Is this eisegesis? 1 Tim. 4:8

[davejonescue]

As I have been thinking on 1 Tim. 4:8 a couple of thoughts come to mind.

1. Paul would was not speaking to a generation/nation where obesity was common place. Instead, meals were meager, often times plain, and work was often times laborious.
2. We live in a society where most meals are what would historically be considered dainty, delicate, luxurious, extravagant, etc. (Basically rich and high calorie.) Also, the work force seems to be about 50/50 laborious & sedentary.
3. In Pauls time, much of the Greek lore was centered around exceptional physical prowess, like Atlas.

Would this then make Pauls statements of comparing physical exercise and spiritual exercise, i.e. benefits little as opposed to godliness; possibly be misconstrued in our current context. Meaning, is Paul not talking about normal Adam type physicality, but Atlas type prowess? I ask this because it would seem in a context where the average citizen has to be borderline offensive to maintain physical normality; given the average meal is calorie dense, and often times work, physically easy; that maintaining an average form of physicality would be a form of godliness in the goal of good stewardship of the temple. While trying to excel or be like Ronnie Coleman would be the thing of little benefit comparative to spiritual prowess. I am just having a hard time imagining Paul looking at a nation of fat people, and telling them to forgo physical exercise to pursue godliness. But on the flip, I can easily see him tell a nation of relatively fit people not to pursue dreams of being like Atlas.

Is this eisigesis though? I dont want to make Paul say what he isnt just because we deal with a national obesity crisis.

 

[iainduguid]

Paul doesn't say that bodily training is of no value; it is of some value but godliness has value beyond this present life into eternity. I have a variety of physical conditions that I struggle with, and the common feature is that all the doctors tell me to exercise more. So it is of recognizable value for me to work out at the gym, which I think Paul would commend. But the pursuit of godliness is still far more important for me. Fortunately, few of us have to choose between a healthy exercise level and the pursuit of godliness: we may have both—we can even listen to sermons while we work out!

 

[davejonescue]

Paul doesn't say that bodily training is of no value; it is of some value but godliness has value beyond this present life into eternity. I have a variety of physical conditions that I struggle with, and the common feature is that all the doctors tell me to exercise more. So it is of recognizable value for me to work out at the gym, which I think Paul would commend. But the pursuit of godliness is still far more important for me. Fortunately, few of us have to choose between a healthy exercise level and the pursuit of godliness: we may have both—we can even listen to sermons while we work out!

Yes, but that is kind of not my point. My contention is that Paul is making a distinction between bodily exercise and godliness, in what I think is a contrast between pursuing physical prowess and spiritual prowess. But, he was speaking to a generation where obesity was rare. In our context exercise is not a necessarily a matter of a pursuit of prowess (i.e. Atlas strength), but Adamic normality, i.e. a temple the way God designed it to be. (Normality vs Excelling) So that while in that verse there is a distinction between physical exercise and spiritual exercise, in a world where it is so easy to be obese, physical exercise now becomes a pursuit of godliness, and bodily exercise merely to be uneedingly fit, becomes secondary to godliness.

 

[Slave-to-the-Light-777]

The reason godliness is more important than physical fitness is due to its eternal value. Physical fitness is a good thing. At the very least, it means taking care of the body God gave us. But physical fitness only benefits us while we have this physical body. On the other hand, spiritual growth impacts eternity

 

[davejonescue]

The reason godliness is more important than physical fitness is due to its eternal value. Physical fitness is a good thing. At the very least, it means taking care of the body God gave us. But physical fitness only benefits us while we have this physical body. On the other hand, spiritual growth impacts eternity

But at what point does physical neglect become sin? If never, I can see this point, but if there is a point, then the pursuit of not allowing our bodies to reach that point, is a pursuit of godliness. This is why I am thinking Paul is not speaking against striving/maintaining for Adam-like normality, but Atlas-like excelling.

 

[clawrence9008]

But at what point does physical neglect become sin? If never, I can see this point, but if there is a point, then the pursuit of not allowing our bodies to reach that point, is a pursuit of godliness. This is why I am thinking Paul is not speaking against striving/maintaining for Adam-like normality, but Atlas-like excelling.

I think you raise a good point. Whereas bodily training / physical exercise will of course have a lower value than "spiritual training," because the latter pertains to eternal things, yet I think for some people it would be sin (violation of the 6th commandment) to not exercise.

WSC 68
Q. What is required in the sixth commandment?
A. The sixth commandment requireth all lawful endeavours to preserve our own life, and the life of others.

WSC 69
Q. What is forbidden in the sixth commandment?
A. The sixth commandment forbiddeth the taking away of our own life, or the life of our neighbor unjustly, or whatsoever tendeth thereunto.

WLC 136
Q. What are the sins forbidden in the sixth commandment?
A. The sins forbidden in the sixth commandment are, all taking away the life of ourselves, or of others, except in case of public justice, lawful war, or necessary defence; the neglecting or withdrawing the lawful and necessary means of preservation of life; sinful anger, hatred, envy, desire of revenge; all excessive passions, distracting cares; immoderate use of meat, drink, labor, and recreations; provoking words; oppression, quarreling, striking, wounding, and whatsoever else tends to the destruction of the life of any.

