also would mean that Paul was suggesting that a mom whose grown children aren’t following the Lord should somehow be punished because those children aren’t following the Lord.

That makes no sense whatsoever.

That’s why I said earlier that it’s important to see this list as examples of character.

If the widow demonstrated her character in raising her children and giving of herself for her children and sacrificing for her children, she’s the kind of woman that qualifies to be on the list. ------- The next example is, “if she has lodged strangers.”

That is a reference to a woman who is hospitable to others and that comes out in all of our English translations. ------ The next phrase, “if she has washed the saints’ feet,” and that was a common expression to describe any kind of service and selfless ministry to others.

Again, Paul is emphasizing character, not some kind of checklist. -------- The next phrase says, “if she has cared for the afflicted” and it refers to a woman with a tender heart toward others who are hurting and seeks to minister to provide practical support and moral support.

And the final phrase sums it up by saying, “if she has diligently followed every good work.”

I think the point is clear: Paul is telling Timothy that for a woman to be taken on the list of official widows supported by the church, she must be a godly woman who life displayed her love for the Lord.

v. 11

If we read this verse apart from the context historically and textually, it could easily sound strange or sound like Paul is saying that wanting to get married is wanting to go against Christ.

But the next verse indicates that these widows who were taken on the support list of the church made a pledge to spend the rest of their lives serving in some capacity in the church.

So, they would make this pledge and be taken on the support list.

But the scenario that Paul is envisioning here is that a younger woman could easily make that pledge with sincere motives but then decide later that she wanted to get married again and end up reneging on her pledge.

That wouldn’t be good because she would then become a woman who doesn’t keep her word, which isn’t a good reputation for any Christian.

So, Paul wisely told Timothy not to allow a young widow to put herself in that kind of situation.

v. 12

Some of our English translation end with the word “faith” and several end with the word “pledge,” which is the idea that Paul is talking about here.

A younger woman could easily make that pledge with sincere motives but then decide later that she wanted to get married again and end up reneging on her pledge, which is why Paul instructed Timothy to not place a younger widow on the support list. ------- The other possible pitfall about putting a younger widow on list is that if she has too much time on her hands and no a lot to do, she could end up falling into some bad habits.

v. 13

Paul had obviously seen this kind of thing happen or he wouldn’t have just fabricated something out of the air.

There is a common expression that says, “Idle hands are the devil’s playground (or workshop).”

That expression wasn’t invented out of nowhere and, in fact, the idea goes all the way back to a saying by Jerome in the late 4th century.

People have regularly observed that those with a lot of time on their hands often end up engaging in things like what Paul says here.

So, Paul instructed Timothy not to put a young widow in that kind of situation by putting her on the support list of the church.

v. 14

Instead of accepting a pledge from a young widow not to marry, which could have easily led to a set of circumstances where the woman would not keep her word, the Holy Spirit through Paul says it’s better for the young widow to be in position to marry again and have a family.

This would be much better than the other scenario, which would give the adversary an opportunity to slander the name of Christ and slander Christians.

This is another reminder, beloved, that the testimony of Christ is connected to how we live and behave.

Oh, how I wish more Christians would care about that.

Few things are more discouraging and disheartening than to hear about Christians or those who claim to know Christ but they do things in business or in school or at home that bring such reproach to the name of Christ.

Listen, if you claim to be a Christian, then understand that the reputation of Jesus is connected to your behavior.

Do other Christians a favor and don’t claim to be a Christian if you’re going to be a poor employee or if you are going to fail to keep your word or if you are going to use foul language or if you are going do things that shame the name of Christ.

That was one of Paul’s primary concerns behind these instructions.

v. 15

This is another reminder that Paul wasn’t just talking about hypothetical situations.

There were already some young widows who had evidently made a pledge to serve in the church and be supported by the church but, in time, their actions became contradictory and detrimental.

Maybe they lapsed into the kind of behavior described in verse 13 or they broke their word and ended up getting married, possibly even to a non-Christian.

If so, that would have brought even more disgrace upon the church and the name of Christ.

We don’t know all the specifics but Paul uses strong language by saying that “some have already turned aside after Satan.”

So, Paul summarizes what he’s said in the next verse.

v. 16

Here Paul broadens his parameters to say that this responsibility to care for widows isn’t only for sons or men; it’s also for daughters or women.

The point that Paul is stressing here is that it’s almost as if the church is the last resort when it comes to supporting widows.

Sure, the church needs to be willing to support widows who genuinely have need... absolutely.

But the first line of responsibility isn’t the church; it’s family members.

If there are no family members who can do it, then it’s important for the church to make sure that widows aren’t allowed to be neglected and become destitute.

So, what can we learn from this, other than the obvious application of caring for widows?

The underlying principle in all of this is what I said earlier about the reputation of Christ being connected to those who are His followers or claim to be His followers.

That’s an application for all of us.

If you claim to be a Christian, then understand that the reputation of Jesus is connected to your behavior and your actions and your words, whatever your situation in life.

May all of us who name the name of Christ take that seriously.

Bryan Hughes Senior Pastor 406-586-9782 x11