1 Timothy 1:20

1 Timothy 1:20 “Among these are Hymenaeus and Alexander”: Which indicates that these two men are not the only ones in this category, “among these are”. This is perhaps the same Hymenaeus as is mentioned in 2 Timothy 2:17. who taught that the resurrection was already past. One way of claiming that the resurrection was past was to argue that the only resurrection mentioned in the Scriptures is when. person rises in newness of life after baptism.

1 Timothy 1:20 “Whom. have delivered over to Satan”: To deliver one to Satan is to withdraw from those mentioned, that is to exercise the withdrawal mentioned in Matthew 18:15 and 1 Corinthians 5:1 ff.

“What. terrifying phrase is that the man was already in Satan's possession. Withdrawal is simply the formal declaration by the visible community of what has already taken place in the invisible realm. Withdrawal suggests our stepping back and leaving the man alone” [Note:. McGuiggan p. 62] “More likely, the language means to turn him back into Satan's sphere” (Fee p. 209). Withdrawal is the acceptance of the "reality" of the case. This man, because of his selfishness, belongs to Satan's kingdom, and not God's.

Some feel that the delivering unto Satan means that God's protection will be withdrawn and Satan will be allowed to inflict physical suffering upon them, yet this does not harmonize with the Scriptures. Even faithful Christians are not immune from physical suffering. The punishment inflicted upon the man in 1 Corinthians 5:1 was inflicted by the many (2 Corinthians 2:5). The punishment that was inflicted was to have no company with this person.

Side Note: “Destruction of the Flesh” (1 Corinthians 5:5).

Many commentators take this phrase to refer to some physical sickness or disease that Satan is allowed to inflict upon the withdrawn, even to the point of physical death. Job, Ananias and Sapphira and Paul's thorn in the flesh are all cited as examples, but neither Job nor Paul were the subjects of church discipline, and “that the spirit may be saved”, wasn't the end result of the punishment visited upon Ananias and Sapphira, not to mention God brought that judgment, not Satan.

Some of the "once saved always saved" school of thinking, believe that this passage is teaching that if. child of God is going to go into sin, God will cause that person to be killed before they have. chance to forfeit their salvation. Problems: (1) How does. person's own death "save their spirit"? Or, does one's own blood also atone for one's own sins?. thought only the blood of Christ could atone for sins (John 1:29). (2) The man in this chapter doesn't fit the above scenario, for he "hath" his father's wife (he's past the stage of merely thinking about it), this man is already "lost". (3) The only path to salvation that. find in the bible, runs directly through repentance. (2 Peter 3:9; Romans 2:4; Acts 8:22; 1 John 1:9) (3) Such would also teach that God saves some people "against their will".

“ The further instruction in verse 11, that they are not to associate with this man, not even to eat with him, implies that no immediate death is in purview” (Fee p. 212). In addition, the man was not killed, for he repented (2 Corinthians 2:5). "Flesh" here must mean something different from the body. For sin does not originate in the body, but in the heart (Mark 7:20). “May”: The "destruction of the flesh" and the "spirit being saved", are hoped for results. This is. key word to understanding the whole verse. Withdrawal can take place without either result. Since the "spirit being saved" depends upon the attitude of the sinner, therefore, the "destruction of the flesh", must be something that the sinner being withdrawn from must allow to happen in their life.

. think Barclay has. good grasp of this verse, “It was to humiliate the man, to bring about the taming and the eradication of his lusts so that in the end his spirit should be saved. It was to bring him to his senses, to make him see the enormity of the thing that he had done”(p. 50).

1 Timothy 1:20 “So that they will be taught not to blaspheme”: The purpose of such discipline was to teach these men. lesson, the hope is that such action will bring them back to God and His truth. “If the false teachers were allowed to continue in their evil practices unhindered, they would not only lead others astray, but would delude themselves into. false sense of spiritual security” (Reese p. 43).

Hopefully removal from the local congregation will cause these two men to face the fact that teaching false doctrine in this instance amounts to blasphemy, for they are contradicting and opposing what God has said, in effect, calling God. liar. To blaspheme means to “speak reproachfully”, and there are many in the religious world today who do speak reproachfully of the Scriptures.

Closing Thought

The following denominational writer gives us. good insight concerning how the denominational world today seems to ignore the need to practice church discipline:

“In. day when the church tolerates every kind of sin (‘because we who are sinners must not be judgmental'), the need for discipline is perhaps greater than ever. Finally, the great problem with such discipline in most Christian communities in the Western world is that one can simply go down the street to another church. Not only does that say something about the fragmented condition of the church at large, but it also says something about those who would quickly welcome one who is under discipline in another community” (Fee p. 214).