We are unsure who planted the church in Crete. This church plant isn’t mentioned in the book of Acts, and this letter doesn’t tell us who started this church either. Both Paul and Titus served there at one point, because Paul said, “I left you in Crete, that you would set in order what remains and appoint elders” (Titus 1:5). This implies that Paul led alongside Titus for some time before moving on to a different city.
Perhaps Paul planted this church on his unnamed “Fourth Missionary Journey,” or maybe Titus originally planted this church (or both?). It’s also possible that the church began through the Cretans in Jerusalem at Pentecost (Acts 2:11).[1] We’re unsure. All we know is that Titus was a central overseer of this church.
The church existed for some time. After all, the gospel had spread to multiple cities (Titus 1:5), and the overseers of the church had growing children who were believers (Titus 1:6). Most importantly, there needed to be “sufficient time to establish a pool of eligible overseers who [could] model the qualities enumerated in Titus 1:5-9.”[2]
Table of Contents
How to use this commentary well 3
Authorship
Critical scholarship argues against Paul’s authorship of the Pastoral Epistles (including Titus). We disagree. For a defense of Pauline authorship, see our earlier article “Introduction to 1 & 2 Timothy.”
Who was Titus?
Luke never mentions Titus in the book of Acts. Paul, however, mentions Titus many times in his letters (e.g. Galatians, 2 Corinthians, and 2 Timothy), giving us details into the character and profile of this man:
- Titus was an uncircumcised Greek Christian (Gal. 2:3).
- Titus personally refreshed and comforted Paul during a time of depression (2 Cor. 7:6-7).
- Titus was a man of superb character (2 Cor. 12:18).
- Titus was last found serving in Dalmatia (2 Tim. 4:10).
- Paul calls Titus his “true child in the faith” (Titus 1:4). This implies that Paul and Titus shared a close friendship with one another.
Paul may have written this letter from Corinth because he sends it with Apollos (Titus 3:13), who was a leader in Corinth (Acts 18:24-28; 19:1; 1 Cor. 1:12; 3:4-6; 4:6; 16:12). While this is somewhat of a personal letter (Titus 1:5; 2:7-8; 3:12-14), Paul addresses the plural churches in Crete at the end of the letter: “Grace be with you all” (Titus 3:15). Therefore, this letter is addressed to all of us and “is written for public dissemination.”[3]
Date
If we accept that Paul had been imprisoned from AD 61-63, then this letter would have been written after this time. Paul makes no mention of the Neronian persecution in AD 64, which may date it before that time, though not necessarily. Paul also wrote before the winter months (Titus 3:12). From this data, Hiebert[4] dates the letter to the fall of AD 63. Mounce states that “it is not possible to determine whether Paul wrote 1 Timothy or Titus first.”[5] However, he states, “The similarity of language between 1 Timothy and Titus may suggest that they were written at approximately the same time.”[6]
How to use this commentary well
For personal use. We wrote this material to build up people in their knowledge of the Bible. As the reader, we hope you enjoy reading through the commentary to grow in your interpretation of the text, understand the historical backdrop, gain insight into the original languages, and reflect on our comments to challenge your thinking. As a result, we hope this will give you a deeper love for the word of God.
Teaching preparation. We read through several commentaries in order to study this book, and condensed their scholarship into an easy-to-read format. We hope that this will help those giving public Bible teachings to have a deep grasp of the book as they prepare to teach. As one person has said, “All good public speaking is based on good private thinking.”[7] We couldn’t agree more. Nothing can replace sound study before you get up to teach, and we hope this will help you in that goal. And before you complain about our work, don’t forget that the price is right: FREE!
Questions for Reflection. Each section or chapter is outfitted with numerous questions for reflection. We think these questions would work best in a small men’s or women’s group—or for personal reading. In general, these questions are designed to prompt participants to explore the text or to stimulate application.
Discussing Bible difficulties. We highlight Bible difficulties with hyperlinks to articles on those subjects. All of these questions could make for dynamic discussion in a small group setting. As a Bible teacher, you could raise the difficulty, allow the small group to wrestle with it, and then give your own perspective.
As a teacher, you might give some key cross references, insights from the Greek, or other relevant tools to help aid the study. This gives students the tools that they need to answer the difficulty. Then, you could ask, “How do these points help answer the difficulty?”
Reading Bible difficulties. Some Bible difficulties are highly complex. For the sake of time, it might simply be better to read the article and ask, “What do you think of this explanation? What are the most persuasive points? Do you have a better explanation than the one being offered?”
Think critically. We would encourage Bible teachers to not allow people to simply read this commentary without exercising discernment and testing the commentary with sound hermeneutics (i.e. interpretation). God gave the church “teachers… to equip God’s people to do his work and build up the church, the body of Christ” (Eph. 4:11-12). We would do well to learn from them. Yet, we also need to read their books with critical thinking, and judge what we’re reading (1 Cor. 14:29; 1 Thess. 5:21). This, of course, applies to our written commentary as well as any others!
In my small men’s Bible study, I am frequently challenged, corrected, and sharpened in my ability to interpret the word of God. I frequently benefit from even the youngest Christians in the room. I write this with complete honesty—not pseudo-humility. We all have a role in challenging each other as we learn God’s word together. We would do well to learn from Bible teachers, and Bible teachers would do well to learn from their students!
At the same time, we shouldn’t disagree simply for the sake of being disagreeable. This leads to rabbit trails that can actually frustrate discussion. For this reason, we should follow the motto, “The best idea wins.” If people come to different conclusions on unimportant issues, it’s often best to simply acknowledge each other’s different perspectives and simply move on.
Consulted Commentaries
We consulted many commentaries for individual passages, but we read these specific commentaries below thoroughly.
- Edmond Hiebert, “Titus,” in The Expositor’s Bible Commentary: Ephesians through Philemon, ed. Frank E. Gaebelein, vol. 11 (Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan Publishing House, 1981).
Donald Guthrie, Pastoral Epistles: An Introduction and Commentary, vol. 14, Tyndale New Testament Commentaries (Downers Grove, IL: InterVarsity Press, 1990).
Thomas D. Lea and Hayne P. Griffin, 1, 2 Timothy, Titus, vol. 34, The New American Commentary (Nashville: Broadman & Holman Publishers, 1992).
