John Calvin Commentary 1 Timothy 2

I exhort therefore. These exercises of godliness maintain and even strengthen us in the sincere worship and fear of God, and cherish the good conscience of which he had spoken. Not inappropriately does he use the word therefore to denote an inference, for these exhortations depend on the preceding commandment.

That, above all, prayers be made. First, he speaks of public prayers, which he enjoins to be offered not only for believers but for all mankind. Some might reason with themselves in this way: “Why should we be anxious about the salvation of unbelievers, with whom we have no connection? Is it not enough if we, who are brothers, pray for our brothers and commend to God the whole of His Church? For we have nothing to do with strangers.” Paul counters this perverse view and enjoins the Ephesians to include all men in their prayers, and not to limit them to the body of the Church.

What the difference is between three out of the four kinds Paul enumerates, I admit that I do not thoroughly understand. The view given by Augustine, who twists Paul’s words to mean ceremonial observances common at that time, is quite childish. A simpler explanation is given by those who think that “requests” are when we ask to be delivered from what is evil; “prayers,” when we desire to obtain something profitable; and “supplications,” when we lament before God injuries we have endured. Yet, for my own part, I do not make the distinction so ingeniously; or, at least, I prefer another way of distinguishing them.

Προσευχαὶ is the Greek word for every kind of prayer, and δεήσεις denotes those forms of petitions in which something definite is asked. In this way, the two words correspond to each other as genus and species. ᾿Εντεύξεις is the word commonly used by Paul to mean those prayers we offer for one another. The word used for it in the Latin Translation is “intercessiones,” intercessions. Yet Plato, in his second dialogue, titled Alcibiades, uses it in a different sense, to mean a definite petition offered by a person for himself; and in the inscription of the book itself, and in many passages, he clearly shows, as I have said, that προσευχὴ is a general term.

But not to dwell longer than is proper on a matter that is not essential, Paul, in my own opinion, simply enjoins that, whenever public prayers are offered, petitions and supplications should be made for all men, even for those who at present are not at all related to us. And yet this heaping up of words is not superfluous; but Paul appears to me to purposely join together three terms for the same purpose, in order to recommend more warmly, and urge more strongly, earnest and constant prayer. We know how sluggish we are in this religious duty; and therefore, we need not wonder if, to arouse us to it, the Holy Spirit, by the mouth of Paul, uses various encouragements.

And thanksgivings. As to this term, there is no obscurity; for, as he instructs us to make supplication to God for the salvation of unbelievers, so also to give thanks for their prosperity and success. That wonderful goodness which he shows every day, when he maketh his sun to rise on the good and the bad (Matthew 5:45), is worthy of being praised; and our love of our neighbor ought also to extend to those who are unworthy of it.

For kings He expressly mentions kings and other magistrates because, more than all others, they might be hated by Christians. All the magistrates who existed at that time were effectively sworn enemies of Christ. Therefore, this thought might occur to Christians: that they should not pray for those who devoted all their power and all their wealth to fight against the kingdom of Christ, the extension of which is desirable above all things.

The apostle meets this difficulty and expressly commands Christians to pray for them also. Indeed, the depravity of human beings is not a reason why God’s ordinance should not be loved. Accordingly, since God appointed magistrates and princes for the preservation of humankind, however much they fall short of the divine appointment, still we must not on that account cease to love what belongs to God and to desire that it may remain in force.

That is the reason why believers, in whatever country they live, must not only obey the laws and the government of magistrates but also, in their prayers, supplicate God for their salvation. Jeremiah said to the Israelites,

Pray for the peace of Babylon, for in their peace ye shall have peace (Jeremiah 29:7).

The universal doctrine is this: we should desire the continuation and peaceful condition of those governments which have been appointed by God.

That we may lead a peaceful and quiet life. By pointing out the advantage, he offers an additional inducement, for he enumerates the fruits that a well-regulated government yields to us. The first is a peaceful life, for magistrates are armed with the sword to keep us in peace. If they did not restrain the boldness of wicked people, every place would be full of robberies and murders. The true way of maintaining peace, therefore, is when everyone obtains what is his own, and the violence of the more powerful is kept under restraint.

