Paul demonstrates that "the Law is good, if one uses it lawfully"

Please compare the following two passages from the same letter:

"... the Law is not laid down for the just but for the lawless and disobedient, for the ungodly and sinners, for the unholy and profane, for those who strike their fathers and mothers, for murderers, the sexually immoral, men who practice homosexuality, kidnapping-enslavers, liars, perjurers, and whatever else is contrary to sound doctrine" (1Tim 1:9-11).

Then:

"Do not admit a charge against an elder except on the evidence of two or three witnesses" (1Tim 5:19).

In the second passage, Paul was applying the Law of Moses within a Christian context:

“A single witness shall not suffice against a person for any crime or for any wrong in connection with any offense that he has committed. Only on the evidence of two or three witnesses shall a charge be established" (Deu 19:15; See also 2Cor 13:1 [Cf Mat 18:16]).

Often 1Tim 1:9 is interpreted to mean that the Law of Moses was given long ago with just the gross sinner in mind. That its only purpose was to define, expose, and condemn sin. However, that can't be right. Paul was outlining proper procedure in 1Tim 5:19. Not defining, exposing, or condemning sin per se. Same with the verse right before, in 1Tim 5:18, where Paul is applying Deu 25:4 to illustrate how Christians are to remunerate worthy congregational elders. Is someone in either scenario being "lawless and disobedient ... unholy and profane" (1Tim 1:9)?

No!

The ESV and other more recent translations have translated the Greek word κεῖται as "laid down." This is an improvement over past translations of "given" or "enacted." It's better reading like this: ""... the Law is not *laid down* [κεῖται] for the just but for the lawless and disobedient ..." (1Tim 1:19). Certainly Paul's application of the Law in 1Tim 5:18, 19 (and all over 1Timothy and his other letters for that matter!) does not mean that worthy congregational elders are "lawless and disobedient" or that even elders being charged of wrongdoing are automatically considered "unholy and profane" people, right? Or that Paul was so, for applying the Law here, or that Timothy would be should he carry out Paul's applications of the Law, right?

"Laid down" seems to be limited to how the Law applies to the list of offenders Paul provides. It is "laid down" for them, but the Law may be applied in other ways to Christians who have not been found guilty of violating "sound doctrine." "Laid down" appears to mean defining, exposing, or condemning sin. But, from Paul's other uses of the Law in 1Timothy (and elsewhere), that can't be the only use of the Law, the only reason it was "given" or "enacted." Right?

A simple comparison of 1Tim 1:9-11 to Paul's application of the Law in 1Tim 5:19 (and 1Tim 5:18!) shows this to be true. There Paul demonstrates that "the Law is good, if one uses it lawfully" (1Tim 1:8) without simply limiting its use to defining, exposing, or condemning sin.

-Michael Millier