William D. Mounce, Pastoral Epistles, vol. 46, Word Biblical Commentary (Dallas: Word, Incorporated, 2000).
Titus 1
Paul begins his letter by addressing his close friend—a man he had served alongside for many years (Gal. 2:3; 2 Cor. 2:13; 8:23; 12:18).
Titus 1:1-4 (Introduction and greetings)
(1:1) “Paul, a bond-servant of God and an apostle of Jesus Christ, for the faith of those chosen of God and the knowledge of the truth which is according to godliness.”
“Bond-servant… apostle.” Paul saw his role as an “apostle” as being conflated with his role as a “servant” (doulos). All Christian leaders should see their role as that of a servant leader.
“For the faith of those chosen of God.” Mounce[8] holds that “the faith” is the subjective faith of the believer. Consequently, the “purpose for Paul’s apostleship is to bring God’s elect to faith.”[9] This would be a good Reformed reading of the text. However, we take the noun “faith” (pistis) to refer to the objective body of beliefs for Christians—just as “the knowledge of the truth” is an objective standard. The subjective element arrives at the end of the text when believers experience personal “godliness.” That being said, even if “faith” (pistis) is subjective, it’s still the case that we are “chosen” according to God’s foreknowledge (1 Pet. 1:1-2).
(1:2) “In the hope of eternal life, which God, who cannot lie, promised long ages ago.”
“In the hope of eternal life.” Our “godliness” (v.1) comes directly from “the hope of eternal life.” Paul sees a direct connection between God’s “promise” and our “hope” in his promises (cf. Acts 26:6; Eph. 2:12). Our hope is “based on the immutable nature and promise of God and therefore results in encouragement, confidence, strength, and security for the believer.”[10]
When we realize that God solved our greatest possible fear (where we go when we die), we are free to give our lives away in “godliness.” We already have eternal life currently (Jn. 5:24), but we also look forward to our eternal life in heaven.
“God, who cannot lie.” How can we know that eternal life is real? Paul grounds this claim in the honesty and veracity of God’s nature. God is truth, and therefore, it is impossible for him to lie. If he promised this to us, that means it will definitely come to fruition (cf. Rom. 3:4; Heb. 6:18).
“Promised long ages ago.” This literally means “before times eternal”[11] or “before the beginning of time” (NIV). This means that “God’s original intention before creation was for people to enjoy eternal life.”[12]
(1:3) “But at the proper time manifested, even His word, in the proclamation with which I was entrusted according to the commandment of God our Savior.”
Does the “word” refer to Jesus or to the gospel message? John frequently refers to Jesus as the “Word” (logos, Jn. 1:1, 14; 1 Jn. 1:1). Moreover, Jesus is often depicted as being “manifested” (ephanerōsen, Jn. 21:1; 1 Tim. 3:16; Heb. 9:26; 2 Tim. 1:10).
However, we don’t find this persuasive. Instead, we hold that the “word” (logos) refers to the gospel message. For one, while John uses the term “word” (logos) to describe Jesus, this isn’t a term that Paul uses. Instead, Paul regularly uses the term “word” (logos) to refer to Scripture in general and the gospel message in particular.[13] Moreover, the context refers to “proclamation.” This fits with spreading a message about Christ. Thus, we agree with Mounce,[14] Hiebert,[15] Griffin, and Lea[16] who understand “His word” to refer to the gospel message (see NIV, NET, NLT).
“At the proper time manifested.” The message of the gospel is not a new or sudden invention. God had this planned for eons, and he patiently waited to reveal his Son at “the proper time.” See our earlier article “Why Did God Spread the Gospel When He Did?”
“I was entrusted according to the commandment of God our Savior.” It constantly shocked Paul that God would “entrust” him with such an important and eternal message (1 Cor. 15:9; Eph. 3:8; 1 Tim. 1:11-13).
(1:4) “To Titus, my true child in a common faith: Grace and peace from God the Father and Christ Jesus our Savior.”
“My true child in a common faith.” By calling Titus his “true child in the faith,” this could be “an expression of affection,” or it could “suggest that Titus was one of Paul’s own converts.”[17] (cf. 1 Tim. 1:2). This simply “cannot be known for sure.”[18]
Titus 1:5-9 (Raise up good leaders)
(1:5) “For this reason I left you in Crete, that you would set in order what remains and appoint elders in every city as I directed you.”
“I left you in Crete.” The island of Crete is “relatively small,” but it is still “one of the larger islands in the Mediterranean Sea.”[19] It also had a Jewish population sizeable enough that was under Roman protection.
The planting of a church in Crete simply doesn’t fit with the brief visit mentioned in Acts 27:7-9, where Paul merely sailed past Crete. We agree with Mounce[20] that Paul most likely planted this church sometime after the end of the book of Acts on a fourth missionary journey. However, it’s also possible that the gospel reached this church through Titus or through one of the earliest believers at Pentecost (Acts 2:11).
Regardless of how these churches in Crete began, Titus was central to the leadership of this movement. Just before Paul left these churches, he left his friend Titus with two central directives:
(1) “That you would set in order what remains.” The job wasn’t done in Crete when Paul left. They didn’t even have officially recognized elders in this church when Paul left. This was probably because the church wasn’t old enough to see who had the character and the impact on leading others for Christ. Recognizing leaders takes time, and it shouldn’t be a rushed endeavor. Paul warned Timothy, “Do not lay hands upon anyone too hastily and thereby share responsibility for the sins of others; keep yourself free from sin” (1 Tim. 5:22).
Consequently, Paul told Titus to stay behind to make sure leaders were recognized to lead this church. Paul didn’t do all of the Christian work himself. He was able to delegate important work to others.
(2) “Appoint elders in every city as I directed you.” Paul’s method was to have plurality in leadership. Paul prescribed a plural number of “elders” in every singular “city.” This fits with Paul’s example in other contexts (Acts 14:21-23).[21] This demonstrates the need for plurality among leaders: “There is no monarchical episcopate, no singular bishop over a city or the country, in this epistle.”[22] Since Paul “directed” Titus to do this, we have an “authoritative endorsement of the elder-system.”[23]
(1:6) “Namely, if any man is above reproach, the husband of one wife, having children who believe, not accused of dissipation or rebellion.”
