Acts 16:1

9. As I have shown, therefore, that Peter was thoroughly aware of the abrogation of the law of Moses, but was compelled by fear to pretend to observe it, let us now see whether Paul, who accuses another, ever did anything of the same kind himself. We read in the same book: “Paul passed through Syria and Cilicia, confirming the churches. Then came he to Derbe and Lystra: and, behold, a certain disciple was there, named Timotheus, the son of a certain woman which was a Jewess, and believed; but his father was a Greek: which was well reported of by the brethren that were at Lystra and Iconium. …

8. For this reason, from the books of the New Testament, except the figurative pre-significations used by our Lord, if thou consider the life and manners of the Saints, their actions and sayings, nothing of the kind can be produced which should provoke to imitation of lying. For the simulation of Peter and Barnabas is not only recorded, but also reproved and corrected. For it was not, as some suppose, out of the same simulation that even Paul the Apostle either circumcised Timothy, or himself celebrated certain ceremonies according to the Jewish rite; but he did so, out of that liberty of his mind whereby he preached that neither are the Gentiles the better for circumcision, nor the Jews the worse. Wherefore he judged that neither the former should be tied to the custom of the Jews, nor the Jews deterred from the custom of their fathers. …

“And, behold a certain disciple was there, named Timotheus, the son of a certain woman, which was a Jewess, and believed; but his father was a Greek: which was well reported of by the brethren that were at Lystra and Iconium. Him would Paul have to go forth with him; and took and circumcised him because of the Jews which were in those quarters; for they knew all that his father was a Greek.” ( ch. xvi. 1-3 .) It is indeed amazing, the wisdom of Paul! He that has had so many battles about circumcision, he that moved all things to this end, and did not give over until he had carried his point, now that the decree is made sure, circumcises the disciple. He not only does not forbid others, but himself does this thing. ( b ) “Him,” it says, “he would have to go forth with him.” And the wonder is this, that he even took him unto him. …

“He went,” it says, “through” the cities “And, behold, there was a disciple, by name Timothy, who had a good report of the brethren which were in Lystra and Iconium.” ( v. 41; xvi. 1 .) Great was the grace of Timothy. When Barnabas departed ( ἀπέστη ), he finds another, equivalent to him. Of him he saith, “Remembering thy tears and thy unfeigned faith, which dwelt first in thy grandmother Lois, and in thy mother Eunice.” ( 2 Tim. i. 5 .) His father continued to be a Gentile, and therefore it was that (Timothy) was not circumcised. ( a ) Observe the Law already broken. Or if not so, I suppose he was born after the preaching of the Gospel but this is perhaps not so. ( c ) He was about to make him a bishop, and it was not meet that he should be uncircumcised. …

This is another commendation, that Timothy came not of Gentiles, nor of unbelievers, but of a family that served Christ from the first. ( Acts xvi. 1, 3 .)