"myths and endless genealogies"

[gmx]

From... 1 Timothy 1:3... the admonition is to ignore such things... to what is it referring if not the major synoptics?

[Peter Kirby]

It could be referring to the development of the aeons.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aeon_(Gnosticism)

[JoeWallack]

From... 1 Timothy 1:3... the admonition is to ignore such things... to what is it referring if not the major synoptics?

JW:
Paul explicitly, repeatedly and significantly identifies The Jewish Bible as Scripture. Paul never explicitly or implicitly indicates he was aware of GMatthew/GLuke. So the better question is why don't you assume he is referring to The Jewish Bible?


Joseph

ErrancyWiki

[DCHindley]

From... 1 Timothy 1:3... the admonition is to ignore such things... to what is it referring if not the major synoptics?

1 Timothy 1:3 As I urged you when I was going to Macedonia, remain at Ephesus that you may charge certain persons not to teach any different doctrine,

4 nor to occupy themselves with myths and endless genealogies which promote speculations rather than the divine training (οἰκονομίαν θεοῦ, literally stewardship of God, or divine stewardship) that is in faith;

5 whereas the aim of our charge is love that issues from a pure heart and a good conscience and sincere faith.

6 Certain persons by swerving from these have wandered away into vain discussion, 7 desiring to be teachers of the law, without understanding either what they are saying or the things about which they make assertions.

8 Now we know that the law is good, if any one uses it lawfully, 9 understanding this, that the law is not laid down for the just but for the lawless and disobedient, for the ungodly and sinners, for the unholy and profane, for murderers of fathers and murderers of mothers, for manslayers, 10 immoral persons, sodomites, kidnapers, liars, perjurers, and whatever else is contrary to sound doctrine, 11 in accordance with the glorious gospel of the blessed God with which I have been entrusted.

These "certain men" think of themselves as "teachers of the law", which I think rules out "big-G" Gnostics, at least of the Valentinian kind. It seems that these directed their legal opinions towards the "just" (i.e., righteous). How these relate to "myths and endless genealogies" (μύθοις καὶ γενεαλογίαις ἀπεράντοις) I am not sure, but my guess would be eschatological apocalyptic "speculations", similar to what modern day fundamentalism has done with regard to "end times prophesy". Think of the way they like(d) to identify eschatological villains such as the USSR and European Union based on genealogical talk about Gog & Mag-Gog" from Genesis 10 (a person) to Ezekiel and Revelation (nations). There is a price to pay for anyone deviating from the strict application of their instructions to the faithful.

In vs 19 the author says that "certain persons have made shipwreck of their faith," by "rejecting conscience". Paul (or the author) contrasts that with his own message, which encourages "love that issues from a pure heart and a good conscience and sincere faith". I'm not about to say that this difference of approach points to the Gospel stories and genealogies. That's pushing things a bit.

[Bernard Muller]

I think the "myths and endless genealogies" refer to the gospels (with "endless" being an exaggeration), more so for the genealogies, gMatthew & gLuke.
BTW, most critical scholars agree that 1 Timothy was not written by Paul, but well after Paul, around 120 CE, when these gospels were already written & known.
At the beginning of that webpage http://historical-jesus.info/gospels.html, I showed that the gospels, including the canonical ones, because of the perceived myths in them (and conflicts & differences between them), were not well accepted by some orthodox Christians (who would include later followers of Paul, to whom the letter was addressed) for a long time, even after Irenaeus' times. More, the myths in them were criticized by non-Christians. And most apologists of the time were ridiculing the myths about pagan gods and consequently, avoided the gospels Jesus because of myths associated with him.
The vastly conflicting genealogies in gMatthew & gLuke were the subject of various explanations by Christians, and likely the subject of disputes.

Cordially, Bernard

[Giuseppe]

I think the "myths and endless genealogies" refer to the gospels (with "endless" being an exaggeration), more so for the genealogies, gMatthew & gLuke.
BTW, most critical scholars agree that 1 Timothy was not written by Paul, but well after Paul, around 120 CE, when these gospels were already written & known.
At the beginning of that webpage http://historical-jesus.info/gospels.html, I showed that the gospels, including the canonical ones, because of the perceived myths in them (and conflicts & differences between them), were not well accepted by some orthodox Christians (who would include later followers of Paul, to whom the letter was addressed) for a long time, even after Irenaeus' times. More, the myths in them were criticized by non-Christians. And most apologists of the time were ridiculing the myths about pagan gods and consequently, avoided the gospels Jesus because of myths associated with him.
The vastly conflicting genealogies in gMatthew & gLuke were the subject of various explanations by Christians, and likely the subject of disputes.