“Above reproach” (anegklētos) means “unaccusable.” Mounce[24] takes this to be the “summary title” for elders, and “what follows are the specifics of how one is deemed above reproach.” Christian leaders should not have any flagrant sin that people could use against them. This implies that they have a long track record of loving others in ministry, demonstrating that they have earned the trust of those closest to them.
“Husband of one wife.” This can hardly refer to a prohibition against polygamy because that would be so obviously “unacceptable among Christians that it would hardly seem necessary to prohibit it.”[25] Furthermore, it doesn’t require that an elder should be married. After all, Paul, Timothy, and Jesus were unmarried leaders (1 Cor. 7:7-8). Surely these men weren’t disqualified from leadership! Nor does this refer to an elder being disqualified because of remarriage after a divorce (1 Cor. 7; 1 Tim. 5:14).[26] Paul could’ve easily written this, but he didn’t.[27] Moreover, those who hold this view need to realize that this same logic would require pastors to have children (1 Tim. 3:4-5). Thus, by this logic, infertile couples were be disqualified from leadership.
The unusual phrase “husband of one wife” (mias gunaikos andros) quite literally means a “one-woman kind of man.”[28] The same is true for the expression given to widows: “A one-man kind of woman” (henos anēr gunē, 1 Tim. 5:9). This expression refers to a lifestyle of sexual integrity. This would include pornography use, flirting, and even emotional or physical affairs.
How many leaders forfeit their life’s work over a cheap and fast affair! The results are tragic. No one wakes up one day and says, “I think I’m going to go commit adultery today…” Instead, this is a gradual and slow slip in the heart. If we sense that we are tacitly moving away from God in this area, we need to be quick to recognize it and bring it out into the light so that we can get the help that we need.
“Having children who believe.” This is similar to Paul’s words to Timothy about managing their household well (1 Tim. 3:5). In 1 Timothy, the word “manages” (prohistēmi) means “to exercise a position of leadership” and can mean to “rule, direct, be at the head (of)” (BDAG, p.870).
This does not imply dictatorial leadership at home. Mounce writes, “The idea of ‘going before’ evolved into the notion of ‘to protect, care.’ This second nuance is especially prevalent in the cognates prostatis, which means ‘protectress, patroness,’ and prostates, meaning ‘protector.’ It provides a commentary on the nature of a Christian father’s role within his family: his leadership should be not dictatorial but caring and protecting.”[29] Many commentators like Fee and Mounce[30] distinguish having (echonta) children who are obedient versus making children submissive. The former view makes the most sense because it leaves open the creative methods the parents might take to win their child to walking with Christ. All Christians should take care of their families (1 Tim. 5:4; 1 Tim. 5:18) and show “dignity” (semnotēs, Phil. 3:8; 1 Tim. 2:2; cf. Titus 2:7; 1 Tim. 3:8, 11). Christians leaders, however, should lead the way in this area.
It is very difficult to fake who we are at home. True spiritual leaders should have a character that is reflected in all aspects of life—not just their outward lives. Moreover, those in vocational ministry can become workaholics, neglecting their marriages and families. This is discrediting, disqualifying, and quite frankly immoral. Our spouse and children are a very important aspect of our ministry, and they should be nurtured deeply.
Does this refer to grown children who are unbelievers? This is a highly nuanced subject because parenting is so complex and adult children have free will. However, by simply sticking to the text, it seems that Paul is referring to children who live at home with their parents. The text refers to “having” (echon) children who are believers. This implies that the children are still under the roof of the parent. Knight states, “The implication is that Paul is talking only about children who are still rightfully under their father’s authority in his home.”[31] This implies that the elder is actively engaged in the spiritual growth and nurture of their children when they are at home. If an elder is neglecting the precious responsibility of spiritual parenting, they are disqualified from leadership.
(1:7) “For the overseer must be above reproach as God’s steward, not self-willed, not quick-tempered, not addicted to wine, not pugnacious, not fond of sordid gain.”
“Not self-willed” (me autheda) refers to being “stubborn or arrogant” (BDAG, p.150). Peter links this trait with being rebelliousness (2 Pet. 2:10). An overseer should “be flexible in his own opinions, considerate of other viewpoints, and especially open and eager to do God’s will.”[32] Christian leaders shouldn’t always demand their way, but they should demonstrate the ability to defer to others at times. By “deferring to others,” we mean actively getting behind another person’s ideas to help them succeed. We agree with the old proverb, “We all get to have our say, but we do not all get our way.”
“Not quick-tempered” (me orgilon) means “inclined to anger” or “hot-headed” (BDAG, p.721). Christian leaders need to work with people who are immature, insensitive, misguided, or downright antagonistic. This can test your patience! Those with an uncontrolled temper can easily discredit themselves. When you have an explosive temper tantrum, it puts everyone on edge and trust is broken. Some fiery words cannot be taken back, and they often etch themselves into the minds of others. Christian leaders may get angry (Eph. 4:26; Jn. 2:13ff), but they should be “slow to anger” (Jas. 1:19). As a leader, you should control your anger, rather than letting your anger control you.
“Not addicted to wine” (me paroinon) literally means “not a drunk.”[33] This can be defined as “one who is given to drinking too much” or simply being “addicted to wine” (BDAG, p.780). Christian leaders are allowed to enjoy alcohol (1 Tim. 5:23), but this must not lead to drunkenness or dependency on alcohol (or any other substance that affects sobriety). Leadership includes a significant deal of suffering, and leaders shouldn’t self-medicate or numb their minds. Likewise, they need to learn to take their emotional stimulation from God—not alcohol. Paul writes, “Do not get drunk with wine… but be filled with the Spirit” (Eph. 5:18). Do you see the connection? When the Holy Spirit fills our hearts, we don’t see the need to get drunk to deal with our stress, our problems, or our insecurities.
“Not pugnacious” (me plēktēs) literally means “not a striker.” This can be defined as being a “bully” (BDAG, p.826), a “brawler,” or “one who strikes and beats.”[34] This includes the fact that leaders should “not practice browbeating people with threats of violence.”[35] It is certainly the case that “words often strike harder than fists.”[36] Christian leaders should not be prone to physical or verbal abuse (i.e. slander, put-downs, cussing someone out, etc.). You should only take an aggressive approach for the sake of others—not to build up your own agenda or ego.
