You are here

Was Timothy Timid or Fearful? (2 Timothy 1:7)

The normal picture people have of Timothy was that he was timid, a picture largely centered on 2 Tim 1:7 — “For the Spirit God gave us does not make us timid, but gives us power, love and self–discipline” (TNIV). When combined with the fact that he was young and evidently sick much of the time (1 Tim 5:23), many have a constructed an image of Timothy that would hardly be emulated.

Nothing could be further from the truth. Timothy was one of Paul’s right-hand men. When Paul had difficult situations, fraught with danger and conflict, he shows no hesitation in sending Timothy into the fray. Ephesus was an established church full of entrenched, sinful management. Paul sends Timothy. The persecutions in Thessalonica were intense. So who did Paul send? Timothy. Of no one else does Paul say, “For I have no one like him, who will be genuinely concerned for your welfare” (Phil 2:20).

This should alert us to a problem. Perhaps “timid” has been misunderstood.

How do you determine the meaning of a word? Etymology can point us in a direction, but ultimately it is how the word is used in other contexts. This gives us the range of meanings possessed by the word, and then it is up to the immediate context (2 Tim 1:3) to determine the specific nuance of meaning.

If you check out my commentary, you will see a listing of the uses of deilia. Nowhere does it mean “timid.” In fact, I am a bit at a loss to know where “timid” came from. The word means ”fearful,” “cowardice.” BDAG lists the gloss, lack of mental or moral strength, cowardice. This is why the ESV reads, “for God gave us a spirit not of fear but of power and love and self-control” (emphasis added).

Is Paul saying that Timothy is fearful, a coward? That seems impossible. Nowhere in our understanding of Paul or Timothy is there a place for cowardice. And look at the entire verse. Is Paul actually saying that Timothy should not be fearful but should be characterized by power, love, and self-control? Would this mean that Timothy was not characterized by power, love, and self-control? That seems hardly possible as well.

So what is Paul saying? Things are not always as easy as we would like them to be. I believe that “fear” is merely a literary foil to emphasize that Timothy’s life is to be characterized by power, by love, and by self-control. In other words, Paul is not saying that Timothy is fearful or cowardly — this makes no sense in light of what we know about Timothy, and merely being young or physically sick does not mean that you are a coward. Rather, these are qualities that Timothy already possessed, and Paul is encouraging his young co-worker (and best friend, I believe) by reminding him of what Timothy knows is true.

2 Timothy 1 is a model of encouragement. It is helpful to walk through the chapter and count all the ways in which Paul is encouraging Timothy. It is a good checklist for us to use in ministry; are these the kind of things we say to our co-workers? Do we affirm what we know to be true of them, and by doing so encourage them to persevere in those very qualities? Do we remind them of their spiritual heritage and how precious it is (v 5)? Do we recall our times of joy together (v 4)? Do we remind them that our position together before God is not due to our own efforts but to the work of Christ (v 9)? Do we remind them that despite suffering, God is faithful (v 12)? Do we remind them of the gifting of the Spirit, and how through his working we are powerful, loving, and self-controlled?

These are the words of a seasoned follower of Jesus. May they be our words as well to those with whom we minister. We’re not cowards! We’re not fearful! We have the power of the Lord!

Comments

Dr. Mounce,
This question is totally off-topic, but where do you think there is a greater need for more evangelical scholars, in OT or NT studies? It may not even be possible to answer that question. If not, where do you think current need exists for evangelicals? I've got a second question that is a little different - in what fields do you think evangelicals are most under-represented? I've got my MDiv and I'm working on a second Master's in NT. Both the Old and New Testaments are extremely important to me, but in today's world of specialization, I want to use my life prudently (i.e., make the maximum contribution for the kingdom). Any wisdom you might offer would be greatly appreciated.

Thanks,
Grant R.

I am not really sure of the answer to this question. I would guess OT more than NT.

I just listened to Dan Wallace's lecture on the need for evangelicals to go into textual criticism.

A lot of the problem has to do with whatever is being attacked, but by the time you train yourself for that issue, the attack will probably be gone into some other field. I would rather ask, where does your passion meet the needs of the church, and there is your calling. We need biblical, passionate preachers more than anything else right now I think, and especially preachers who will deal with the horrid ecclesiology out there that allows people to be part-time Christians instead of fully-devoted disciples of Jesus Christ.

In the mounce's expository dictionary it lists timid as a definition for the Greek word you were discussing, but you are saying here it is not timid, I myself like fear better, but is the blog here right or is the dictionary?

Good catch. I will fix the dictionary. It does not mean "timid."

Add new comment