With all godliness and decency. The second fruit is the preservation of godliness; that is, when magistrates dedicate themselves to promoting religion, maintaining the worship of God, and ensuring that sacred ordinances are observed with due reverence. The third fruit is the care of public decency, for it is also the business of magistrates to prevent people from abandoning themselves to brutal filthiness or shameful conduct but, on the contrary, to promote decency and moderation.

If these three things are taken away, what will be the condition of human life? If, therefore, we are at all moved by concern for the peace of society, or godliness, or decency, let us remember that we should also be concerned about those through whose agency we obtain such distinguished benefits.

Hence we conclude that fanatics who wish to have magistrates taken away are destitute of all humanity and breathe nothing but cruel barbarism. How different it is to say that we should pray for kings so that justice and decency may prevail, and to say that not only the name of kingly power but all government is opposed to religion! We have the Spirit of God as the Author of the former sentiment, and therefore the latter must be from the Devil.

If anyone asks, "Should we pray for kings from whom we obtain none of these advantages?" I answer that the purpose of our prayer is that, guided by the Spirit of God, they may begin to provide us with those benefits of which they formerly deprived us.

It is our duty, therefore, not only to pray for those who are already worthy, but we must pray to God that He may make bad rulers good. We must always hold to this principle: magistrates were appointed by God for the protection of religion, as well as of the peace and decency of society, in exactly the same manner that the earth is appointed to produce food.

Accordingly, just as when we pray to God for our daily bread, we ask Him to make the earth fertile by His blessing, so with those benefits of which we have already spoken, we should consider the ordinary means He has appointed by His providence for bestowing them.

To this must be added that if we are deprived of those benefits which Paul indicates magistrates should provide, it is through our own fault. It is the wrath of God that renders magistrates useless to us, in the same manner that it renders the earth barren. Therefore, we should pray for the removal of those chastisements which have been brought upon us by our sins.

On the other hand, princes and all who hold the office of magistrate are here reminded of their duty. It is not enough if, by giving to everyone what is due, they restrain all acts of violence and maintain peace; they must also endeavor to promote religion and to regulate morals by wholesome discipline. The exhortation of David (Psalms 2:12) to kiss the Son, and the prophecy of Isaiah that they shall be nursing — fathers of the Church (Isaiah 49:23), are not without meaning. Therefore, they have no right to flatter themselves if they neglect to offer their assistance to maintain the worship of God.

For this is good and acceptable before God. After having taught that what he instructed is useful, he now presents a stronger argument—that it pleases God. For when we know what His will is, this should have the force of all possible reasons. By good he means what is proper and lawful; and, since the will of God is the rule by which all our duties must be regulated, he proves that it is right because it pleases God.

This passage is highly noteworthy. First, we draw from it the general doctrine that the true rule for acting well and properly is to look to the will of God, and not to undertake anything except what he approves.

Next, a rule for godly prayer is also established: we should follow God as our leader, and all our prayers should be regulated by his will and command.

If this argument had been given its due weight, the prayers of Papists today would not have abounded with so many corruptions. For how will they prove that they have God's authority for resorting to dead men as their intercessors, or for praying for the dead? In short, in all their form of prayer, what can they point out that is pleasing to God?

Who wishes that all men may be saved. Here follows a confirmation of the second argument; and what is more reasonable than that all our prayers should be in conformity with this decree of God?

And may come to the acknowledgment of the truth. Lastly, he demonstrates that God has at heart the salvation of all, because he invites all to the acknowledgment of his truth. This belongs to that kind of argument in which the cause is proved from the effect; for, if

the gospel is the power of God for salvation to every one that believeth, (Romans 1:16),

it is certain that all those to whom the gospel is addressed are invited to the hope of eternal life. In short, as the calling is a proof of the secret election, so those whom God makes partakers of his gospel are admitted by him to possess salvation, because the gospel reveals to us the righteousness of God, which is a sure entrance into life.

Hence we see the childish folly of those who represent this passage to be opposed to predestination. “If God,” they say, “wishes all men indiscriminately to be saved, it is false that some are predestined by his eternal purpose to salvation, and others to perdition.” They might have had some ground for saying this, if Paul were speaking here about individual men. However, even then we would not have lacked the means of replying to their argument. For although the will of God should not be judged from his secret decrees, when he reveals them to us by outward signs, yet it does not therefore follow that he has not determined within himself what he intends to do concerning every individual.