“Free from the love of money” (aphilarguros) comes from “not” (a) and “love” (philos) and “silver” (arguros). Thus, it refers to “not being a lover of silver [money].” This would stand in contrast to the false teachers who desired to get rich from preaching (1 Tim. 6:5). In our contemporary setting, this quality “warns against devotion to materialism.”[37] Christian leaders show with their lives that they value spiritual things more than money. Since elders are supposed to handle the money in the church, they should have a history of strong character in this area. Mounce comments, “The overseers may have controlled the church’s finances, so it was especially important that they be above reproach in this area.”[38]
While this teaching is given to all Christians (Heb. 13:5), the church needs models to lead the way in the area of simple-living. Mature leaders should only accept an average income with the rest of their community, be generous financial givers, and live a simple lifestyle. Spiritual leaders are also keenly aware of the fact that their example plays a large impact on others around them. People generally do not go above the examples set by their leaders.
(1:8) “But hospitable, loving what is good, sensible, just, devout, self-controlled.”
“Hospitable” is really a poor translation of this Greek word. The word (philoxenos) literally means “loving strangers,” which goes far beyond merely hosting people in your home. Of course, hospitality is required of all believers (Rom 12:13; 16:23; cf. Acts 28:7; 1 Pet 4:9), and this is a good place to start. But this Greek term (philoxenos) literally means to care about strangers—most likely lost people. When leaders lose a love for the lost, their people often lose it too. The church becomes a place to take care of your own spiritual needs, rather than a place to reach others for Christ. Leaders who are weak in this area are often intimidated by meeting or talking to non-Christians. They become consumed with their own Christian sub-culture, rather than being consumed with a passion for the lost. When people see a leader’s love for the lost, they yearn to develop the same passion. After all, most evangelism is caught, rather than taught.
“Loving what is good” (philagathos) implies that a leader’s lifestyle should demonstrate that they enjoy what God values as good (Rom. 12:2). These leaders have cultivated an ability to critique their culture without becoming self-righteous, cold-hearted, or prudish. They recognize the underlying worldview in what they read, watch, or listen to.
“Sensible” (sophron) is the opposite of being mentally unstable (Acts 26:25; Mk. 5:15; 2 Cor. 5:13). It can refer to “being in control of oneself” or “thoughtful” (BDAG, p.987). It describes a person who is “trustworthy and balanced in judgment, not flighty or unstable.”[39] Thus, it suggests that the person is mentally healthy.
Strong leaders need mental and emotional stability. They need to be reasonable and sensible even during times of intense stress. Before we are fit to lead, we need to get our emotional and mental issues under control, getting the help that we need.
“Just” (dikaios) can also be translated as “right” or “righteous.” This means that leaders should be fair and impartial in their dealings with people (1 Tim. 5:21). People need to feel confident that leaders do not play favorites, which includes favoritism toward family members or friends.
“Devout” (hosios) is one of the words sometimes translated “holy.” This simply means that leaders should be committed and passionate for spiritual matters. They should embody a zeal for God’s will and God’s ways. People like this serve as strong models for others in Christian community. These people are not drained by serving God, but rather, they are contagious in spreading their excitement to others.
(1:9) “Holding fast the faithful word which is in accordance with the teaching, so that he will be able both to exhort in sound doctrine and to refute those who contradict.”
“Exhort in sound doctrine” doesn’t necessarily imply a gift in teaching. Instead, this means that the person has developed this ability to teach through practice, repetition, and hard work (1 Tim. 5:17). Of course, the best teachers are also the best learners. Elders need to be a “student of the word,” being both “willing to learn” and “willing to communicate his learning.”[40] Leaders who are unable to develop a love for reading and the study of Scripture become weak teachers, because they have nothing to share. But those who have a drive to study most often become stronger teachers. Their focus is on the content of God’s word, rather than their own charisma in teaching.
“Refute those who contradict.” Elders need to have developed a skill in being able to debate false teaching and false teachers.
Questions for Reflection
See the “Questions for Reflection” at the end of the article “Character and Leadership.”
Titus 1:10-16 (Recognize and refute false leaders)
Why is quality leadership so important in the church? One reason is that there are false teachers who are constantly vying for the attention of believers and non-believers alike. Paul began by encouraging Titus to get some help from other leaders in his church (vv.5-9). Specifically, Titus needed faithful leaders who could “refute those who contradict” sound teaching (v.9). Next, Paul tells Titus to confront the many “rebellious men” who were causing trouble in these churches on the island of Crete.
(1:10) “For there are many rebellious men, empty talkers and deceivers, especially those of the circumcision.”
Paul begins with the connecting word “for” (gar). This connects Titus’ need to develop leaders who will be equipped to confront these “rebellious men.” Mounce writes, “Titus must appoint qualified people to church leadership because there are many wicked people in Crete who would destroy the church if they could.”[41] Paul writes about these “rebellious men” toward the end of his letter as well (Titus 3:10-11).
Who were these false teachers? These people were some sort of pseudo-Christian Jewish faction. They claimed to be Christians (Titus 1:16), but they were not true believers in Christ. Moreover, they were some sort of Jewish faction. Paul refers to them as being “those of the circumcision,” and they were people who were spreading “Jewish myths” (v.14). Furthermore, both Philo and Josephus teach that a Jewish faction existed on the island of Crete in the first century.[42]
Were there Gentiles in this group of false teachers? At first glance, it seems that there were both Jews and Gentiles in this faction of false teachers. After all, Paul refers to the Jewish false teachers in a separate category from the rest of the group (“especially those of the circumcision”). However, the term “especially” (malista) could “also mean in other words.”[43] So, it seems that this faction was mostly comprised of Jewish false teachers.
“Empty talkers” (mataiologoi) means that they are “emptyheaded in their teaching.” They are “doing much talking but saying nothing.”[44]
“Deceivers” (phrenapatēs) implies that they are both self-deceived and also deceivers of others.[45]
(1:11) “Who must be silenced because they are upsetting whole families, teaching things they should not teach for the sake of sordid gain.”
