‘Fight the Good Fight’: Pauline Metaphor with Greco-Roman Roots

The expression “fight the good fight” is often used in Christian circles and in the wider Western culture. While perusing Amazon, I found at least 31 books with the title “The Good Fight” and at least 10 with the fuller title “Fighting the Good Fight.” Some were overtly Christian in nature, but many weren’t.

The origin of the phrase is 1 Timothy 1:18 (and perhaps 1 Tim. 6:12 and 2 Tim. 4:7). In 1 Timothy 1:18 and 6:12, Timothy is exhorted to “fight the good fight”; in 2 Timothy 4:7, Paul says he himself has “fought the good fight.” (Various Scripture translations are used throughout this article, including the author’s own.)

In 1 Timothy 1:18, the phrase “fight the good fight” is composed of a verb (στρατεύω) and a noun (στρατεία), which is a cognate word with the verb. The repeated use of the noun “fight” after the verb “to fight” in this phrase is a figure of speech, whereby there’s “a repetition of the same basic word with the same sense” to underscore the meaning of the redundant wording.

The wording had a ring to it, so I decided to see if it was used elsewhere in the Greco-Roman world, since it didn’t appear anywhere else in the New Testament or the Greek Old Testament. What I found surprised me and encouraged my faith. I hope your faith is also encouraged amid the trials of this world.

This redundant wording was frequently used from the fifth century BC up to the third century AD and even onward. In its various contexts, the expression can be translated as “battle the battle” or “serve as a soldier in warfare” or, more generally, “perform military service” or “serve in a military campaign.” The wording is typically a patriotic warfare idiom for good character revealed by persevering through not merely one battle but military campaigns extending over a period of time.

Honorable Service

For example, in the classical work of Hyperides, people who have “fought [the] fight” (στρατεία . . . τῶν στρατευομένων) in past battles to provide liberty for their country (Greece) are to receive “praise.”

In Athens, Herakleides Salaminos of Charikleidos is said to have “loved honor for the benefit of the Athenian people,” and due to this he received “a gold crown” and became a “patron and benefactor of Athens.” As a result, he and his descendants had the right “to wage wars [στρατεύεσθαι αὐτοὺς τὰς στρατείας] and pay property taxes with the Athenians.” These and “other praiseworthy things” about him were to be “engraved” in a “decreed writing by the Athenian presidencies.”

Thus, Herakleides’s “waging of wars” was among the honorable and praiseworthy activities for which he was honored by having this privilege of “waging war” being written on a stone stele.

A military commander named Astyphilus “fought first at Corinth, then in Thessaly and again throughout the Theban war, and wherever else he heard of an army being collected, he went abroad holding a command.” Afterward, “he was fighting in other war campaigns [στρατεία + στρατεύω] and was well aware that he was going to run risks on all of them.” Then, “he was about to set out on his last expedition, going out as a volunteer with every prospect of returning safe and sound from this campaign,” when he finally died in battle at Mytilene. His patriotism is expressed both through his amazing perseverance in fighting for his country until death and his religious and civic commitments.

Under the Roman military system, in times of danger from foreign powers, citizens who enlisted in the army were “obligated to serve as soldiers in warfare service [στρατεύω + στρατεία] for twenty years,” though only 10 years were required for being “eligible for any political office.” The point was that an extended period of military service was a requirement for political office since it demonstrated a person’s honorable character as a loyal citizen, willing to persevere in service to protect his home country.

Under the Roman military system, an extended period of service was a requirement for political office since it demonstrated a person’s honorable character.

Similarly, the Roman commander Pompey affirmed he had received “the greatest honor” as a result of “the battle campaigns he had fought” (στρατεία + στρατεύω). On another occasion, while dying, a Jewish martyr suffering execution by the Greek king Antiochus IV Epiphanes encourages his brothers to persevere in their faith, to be “of good courage,” and to “fight the sacred and noble fight for godliness” [ἱερὰν καὶ εὐγενῆ στρατείαν στρατεύσασθε περὶ τῆς εὐσεβείας; 4 Macc. 9:24].

Likewise, Marcus Cato, a Roman commander, sought “high repute in battles and campaigns against the enemy,” having “fought [his] first campaign [τὴν πρώτην στρατεύσασθαι στρατείαν] when he was seventeen years old.” Such battle renown added to “the weight and dignity of his character.”

The emperor Tiberius “waged war with distinction [στρατείας ἐπιφανῶς στρατευσάμενον], served in the second place as the high priest of Asia, and presided over the games and acquired the office of imperial commissioner of the most distinguished cites” of Asia. Thus, Tiberius’s battle reputation is inextricably linked to religious and political positions, the epitome of the loyal citizen.

Honorable War

In a Greek papyrus from the second century, a father writes a letter to his son who was “persuaded . . . not [to] enlist to fight [ἐστρατεύσω] at [a city called] Klassan.” The father “grieved” over what appeared to be his son’s lack of patriotism. The father said,

From now on, take care not to be so persuaded . . . not [to] enlist to fight, or you will no longer be my son. You know you have every advantage over your brothers, and all the authority. Therefore, you will do well to fight [στρατεύω] the good fight [στρατεία]. . . . Therefore, do not transgress my instructions and you will have an inheritance.