But I say nothing on that subject, because it has nothing to do with this passage.

For the Apostle simply means that no people and no rank in the world are excluded from salvation, because God wishes that the gospel should be proclaimed to all without exception.

Now the preaching of the gospel gives life, and hence he justly concludes that God invites all equally to partake of salvation.

But the present discussion relates to classes of men, and not to individual persons, for his sole object is to include in this number princes and foreign nations.

That God wishes the doctrine of salvation to be enjoyed by them as well as others is evident from the passages already quoted and from other passages of a similar nature.

Not without good reason was it said, Now, kings, understand, and again, in the same Psalm,

I will give thee the Gentiles for an inheritance, and the ends of the earth for a possession (Psalms 2:8–10).

In a word, Paul intended to show that it is our duty to consider not what kind of persons the princes at that time were, but what God wished them to be. Now, the duty arising from that love we owe our neighbor is to be solicitous for and to endeavor for the salvation of all whom God includes in his calling, and to testify to this by godly prayers.

It is with the same view that he calls God our Savior; for from where do we obtain salvation but from the undeserved kindness of God? Now the same God who has already made us partakers of salvation may sometime extend his grace to them also. He who has already drawn us to him may draw them along with us. The Apostle takes for granted that God will do so, because this had been foretold by the predictions of the prophets concerning all ranks and all nations.

For there is one God. This argument might, at first sight, appear not to be very strong—that God wishes all people to be saved because He is one—if a transition had not been made from God to humanity. Chrysostom—and, after him, others—view it in this sense: that there are not many gods, as idolaters imagine. But I think that Paul’s design was different, and that here there is an implied comparison of the one God with the whole world and with various nations. Out of this comparison arises a view of both, as they mutually regard each other. In the same way, the Apostle says,

Is He the God of the Jews only? Is He not also of the Gentiles? Yes, it is one God who justifies the circumcision by faith, and the uncircumcision through faith (Romans 3:29).

Therefore, whatever diversity might have existed among people at that time—because many ranks and many nations were strangers to faith—Paul reminds believers of the unity of God. He does this so they may know that they are connected with all, because there is one God of all, and so they may know that those who are under the power of the same God are not excluded forever from the hope of salvation.

And one Mediator between God and men. This clause has a similar meaning to the former. For, as there is one God, the Creator and Father of all, so Paul says that there is only one Mediator, through whom we have access to the Father. He also says that this Mediator was given not only to one nation, or to a small number of persons of some particular rank, but to all, because the fruit of the sacrifice by which He made atonement for sins extends to all. More especially, because a large portion of the world was at that time alienated from God, Paul expressly mentions the Mediator, through whom those who were far off now approach.

The universal term all must always be referred to classes of people, not to individuals—as if Paul had said that not only Jews but Gentiles also, not only persons of humble rank but princes also, were redeemed by the death of Christ. Since, therefore, He wishes the benefit of His death to be common to all, an insult is offered to Him by those who, by their opinion, shut out any person from the hope of salvation.

The man Christ Jesus. When Paul declares that He is “a man,” the Apostle does not deny that the Mediator is God. Rather, intending to point out the bond of our union with God, he mentions the human nature rather than the divine. This ought to be carefully observed. From the beginning, people, by devising for themselves this or that mediator, departed further from God. The reason was that, being influenced by the error that God was at a great distance from them, they did not know where to turn. Paul corrects this problem when he represents God as present with us, for He has descended even to us, so that we do not need to seek Him above the clouds. The same thing is said in Hebrews 4:15:

We have not a high priest who cannot sympathize within our infirmities, for in all things He was tempted.

And indeed, if it were deeply impressed on the hearts of all that the Son of God extends to us the hand of a brother, and that we are united to Him by the fellowship of our nature, so that out of our low condition He may raise us to heaven—who would not choose to stay on this direct path, instead of wandering on uncertain and stormy paths! Therefore, whenever we ought to pray to God, if we recall His exalted and unapproachable majesty, so that we may not be deterred by its awesomeness, let us at the same time remember the man Christ, who gently invites us and, so to speak, takes us by the hand, so that the Father, who had been an object of terror and alarm, may be reconciled by Him and made friendly to us. This is the only key to open for us the gate of the heavenly kingdom, so that we may appear in God’s presence with confidence.