“Who must be silenced.” The term for “silenced” (epistomizein) only occurs here in the entire NT. It comes from the root word for “mouth” (stoma), and it literally means “to close the mouth by means of a muzzle or gag.”[46] Paul is using this term metaphorically on some level, because he isn’t referring to a literal gag or muzzle (!). The goal is to shut down false teaching. But how we do this is multifaceted. Leaders have many ways of approaching such a difficulty situation at their disposal:
- They can “silence” them from sharing their teaching in the church (v.11).
- They can publicly debate and “refute” their views (v.9).
- They can also “reprove them severely” (v.13).
“They are upsetting whole families.” In the early church, believers met in homes. This would be particularly worrisome to see “whole families” walking away from Christ because of these false teachers. The term “upsetting” (anatrepousin) can also be rendered as “ruining” (NIV) or “turning” (NLT). Lexicons define the term in a variety of ways: “cause to fall,” “overturn,” “destroy,” “upset,” or “ruin” (BDAG, p.74). These alternate translations seem to fit better in context. Paul isn’t merely concerned that these people were upset, but that their faith was being ruined.
“Teaching things they should not teach for the sake of sordid gain.” The false teachers were leading others astray for the sake of “sordid gain.” This is in stark contrast to what Paul told Timothy: “Godliness actually is a means of great gain when accompanied by contentment” (1 Tim. 6:6).
(1:12) “One of themselves, a prophet of their own, said, ‘Cretans are always liars, evil beasts, lazy gluttons.’”
Who is Paul citing? This quote originated with Epimenides (6th c. BC). Many ancient authors refer to Epimenides, including Aristotle, Plato, Cicero, and Plutarch (Plato, Laws 1.642; Aristotle, Rhetoric 3.17.10; Cicero, De Divinatione 1.18; Plutarch, Life of Solon 12.4.). History tells us that Epimenides was known as a teacher, philosopher, priest, prophet, and even a “worker of miracles.”[47]
Where did Epimenides write this? We don’t know. We don’t possess any of Epimenides’ extant writings. However, Clement of Alexandria (Stromata 1.59.2) attributes this quote to Epimenides, as do Chrysostom and Jerome.[48]
Was Callimachus the true writer of this quote? No. Theodore of Mopsuestia (3rd c. BC; 2.243) attributed this quote to Callimachus because he has the words “Cretans are always liars” in one of his writings (Hymn to Zeus 8). However, he doesn’t contain the entire quote, and as Knight observes, “Callimachus was not from Crete but from Cyrene and does not have the entire statement quoted by Paul.”[49]
The Cretans venerated Epimenides and venerated him with “mythical honours.”[50] So, this was a good person for Paul to cite because he was using one of their own trusted writers against them. This would be like citing Richard Dawkins to demonstrate the intellectual poverty of atheism. Paul is simultaneously revealing the poor character of these “rebellious men” (Titus 1:10) as well as refuting their grandiose spiritual claims.
“Cretans are always liars.” The Greek language had a word that meant “to lie” (crētizō), and it originated from the term “Cretan.”
“Evil beasts” is a dehumanizing attack that shows “a maliciousness akin to the more savage animal creation”[51]
“Lazy gluttons” could refer to “uncontrolled greed.”[52]
(1:12) Is this a self-defeating statement?
(1:13) “This testimony is true. For this reason reprove them severely so that they may be sound in the faith.”
The goal of reproof is to win the person over to a sound faith. Elders needed to have the smarts and the strength to “reprove” (elegche) these false teachers (Titus 1:9). Specifically, Titus needed to rebuke these men “severely” (apotomōs).
(1:14) “Not paying attention to Jewish myths and commandments of men who turn away from the truth.”
The false teaching in Crete seems similar to that in Ephesus (1 Tim. 1:4).
Titus isn’t supposed to “pay attention” to these myths. This could mean that he shouldn’t allow his opponents to set the rules for the debate, and instead, he should reprove them with truth. Or this could also mean that Titus should not waste inordinate time arguing with these people (Prov. 26:4-5).
(1:15) “To the pure, all things are pure; but to those who are defiled and unbelieving, nothing is pure, but both their mind and their conscience are defiled.”
Hiebert[53] states that the false teachers were claiming that certain foods were evil, and this was the cause of their disputes (cf. 1 Tim. 4:3; Rom. 14:20). Perhaps. But this is merely speculation. The text simply doesn’t state what these false teachers had in mind.
Guthrie[54] thinks the false teachers were “like the later Gnostics” who denied that physical creation was “pure.” He also entertains the idea that these are “weak Jewish Christians” who are stumbled by the purity laws being fulfilled through Christ. But then, how could authentic Christians “profess to know God, but by their deeds deny Him”? Paul’s scathing critique of these people reveals that these are false teachers. Thus, this latter view seems untenable.
Lea and Griffin[55] state that the false teaching must’ve centered around “Jewish ceremonial practice” and perhaps “dietary regulations.” They understand the word “pure” (kathara) to refer to being “clean.” Thus, Paul is stating that believers in Jesus can know that all foods are clean (cf. Mk. 7:1-23; Acts 10:9-15).
Mounce[56] holds that Paul uses the term “clean” (kathara) to refer to both ritual and moral purity: “To the [ritually] pure, all things are [morally] pure.” He argues that the first usage must be ritual because “not all things are morally pure.” The second usage refers to believers who regard all things as ritually clean (Acts 10:15). By contrast, the false teachers would’ve been “teaching that a morally pure person is still made unclean by eating unclean foods or by touching any defiled thing.”[57] Those who “do not believe cannot be made acceptable to God even by ritual purity because everything about them is unclean. To the (morally) impure, all things are (ritually) impure.”
How should we interpret this passage? This passage is certainly cryptic. However, in our view, Paul is critiquing Jewish false teachers who are trying to bring back Jewish ceremonial laws. To a believer in Jesus (i.e. “the pure”), none of this is necessary because “all things are pure.” That is, the Christian has freedom when it comes to ritual purity laws. By contrast, Paul states that these Jewish false teachers are living for “sordid gain” (v.11) and are “unbelieving,” and therefore, this affects their entire lives (i.e. “nothing is pure”). As a result, “their mind and their conscience are defiled.” This speaks to the noetic effects of sin. Because they are “unbelieving,” their sin has an effect on both their “minds” as well as their “consciences.”