Cordially, Bernard

I listen these words usually as argument against the proto-orthodox origin of the first gospels. The "anti-Gospel suspect" you are talking about is more expected among the literalist proto-orthodox because of their perceived heretic origin and/or allegorical use of the first gospels.

[gmx]

I think the "myths and endless genealogies" refer to the gospels (with "endless" being an exaggeration), more so for the genealogies, gMatthew & gLuke.
BTW, most critical scholars agree that 1 Timothy was not written by Paul, but well after Paul, around 120 CE, when these gospels were already written & known.

Interesting too, that the gospels with genealogies were the first to appear, and that Mark has excised these genealogies from his derivative account. It dovetails neatly into your theory around Paul's tight integration with Mark...

[Japhethite]

I think it is possibly refering to pagan/gentile & jewish genealogy in general. We all like if we have some royal/noble blood in our family tree. It is also well known that nowadays many people will have some noble/royal link somewhere in past generations. Cultures also grafted on other prominent cultures (Classical, Biblical), like some Norse/Saxons claim descent from Odin (and Troy and Adam). It could also possibly refer to geological time scale?

Matthew/Levi to Jews [Shem] has genealogy from Abraham, Luke/Paul to Greeks/Gentiles [Japheth] from Adam, Mark/Peter to Romans [Ham] has none.

(Had the idea to try a different browser to see if would let me post longer posts not just 1/few lines posts.)

[Stuart]

I side with Peter on this. But I am going to do so by examination of the context of the passage.

First, we need to keep in mind that the Pastoral letters are not harmonies, but rather competitors. They differ from each other and present differing theologies, undoubtedly representing differing factions, with perhaps a Catholic layer on top to make at the first two written acceptable. (I think that layer is small, as in a few words here and there only - but I have not made a complete survey to verify that, so I won't argue or develop that point here.)

With Friedrich Schleiermacher's analysis in view, 1 Timothy 1:4 is here seen as a rewrite of Titus 1:14.

Titus 1:14

not paying attention to Jewish myths and commandments of men who turn away from the truth.
μὴ προσέχοντες Ἰουδαϊκοῖς μύθοις καὶ ἐντολαῖς ἀνθρώπων ἀποστρεφομένων τὴν ἀλήθειαν

1 Timothy 1:4

nor to pay attention to myths and endless genealogies, which give rise to mere speculation rather than furthering the administration of God which is by faith.
μηδὲ προσέχειν μύθοις καὶ γενεαλογίαις ἀπεράντοις, αἵτινες ἐκζητήσεις παρέχουσιν μᾶλλον ἢ οἰκονομίαν θεοῦ τὴν ἐν πίστει·

Titus specifies the myths he opposes as Jewish or rather Jewish Christian, suggesting the author is in the "Greek" or heretical camp. This is supported by his association of these 'Jewish myths' to the 'commandments of men who have turned away from the truth.' We also find in Colossians 2:20-22 the depiction of such commandments of men, and they are associated with competing Christian doctrines (διδασκαλίας). Colossians further associates these with Jewish Christians, saying that these commandments (ἐντάλματα) derive from the handling of foods, 'Do not touch, do not taste, do not cut up' (Μὴ ἅψῃ μηδὲ γεύσῃ μηδὲ θίγῃς). These commandments and teachings of men are derived from some of the Leviticus directives; but I think Deuteronomy 14:8, especially in LXX form gives the closest approximation to commandments the author is objecting to, dealing here specifically with pig meat. Titus is in agreement with Colossians 2:20, that the one who is in Christ, who defeated the elemental spirits of the world, and so should not be subject to the regulations of the world, emphasis here on the Leviticus dietary prohibitions.

And he goes on to say that those who follow the Jewish commandments and myths have "turned away from the truth." This leads to the conclusion that the myths in question concern Jesus being descendant from the seed of David (e.g., Matthew 1:1ff), predicted in the very Law which Titus rejects. Most important is then the "myth" that the Jewish tribal God is the same as the high God. Titus confirms that his Christ is different, describing him in verse 2:11, as one the who 'appeared' (Ἐπεφάνη) as 'the grace of God bringing salvation to all men' (ἡ χάρις τοῦ θεοῦ σωτήριος πᾶσιν ἀνθρώποις). Titus' Christ is the heretical one, and so it is not surprising that Tatian would accept it alone among the Pastoral epistle.