So I think for someone who is putting their life at risk because of health conditions that come specifically from not taking care of your body through proper diet or exercise, or for someone (like Dr. Duguid said above) who has health conditions that can be remedied through exercise and yet who refuses to be a good steward of their body by exercising, to neglect one's physical condition would be sin.

 

[davejonescue]

I think you raise a good point. Whereas bodily training / physical exercise will of course have a lower value than "spiritual training," because the latter pertains to eternal things, yet I think for some people it would be sin (violation of the 6th commandment) to not exercise.

WSC 68
Q. What is required in the sixth commandment?
A. The sixth commandment requireth all lawful endeavours to preserve our own life, and the life of others.

WSC 69
Q. What is forbidden in the sixth commandment?
A. The sixth commandment forbiddeth the taking away of our own life, or the life of our neighbor unjustly, or whatsoever tendeth thereunto.

WLC 136
Q. What are the sins forbidden in the sixth commandment?
A. The sins forbidden in the sixth commandment are, all taking away the life of ourselves, or of others, except in case of public justice, lawful war, or necessary defence; the neglecting or withdrawing the lawful and necessary means of preservation of life; sinful anger, hatred, envy, desire of revenge; all excessive passions, distracting cares; immoderate use of meat, drink, labor, and recreations; provoking words; oppression, quarreling, striking, wounding, and whatsoever else tends to the destruction of the life of any.

So I think for someone who is putting their life at risk because of health conditions that come specifically from not taking care of your body through proper diet or exercise, or for someone (like Dr. Duguid said above) who has health conditions that can be remedied through exercise and yet who refuses to be a good steward of their body by exercising, to neglect one's physical condition would be sin.

I am also thinking of Eph. 5:29, notice how it says "even as the Lord does the church." That seems like a serious imperative on how we should cherish it. If I am not mistaken this is the same comparison as how husbands should love their wives? This is one thing that makes me think Paul wouldn't be too hip to so many thinking combating obesity is not striving for godliness.

And by the way, struggling with weight is something I deal with. But it is one thing I have almost never heard mentioned in church. Am just wondering if the idea that physical exercise is optional plays into this? It may have been optional in a context where obesity is rare, but not in a context where it is 50% of the nation.

 

[omniavanitas]

Notice the preceding verse: "But refuse profane and old wives' fables, and exercise thyself rather unto godliness." Verse 8 is referring to rigorous asceticism and outward religious practices. Calvin puts it quite eloquently in his Commentary:

For bodily exercise is of little profit. By the exercise “of the body,” he does not mean that which lies in hunting, or in the race-course, or in wrestling, or in digging, or in the mechanical occupations; but he gives that name to all the outward actions that are undertaken, for the sake of religion, such as watchings, long fasts, lying on the earth, and such like. Yet he does not here censure the superstitious observance of those things; otherwise he would totally condemn them, as he does in the Epistle to the Colossians, (Colossians 2:21,) but at present he only speaks slightingly of them, and says that they are of little advantage. So, then though the heart be altogether upright, and the object proper, yet, in outward actions, Paul finds nothing that he can value highly.

 

[Slave-to-the-Light-777]

But at what point does physical neglect become sin? If never, I can see this point, but if there is a point, then the pursuit of not allowing our bodies to reach that point, is a pursuit of godliness. This is why I am thinking Paul is not speaking against striving/maintaining for Adam-like normality, but Atlas-like excelling.

But at what point does physical neglect become sin? If never, I can see this point, but if there is a point, then the pursuit of not allowing our bodies to reach that point, is a pursuit of godliness. This is why I am thinking Paul is not speaking against striving/maintaining for Adam-like normality, but Atlas-like excelling.

Even if we were to set that distinction aside and grant you the full stewardship framing, Paul’s comparative principle still stands untouched. Whatever physical maintenance you’re doing, … whether it’s the minimum required to not be in open sin against your own body, or whether it’s rigorous daily training, it still profits only for this life. The eschatological point doesn’t change based on the intensity of the exercise. A man maintaining basic health and a man training for a marathon are both engaging in something whose benefit terminates at the grave. Paul’s point in this passage is about where the profit ends.
That said, I think your stewardship concern is entirely valid, it is just that, you don’t need 1 Timothy 4:8 to support it. Because it can’t support it without distorting Paul’s actual argument. What supports it is 1 Corinthians 6:19-20, the theology of the body as the temple of the Holy Spirit, and the general biblical condemnation of gluttony and sloth as genuine sins. All of that is right there in Scripture, and you can refer to it to make your case without asking Paul to say something more contextually specific than he was saying.

 

[davejonescue]

Notice the preceding verse: "But refuse profane and old wives' fables, and exercise thyself rather unto godliness." Verse 8 is referring to rigorous asceticism and outward religious practices. Calvin puts it quite eloquently in his Commentary:

Thank you for this. As after looking at multiple commentaries, old and newer, this is exactly what was intended by Pauls statements.

NICNT:
“Godliness” emerges as the central interest in the subsection and reflection on it helps undergird its importance within the view of authentic Christian existence Paul seeks to develop. For this reason its meaning is carefully measured against a traditional emphasis on physical exercise (exemplified in the asceticism of the heretics) and woven into a proverbial statement (v. 8). Paul’s use of the logic is then reinforced with the “faithful saying” formula (v. 9).

I stand corrected, & much appreciated.