(1:16) “They profess to know God, but by their deeds they deny Him, being detestable and disobedient and worthless for any good deed.”
Mounce considers this to be “the hinge verse of the epistle.”[58] This is because the false teachers were neglecting good deeds in favor of ceremonial rituals. Paul, by contrast, argues for the importance of good deeds based on grace throughout the rest of the letter.
“Profess to know God… Deny Him.” We can claim to know God with our words, but we can deny him with our works. Our works can demonstrate to others that we know God (Jn. 13:34-35; 17:21-23; 1 Jn. 2:4; Jas. 2:14-26).
“Worthless for any good deed.” This false teaching didn’t lead to love—the goal of the Christian life (1 Tim. 1:5). Instead, it made them “worthless for any good deed.” Lea and Griffin comment, “There is an obvious irony here. Those who trusted in ‘works” are unfit for those ‘good works” which God desires (cf. Eph 2:8-10).”[59]
Questions for Reflection
Read verses 10-16. What advice does Paul give on how to discern false teachers?
What advice does he give in responding to false teachers?
Titus 2
Paul just finished writing that the false teachers use words to claim to know God (“they profess to know God”), but they have a lifestyle of works that deny that they know God (“by their deeds they deny Him”). As a result, Paul tells Titus to focus on sound doctrine (i.e. good words) and love (i.e. good deeds). As a leader, Titus should teach people sound doctrine (v.1) and teach people to engage in good works (vv.2-15).
Titus 2:1 (The importance of good WORDS)
(2:1) “But as for you, speak the things which are fitting for sound doctrine.”
Contrary to postmodern thought, doctrine is important. According to chapter 1, it’s worth fighting over. There are accurate and inaccurate interpretations of the Bible, and some distortions can be so serious that they can result in spiritual ruin. Indeed, these false teachers were ruining people’s lives (Titus 1:11), and Paul urges Titus to know sound doctrine and to teach it.
Titus 2:2-15 (The importance of good WORKS)
Paul isn’t addressing official offices within the church. Rather, he is addressing people according to their age and gender. This is similar to his approach in 1 Timothy where he addresses elders (1 Tim. 3) and then individual groups (1 Tim. 5:1-2).
(2:2) “Older men are to be temperate, dignified, sensible, sound in faith, in love, in perseverance.”
“Older men” (presbutēs) are not those who hold the office of elder. Rather, these are simply men in the fellowship that are older in age. Philo uses this term to describe men in their 50s and 60s (On the Creation 105). These men should aim for certain character qualities:
“Temperate” (nephalious) primarily means “pertaining to being very moderate in the drinking of an alcoholic beverage.” But the term can also have the broader meaning of “pertaining to being restrained in conduct, self-controlled, level-headed” (BDAG, p.672). In our view, the term at least refers to being sober from alcohol. But it probably implies more than this. Guthrie[60] understands this quality to refer to “general moderation.”
This passage doesn’t ban all alcoholic consumption. Instead, it teaches us not to be addicted or “enslaved to much wine” (v.3).
“Dignified” (semnous) refers to being “worthy of respect” (BDAG, p.919). Those with this character quality garner respect from those around them through the way that they live.
“Sensible” (sophronos) refers to “being in control of oneself” or being “prudent” or “thoughtful” (BDAG, p.987). We would translate this as having a “sound mind.”
“Sound in faith” (hygiainontas) is the root for our modern word “hygiene.” We need a healthy faith—not an unhygienic faith. The word “faith” (pistis) refers to “personal trust”[61] in this context, rather than Christian doctrine. We know this because the other qualities of love and perseverance are also personal qualities. Guthrie[62] states that this “soundness” applies to all three qualities: soundness in faith, soundness in love, and soundness in perseverance. Furthermore, Paul uses the article (ho) before each characteristic, which implies that all three are being modified by “soundness.”
“[Sound] in love” (agape) refers to a sacrificial form of love for God and others.
“[Sound] in perseverance” (hypomonē) is “the capacity to hold out or bear up in the face of difficulty.” It refers to “patience, endurance, fortitude, and steadfastness” (BDAG, p.1039).
(2:3) “Older women likewise are to be reverent in their behavior, not malicious gossips nor enslaved to much wine, teaching what is good.”
“Reverent” (hieroprepēs) is a term that literally “refers to conduct appropriate to a temple.”[63] In this context, it can be translated as “honorable” (NLT) or “venerable” (BDAG, p.470). It can simply mean that “we must take seriously the fact that we belong to God.”[64]
“Malicious gossips” (diabolous) is also translated as “slanderers.”
(2:4-5) “So that they may encourage the young women to love their husbands, to love their children, 5 to be sensible, pure, workers at home, kind, being subject to their own husbands, so that the word of God will not be dishonored.”
The term “encourage” (sōphronizō) means “to instruct in prudence or behavior that is becoming and shows good judgment” (BDAG, p.986). This implies that women have a teaching role in the church, and this even implies “spiritual mentoring”[65] of younger “women” and “children.”
Older women are supposed to teach and encourage younger women in their roles as wives and mothers. Modern culture often looks down on women who stay at home with their children, but the Bible has a high view of this incredibly important ministry of raising children.
“Subject to their own husbands.” This is a repeated teaching in the NT (Eph. 5:24; Col. 3:18; 1 Pet. 3:1, 5). For a thorough explanation of this subject, see “Christianity and Women.”
“Workers at home.” This stands in contrast to widows in Ephesus who were false teachers and “busybodies” (1 Tim. 5:13).
“So that the word of God will not be dishonored.” We are unsure about the historical circumstances in Crete that led Paul to write this clause. Whatever the case, the love of wives and mothers was a witness to the society at large.
(2:5) Are women supposed to be barefoot and pregnant at home?
Titus 2 (Younger men)
(2:6) “Likewise urge the young men to be sensible.”
Paul uses the term “sensible” (sophrona) to describe men—just as he used it for older men (v.2). It refers to being “wise” or having a “sound mind.”