Note: Titus 2:14 gives an opposing view, putting forward the Catholic concepts of redemption (see Matthew 20:28 = Mark 10:45, Luke 1:68, 2:38) from 'all lawlessness' and 'purifying a people of his own'. I simply mark it as candidate for part of the Catholic layer of the Pastoral collector (and editor), without further inspection.

1 Timothy 1:4 however rewrites Titus, dropping the reference of the myths being Jewish, and confirms this is a deliberate distancing by associating the myths with 'endless genealogies' (γενεαλογίαις ἀπεράντοις) instead of the commandments of men that Titus so closely associates with Jewish food ordinances. The 'endless genealogies' do not correspond to the ancestral list in Matthew's 'book of the genealogy' (Βίβλος γενέσεως) concerning his Jesus' Davidic and Abrahamic roots. And anyway such a debate is finite, defined by accepted texts of Matthew or Luke. What 1 Timothy is concerned with however, is so disruptive that it impacts the church leaders such that they cannot pay attention to the administration (οἰκονομίαν) and even challenges the faith of God's church. This depicts an existential challenge, and that suggests something more like the cosmological systems of Valentinian type heretics.

Tertullian sees this statement exactly the same way in Adversus Valentinianos 3.4:

Let, however, any man approach the subject from a knowledge of the faith which he has otherwise learned, as soon as he finds so many names of eons, so many marriages, so many offspring, so many exits, so many issues, felicities and infelicities of a dispersed and mutilated Deity, will that man hesitate at once to pronounce that these are the fables and endless genealogies (fabulas et genealogias indeterminatas) as the holy apostle says

You can pick up the works of Irenaeus, Origen, Hippolytus, Clement, or Tertullian and read about the systems of heavenly beings, how such and such begat so and so, which are sometimes even more complex than the chart Peter Kirby provided above.

The context of the 1 Timothy passage provides clear evidence of this heretical focus. His myths are different than Titus' which are tied to Leviticus dietary prohibitions in the Law, because he makes clear in verses 1:8-11, saying, "the Law is good," and it was laid down for the "lawless" (i.e., heretics), "in accordance with the ... Gospel ... of God." Timothy makes reference to the various Paul legends, such as in verse 1:13 mention of Saul's persecution of Jesus Christ found in Acts. And in the process he makes a profound statement that he also blasphemed the Christ he now supports. Blaspheme is a term heavily associated with the Heretics who denied the Creator was the God of Christ. This statement, much like 2 Peter 3:15-16, is an acknowledgement that Paul is, or at least was formerly associated with the heretics, but is now presented in 1 Timothy as no longer a blasphemer. But the heretics still blaspheme, and 1 Timothy's author now uses Paul's authority in verse 1:20, borrowing from the Marcionite phraseology of 1 Corinthians 3:5, say he delivered up to Satan two heretics, Hymenaeus and Alexander, "so they'll learn not to blaspheme." This blasphemy circles back as we are told in verse 1:19 that they shipwrecked their faith, indicating they could not carry out their administrative duties called for in verse 1:4.

Irenaeus, for example in Against Heresies associates Blasphemy with Valentinians such as Ptolemaeus in the prologue of the first book. And he makes a clear statement at the end of chapter eight, that he associates blaspheme with those complicated Valentinian schemes

But [the superior skill spoken of] is not found in this, that any one should, beyond the Creator and Framer [of the world], conceive of the Enthymesis of an erring Aeon, their mother and his, and should thus proceed to such a pitch of blasphemy; nor does it consist in this, that he should again falsely imagine, as being above this [fancied being], a Pleroma at one time supposed to contain thirty, and at another time an innumerable tribe of Aeons, as these teachers who are destitute of truly divine wisdom maintain; while the Catholic Church possesses one and the same faith throughout the whole world, as we have already said.

We find the same opinion from Tertullian in Adversus Valentinianos. He gives example of how blaspheme derives from the cosmological generation of the various demigods that populate it. He states this explicitly in chapters 17-18 concerning Achamoth's birth of various offspring including the creator

And first of all (she does) what cannot be described and read, and heard of, without an intense horror at the blasphemy thereof: she produces this God of ours, the God of all except of the heretics, the Father and Creator and King of all things, which are inferior to him.

From the above I conclude the endless genealogies in 1 Timothy refers to the Valentinian heresy, and not to the book of genealogy in Matthew which Titus objected to.