The son’s willingness to “fight the good fight” will certainly enhance his reputation before his father (enough to receive the father’s inheritance) and likely in the eyes of others. “Good fight” refers here to a war in which it’s “honorable” to participate because fighting for one’s country (or city) and overcoming the enemy is “good.” Once again, the idiom demonstrates a person’s good character as a loyal citizen to his king and kingdom.

“Fight the good fight” in 1 Timothy 1:18 refers to the same thing as in the papyrus letter (with the identical three words in Greek), though the warfare is spiritual and is conducted against false teaching opponents (e.g., 1 Tim. 1:3–6, 18–20; 6:20–21; 2 Tim. 3:7–14). Like in the papyrus letter, Paul considers Timothy and Titus each to be a “true child,” though a child in “the faith” (1 Tim. 1:2; Titus 1:4).

Both also are promised an inheritance if they persevere. This is clearest in 1 and 2 Timothy. In 2 Timothy 4:8, after saying he has “fought the good fight,” Paul says, “In the future there is laid up for me the crown of righteousness, which the Lord . . . will award to me on that day.” Like Paul in 2 Timothy 4:7–8, if Timothy perseveres in “fighting the good fight” (1 Tim. 1:18; 6:12), he’ll finally receive an inheritance—he’ll “receive [attain to] the eternal life to which he was called.”

As with Paul’s command to Timothy to “fight” in 1 Timothy 1:18, so likewise the father’s use of “fight” has an imperatival sense because of the immediate context. The papyrus letter gives a striking parallel to the idiom of “fighting the good fight” in the Pastoral Epistles.

Loyalty to the King

The idiom of “fight the fight” occurs 40 times in the Greek world (including in the father’s letter to his son) as a patriotic warfare idiom for one who perseveres in loyalty to king and country by fighting war campaigns to preserve the welfare of the kingdom. As a result, a person earns a reputation as a good and honorable citizen.

Paul applies the idiom to fighting for God’s kingdom instead of for an earthly kingdom. He’s referring to a “fight” against false teaching to maintain and foster “godliness.” Thus, this is a “good” fight or extended “war campaign” through which Timothy is to persevere, which will demonstrate his good Christian character and reputation over against the false teachers’ bad character.

Paul applies the idiom to fighting for God’s kingdom instead of for an earthly kingdom.

“Good” is further defined in 2 Timothy 2:3–4, where Paul exhorts Timothy to be “a good soldier” and then defines part of what such a “good soldier” is: “No soldier while being engaged in a war campaign entangles himself in the affairs of everyday life, so that he may please the one who enlisted him as a soldier.” Thus, the warfare is also “good” because the divine Commander who enlisted the Christian soldier to fight wouldn’t enlist anyone if the warfare wasn’t a “good” one in which to engage.

Ultimate loyalty in this world is to be given to the divine king and not to earthly authorities (though there’s a place for submitting to earthly authorities, as explained in Rom. 13).

Paul in 1 Timothy 1:18 gives Timothy a “command” to uphold true doctrine for the purpose that he might “fight the good fight.” The “command” picks up the earlier use of “command” in 1:3 and 1:5 (respectively the verb παραγγέλλω and noun παραγγελία), which reinforces this is a “command” to fight for truth against false teachers.

It’s likely not coincidental that the main point of the preceding paragraph (1:12–17) ends with praise of God as “King” and that the warfare idiom occurs directly afterward in verse 18. As the main point of verses 12–17, God as “king” is surely still in view as Paul “commands” Timothy in verse 18, so that the “command” can be viewed implicitly to have its origin with the “King,” for whom Timothy is to fight.

The only other place in the Pastoral Epistles where “king” is used (excepting 1 Tim. 2:2, where the reference is to human kings) is 1 Timothy 6:15–16, where the reference is to God and the doxology is extended as in 1:17 and has several verbal parallels with 1:17 (e.g., “the only” God, “King,” “invisible, “honor . . . forever. Amen”). In addition, 6:15 forms a nice epistolary bookend with 1:17, since “fight the good fight” in 6:12 also occurs in close connection to praise of God as “King.”

Furthermore, there’s the parallel of Paul giving another “command” to Timothy (6:13), as in 1:18 (see also “the command” in 6:14). As the climaxing part of the bookend in 6:15, the kingship of God is emphasized with synonyms (as in 1:17): “The only ruler, the king of kings and Lord of lords.” It’s clear that Timothy and Paul are citizens of a “kingdom” in which they’ll participate consummately at Christ’s final coming (2 Tim. 4:1, 18, though this kingdom is likely inaugurated).

God as “King” in 6:15 is closely linked to the imperatival form of the battle idiom in 6:12 (and to the imperative there to “receive eternal life”), since “I command you” in 6:13 and “keep the command” in 6:14 include the imperatival idiom in their purview. As we’ve seen, God as “King” in 1:17 is in the immediate purview of the “soldier in warfare” idiom of 1:18.

These links between 1:17–19 and 6:12–16 show that Timothy’s “fighting the good fight” against false teachers is for the King and the welfare and protection of the kingdom. And since they form bookends for 1 Timothy, this theme should be seen as a major theme of the book.