(2:7-8) “In all things show yourself to be an example of good deeds, with purity in doctrine, dignified, 8 sound in speech which is beyond reproach, so that the opponent will be put to shame, having nothing bad to say about us.”
“Show yourself to be an example of good deeds.” Paul wants people to have solid doctrine (v.1), but he also wants them to have good deeds.
“So that the opponent will be put to shame, having nothing bad to say about us.” Paul tells Titus to demonstrate good deeds, doctrine, and dignity in front of others. It isn’t that the accusers are “at a loss for words with which to abuse the Christian minister.”[66] They still have plenty of words to choose from! Rather, Paul’s point is that their accusations are bankrupt and lack credibility. They have “nothing [objectively!] bad to say about us.”
(2:9) “Urge bondslaves to be subject to their own masters in everything, to be well-pleasing, not argumentative.”
Paul addresses slavery throughout his letters because this was such a widespread reality in the Roman Empire (Eph. 6:5-8; Col. 3:22-25; 1 Tim. 6:1-2; cf. 1 Pet. 2:18-25). But Paul doesn’t condone slavery. Rather, he is explaining how to spread the gospel within the context of this cruel institution. For a complete explanation of slavery, see our earlier article “The Bible and Slavery.” Suffice to say, Paul’s focus is on “adorning the doctrine of God” (Titus 2:10). He is trying to support the spread of the gospel, which is the greatest conceivable good. Lea and Griffin write, “Against the bleak hopelessness of this system of bondage, the Christian slave’s devotion to the gospel and resulting godly attitudes and actions serve to make attractive in an unparalleled way the ultimate freedom that is only realized in Christ.”[67] Indeed, in spreading the gospel, the philosophical foundations for slavery would be undercut.
“Be subject to their own masters in everything.” Paul gives two concrete examples of what he means by being subject to masters: (1) Don’t be argumentative and (2) don’t steal. These are two basic moral principles for all Christians.
(2:10) “Not pilfering, but showing all good faith so that they will adorn the doctrine of God our Savior in every respect.”
The term “adorning” (kosmeō) is the root from which we get our term “cosmetic.” Just as cosmetics bring additional beauty to a woman, our good deeds are supposed to beautify or “adorn the gospel.” Of course, Paul chooses his words very carefully: Good works do not substitute for the message itself. But they do make the message more attractive to the listeners.
(2:11) “For the grace of God has appeared, bringing salvation to all men.”
The connecting word “for” (gar) shows that Paul’s instructions to slaves (vv.9-10) was given for the purpose of evangelism.
“The grace of God has appeared.” Just as Jesus “appeared” (epephane) to bring salvation (Titus 2:11), he will “appear” (epiphaneian) again at his Second Coming (Titus 2:13). Hoekema writes, “If the first appearing of Christ… was visible—as no one would care to deny… the Second Coming will be as visible as the first.”[68]
(Titus 2:11) Does this passage teach universalism? We can render this as salvation being for all men. This is the language of intent—not actuality. Paul’s use of the dative could render this as “to all men,” or it could be rendered “for all men.” The distinction is important. Hiebert comments, “The adjective rendered ‘that brings salvation’ (sōtērios) asserts its saving efficacy. The dative ‘to all men’ may equally be rendered ‘for all men,’ thus stressing the universality of the salvation provided. Salvation is available to all, but its saving effect is dependent on the personal response of faith.”[69] Consequently, Paul isn’t stating that all will be saved, but that “salvation is universally offered to all without exception.”[70] The Atonement is universal in its scope (1 Tim. 2:6; 1 Jn. 2:2), but it is not universal in its application or acceptance.
(2:12) “Instructing us to deny ungodliness and worldly desires and to live sensibly, righteously and godly in the present age.”
“Instructing us to deny ungodliness.” Grace does not support licentiousness. Rather, grace teaches us to live a loving and ethical lifestyle. When we come under grace, we begin to have a change of attitude toward living selfishly. What is it about a message of love and forgiveness that would make us want to be greedy and selfish? Encountering the love of God has a thawing effect on the coldness of human hearts.
(2:13) “Looking for the blessed hope and the appearing of the glory of our great God and Savior, Christ Jesus.”
“Looking for” (prosdechomai) can be rendered “to look forward to” (BDAG, p.877). This refers to the imminence of Jesus’ return—namely, he could return at any moment.
(2:13) Does this passage support the deity of Christ? Yes. The grammar requires this reading. There is a grammatical rule called the Granville Sharp’s rule that applies here. In NT Greek, whenever the article (“the”), a substantive (noun), kai (translated “and, but, even, also, namely”), and a substantive (noun) are used, they always refer to the same person.[71] This is called the TSKS construction. Thus, this expression (tou megalou theou kai soteros) must all refer to Jesus. Greek grammarian Daniel Wallace affirms, “There is no good reason to reject Titus 2:13 as an explicit affirmation of the deity of Christ.”[72] Likewise, Greek expert Bill Mounce goes so far to say that the deity of Christ is “required by the grammar.”[73]
(2:14) “[Jesus] gave Himself for us to redeem us from every lawless deed, and to purify for Himself a people for His own possession, zealous for good deeds.”
God’s saving work was both to forgive us for our sins (“redeem us from every lawless deed”) and to create us for good works (“zealous for good deeds”). The same sequence appears in Ephesians 2:8-10. Paul is explicit that good works do not save us, but he is equally explicit that this is the goal of the Christian life.
(2:15) “These things speak and exhort and reprove with all authority. Let no one disregard you.”
Leaders have spiritual authority. One of the biggest areas of their authority is in the teaching of the word (“speak and exhort and reprove”). By giving three different types of speech (“speak and exhort and reprove”), Paul was demonstrating that leaders shouldn’t be a “one-trick pony” when it comes to leading others. He is showing a “progression of intensity.”[74] Sometimes, we need to “speak” a word of Scripture; other times we will need to “exhort” others; and finally, we will sometimes need to “reprove” those who refuse to take God’s word seriously.
Questions for Reflection
Read verse 1. What are some ways that we might avoid falling into poor doctrine as a church?
