At Ephesus, over which Timothy was bishop, people had been bewildered by the teaching of converted Jews, who mixed the old leaven of Judaism with the new spirituality of Christianity. They maintained the perpetual obligation of the Jewish law.--v. 7. They desired to be teachers of the law. They required strict performance of a number of severe observances. They talked mysteriously of angels and powers intermediate between God and the human soul.--v. 4. The result was an interminable discussion at Ephesus. The Church was filled with disputations and controversies. Now there is something always refreshing to see the Apostle Paul descending upon an arena of controversy, where minds have been bewildered; and so much is to be said on both sides, that people are uncertain which to take. You know at once that he will pour light upon the question, and illuminate all the dark corners. You know that he will not trim, and balance, and hang doubtful, or become a partisan; but that he will seize some great principle which lies at the root of the whole controversy, and make its true bearings clear at once. This he always does, and this he does on the present occasion.--v. 5 and 6. He does not, like a vehement polemic, say Jewish ceremonies and rules are all worthless, nor some ceremonies are worthless, and others essential; but he says, the root of the whole matter is charity. If you turn aside from this, all is lost; here at once the controversy closes. So far as any rule fosters the spirit of love, that is, is used lawfully, it is wise, and has a use. So far as it does not, it is chaff. So far as it hinders it, it is poison. Now observe how different this method is from that which is called the sober, moderate way--the _via media_. Some would have said, the great thing is to avoid extremes. If the question respects fasting--fast--only in _moderation_. If the observance of the Sabbath day, observe it on the Jewish principle, only _not so strictly_. St. Paul, on the contrary, went down to the root; he said, the true question is not whether the law is good or bad, but on what principle; he said, you are both wrong--_you_, in saying that the observance of the law is essential, for the end of it is charity, and if _that_ be got what matter _how_--_you_, in saying rules may be dispensed with entirely and always, "for we know that the law is good." I. The unlawful use, and II. The lawful use of law. I. The unlawful use. Define law.--By law, Paul almost always means not the Mosaic law, but law in its essence and principle, that is, constraint. This chiefly in two forms expresses itself--1st, a custom; 2nd, a maxim. As examples of custom, we might give Circumcision, or the Sabbath, or Sacrifice, or Fasting. Law said, thou shalt _do_ these things; and law, as mere law, constrained them. Or again, law may express itself in maxims and rules.