As seen, Paul opposes very firmly the tradition (legend is what was transmitted to Timothy and received by him, obviously, from Paul himself) of idle talks and disputes as regards this knowledge, which the apostle calls “science falsely". Of course, the ancient philosophers paid a lot of attention on the correctness of names, was already interested in this problem Socrates, who, before reasoning about whatever categories, put always at first the question: but what means the corresponding word...
As seen, Paul opposes very firmly the tradition (legend is what was transmitted to Timothy and received by him, obviously, from Paul himself) of idle talks and disputes as regards this knowledge, which the apostle calls “science falsely". Of course, the ancient philosophers paid a lot of attention on the correctness of names, was already interested in this problem Socrates, who, before reasoning about whatever categories, put always at first the question: but what means the corresponding word? And will it not happen that when disputing, each will speak about what is appropriate for him, without even noticing it? But Paul, it seems, speaks all the same about another thing. He calls, it seems, "science falsely" in general everything that has no direct relation to the witness. The synagogue boiled in those days with theological disputes about various subjects, and also penetrated in the Church the tradition of the disputes and debates.
Paul, as seen, doesn’t support at all this tendency. And of course, not because he is against the difference of opinions and debates. The problem is somewhere else: such debates do not have to destroy the Church as the body of the Christ. Everything can be discussed, and also disputes can be on anything, on whatever. But only as long as in these disputes and discussions, no doubt is put on the main part: the Messiah and the Kingdom. And the problem here is not only in the fact that if one doubts in fundamental things, the Church can be forgotten. The problem is also in the fact that such discussions easily transform the church meeting into a discussion club; it {the church} should not be such. There are things, about which it is possible and necessary to speak during the catechism, but no conversations which are convenient at all in the church meeting.
And not because they should not speak about them, but because the man, who did not answer these things in a unambiguous way to God, to himself and to others, simply cannot and does not have to participate in the church meeting. And if in the church meeting begin discussions about one of such subjects, it is better to cut them, and already talked with the one who asked the questions separately, outside the frame of the meeting. If there are in the church people, who participate in such discussions with pleasure, it can only be the sign of their personal spiritual hesitations.
Maybe, somebody of them made the decision to enter the Church angry, and someone else has perhaps just another spiritual crisis, the causes of which can be numerous, including the most ordinary spiritual maturation. But in every case such discussions contribute not at all to overcome the spiritual crisis: they allow only, so to speak, to let off steam so that after a while to begin to talk again. And the apostle of course perfectly understood that spiritual crises and spiritual problems are resolved differently. And he warned his disciple of what could easily transform the Church into a discussion club, the participants of which, not being able to solve any problem, would be engaged only in idle talks.
6
6:20 Keep that which is committed to thy trust - The charge I have given thee, Ti1 1:18.Avoid profane empty babblings - How weary of controversy was this acute disputant! And knowledge falsely so called - Most of the ancient heretics were great pretenders to knowledge.