Hence we see that Satan has, in all ages, pursued this strategy to lead people astray from the right path. I say nothing of the various devices by which, before the coming of Christ, he alienated people’s minds, causing them to devise methods of approaching God. At the very beginning of the Christian Church, when Christ, with so excellent a pledge, was fresh in their remembrance, and while the earth was still ringing with that delightfully sweet word from His mouth:

Come to Me, all you who labor and are heavy laden,
and I will give you rest (Matthew 11:28).

Nevertheless, there were some persons skilled in deception who thrust angels into His place as mediators, which is evident from Colossians 2:18. But what Satan devised secretly at that time, he carried to such an extent during the times of Popery that hardly one person in a thousand acknowledged Christ, even in words, to be the Mediator. And while the name was buried, the reality was even more unknown.

Now that God has raised up good and faithful teachers, who have labored to restore and remind people of what ought to have been one of the best-known principles of our faith, the sophists of the Church of Rome have resorted to every scheme to obscure a point so clear.

First, the name is so hateful to them that if anyone mentions Christ as Mediator without taking notice of the saints, he immediately falls under suspicion of heresy. But because they do not dare to reject altogether what Paul teaches in this passage, they evade it with a foolish explanation that He is called “one Mediator,” not “the only Mediator.” This is as if the Apostle had mentioned God as one among a vast multitude of gods, for the two clauses are closely connected: “there is one God and one Mediator.” Therefore, those who make Christ one out of many mediators must apply the same interpretation when speaking of God. Would they reach such a level of shamelessness if they were not driven by blind rage to suppress the glory of Christ?

There are others who consider themselves more perceptive and who make this distinction: that Christ is the only Mediator of redemption, while they pronounce the saints to be mediators of intercession. But the folly of these interpreters is refuted by the context of the passage, in which the Apostle speaks explicitly about prayer. The Holy Spirit commands us to pray for all because our only Mediator admits all to come to Him, just as by His death He reconciled all to the Father. And yet those who thus, with bold sacrilege, strip Christ of His honor wish to be considered Christians.

But it is objected that this appears to be a contradiction, for in this very passage Paul commands us to intercede for others, while in the Epistle to the Romans, he declares that intercession belongs to Christ alone (Romans 8:34). I reply: the intercessions of the saints, by which they help each other in their prayers to God, do not contradict the teaching that all have only one Intercessor. For no one’s prayers are heard, either on behalf of himself or on behalf of another, unless they rely on Christ as their advocate. When we intercede for one another, this is so far from undermining the intercession of Christ as belonging to Him alone, that the primary reliance is placed, and the primary reference is made, to that very intercession.

Someone might perhaps think that it will, therefore, be easy for us to reach an agreement with the Papists, if they place all that they attribute to the saints below the unique intercession of Christ.

This is not the case, for the reason they transfer the office of interceding to the saints is that they imagine that otherwise we lack an advocate. It is a common belief among them that we need intercessors because in ourselves we are unworthy to appear in God’s presence. By speaking in this manner, they deprive Christ of His honor.

Besides, it is a shocking blasphemy to attribute to saints such excellence as would obtain God’s favor for us; and all the prophets, apostles, martyrs, and even the angels themselves—are so far from making any claim to this that they too need the same intercession as we do.

Again, it is a mere fantasy, originating in their own minds, that the dead intercede for us. Therefore, to base our prayers on this is entirely to withdraw our trust from calling upon God. But Paul establishes, as the rule for calling on God correctly, faith grounded on the Word of God (Romans 10:17). Therefore, everything that people devise from their own thoughts, without the authority of God’s Word, is rightly rejected by us.

But not to dwell on this subject longer than the explanation of the passage requires, let it be summarized in this way: those who have truly learned the office of Christ will be satisfied with having Him alone, and no one will create mediators according to their own whim except those who know neither God nor Christ. Hence I conclude that the doctrine of the Papists—which obscures, and almost buries, the intercession of Christ, and introduces false intercessors without any scriptural support—is full of wicked distrust and also of wicked rashness.