Read verse 2-15. We know that Paul doesn’t believe that good works can earn a relationship with God (cf. Titus 3:5). Yet, he places such a large emphasis on the importance of good works in this section. What is the role of good works in Paul’s thinking?
Read verse 12. If we’re truly under grace, what’s to stop us from living selfishly? In what way does the grace of God change our inner motivations to live a loving lifestyle?
Titus 3
Paul ends by reminding Titus of the engine that drives good works in the life of a Christian community: grace. In order to have powerful love, we need to experience powerful love from God.
Titus 3:1-8 (Grace leads to good deeds)
(3:1) “Remind them to be subject to rulers, to authorities, to be obedient, to be ready for every good deed.”
“Be subject to rulers, to authorities.” It isn’t just that we should submit to the government, but we should be ready to serve them with “every good deed.” This means that the government should see believers as loving and helpful, rather than as dangerous.
Does this mean that we should submit to evil governments? See comments on Romans 13:1-7.
(3:2) “To malign no one, to be peaceable, gentle, showing every consideration for all men.”
“Malign” (blasphēmeō) can also be translated as “slander” (NIV). It refers to a “verbal expression of evil and malicious thoughts directed toward a person who is held in contempt.”[75] Paul is “urging Christians to restrain their natural inclination to say the worst about people.”[76]
“Be peaceable” (amachous) means to “not fight.” Hiebert comments, “The Christian must not adopt the arts of the agitator.”[77]
“Gentle” (epieikēs) means “not insisting on every right of letter of law or custom.” It can also mean “yielding, kind, courteous, or tolerant” (BDAG, p.371). “Flexible” also seems like a good synonym.
“All men.” Paul’s focus is for believers to have this sort of attitude with the public and the culture at large. Not only is this the best way to win the world for Christ, but we should know that we should love people like this because we were recently one of them ourselves…
(3:3) “For we also once were foolish ourselves, disobedient, deceived, enslaved to various lusts and pleasures, spending our life in malice and envy, hateful, hating one another.”
Paul uses the connecting word “For” to connect verse 2 to verse 3. Our basis for being peaceful, gentle, and considerate is rooted in the fact that we were very recently just like these people! Believers should never look down upon those in the world, having a self-righteous posture. Instead, we should remember that we were fairly recently in their same shoes. Francis Schaeffer captured the heart of this concept when he wrote, “Don’t be proud. As you look out across the world of sinners, weep for them.”[78]
Isn’t this an exaggerated list of negative attributes? Isn’t this a pessimistic view of human nature? No. We see these attributes quite clearly in human nature—though they are not always apparent (see “Original Sin” and “Total Depravity”). That being said, when we come under grace, we see our sin to a much deeper degree, even as we see God’s acceptance and grace for us at the same time.
- How often do we disobediently disagree with another person’s ideas, simply because they weren’t our own?
- How often do we assume that we are in the right, and never even consider if we’re deceived by our pride or ego?
- How much time, money, and thought do we invest in pleasure-seeking?
- How often do we have thoughts of using others in a lustful way? One statistic states that people think about sex 10-19 times per day—or at least once an hour.[79]
- When others succeed, do we celebrate this, or do we secretly envy them?
- Do you have people in your life whom you can’t stand to be around—or even hate?
I remember sitting through my final quarter in my undergraduate degree with a particularly loud, obnoxious, and infantile classmate. Every time he opened his mouth to share his (never ending!) opinions, I cringed, rolled my eyes, or even openly argued with him. He was irrational and foolish, and the rest of the class couldn’t stand him either.
One day, as I was sitting next to my classmate, a thought entered my mind: “How much would someone need to pay me to be this guy’s genuine friend for the rest of my life?” Ten million dollars? A billion? I realized that I would probably need to be “Bill Gates rich” in order to be friends with him!
I felt that the Holy Spirit brought to mind biblical truths that I had been taught: Not only does God want to be this young man’s friend, but God has been pursuing him for his entire life. Like the Father of the Prodigal Son, God has been patiently waiting for the man to turn to him. Ever since this guy took his first breath as a baby, God had been waiting and yearning for this young man to turn to him and know him.
We might think that Paul’s statements in this verse are exaggerated, but this is only because we don’t realize how far we fall short of God’s picture of love. We read about God’s great love in the following verses…
(3:4) “But when the kindness of God our Savior and His love for mankind appeared.”
The word “but” is a very good word to hear at this point in the letter! God had different plans for us. While we were making a mess of our lives and relationships, God looked at us with “kindness” and “love.” (cf. Titus 2:11)
Paul described our unregenerate state in verse 3 with eight different descriptors. In the following verses (vv.4-7), he describes our regenerate state.
(3:5) “He saved us, not on the basis of deeds which we have done in righteousness, but according to His mercy, by the washing of regeneration and renewing by the Holy Spirit.”
“Not on the basis of deeds… but according to His mercy.” What was the basis of our salvation? It was not good works done in “righteousness” (dikaiosunē); it was God’s great mercy in us “being justified” (dikaiōthentes; cf. Phil. 3:9). He recreated us and cleansed us by transforming us into a “new creation” (2 Cor. 5:17).
“Regeneration” (paliggenesia) comes from two root words: “again” (palin) and “birth” (genesis). Ancient Greek philosophers used this term (paliggensia) to refer to the rejuvenation of the Earth. However, Greek thinkers held to a repeated destruction and renewal of the Earth—over and over again. Yet, Colin Brown notes, “The cosmos did not attain to a new mode of being or quality through the rebirth; the world that has passed away was there once again.”[80] In the same way, when we come to Christ, we are still us, but we are reborn into a new self and a “new creature” in Christ (2 Cor. 5:17).
(3:6) “Whom He poured out upon us richly through Jesus Christ our Savior.”
Jesus himself “poured out” (ekcheō) his love into our hearts through the Holy Spirit (Acts 2:33). Elsewhere, Paul writes, “God has been poured out within our hearts through the Holy Spirit who was given to us” (Rom. 5:5).
“Jesus Christ our Savior.” Just two verses earlier, Paul referred to “God our Savior.” That is, Jesus shares the same title as God the Father.
(3:7) “So that being justified by His grace we would be made heirs according to the hope of eternal life.”
Our justification is the basis for our adoption.
(3:8) “This is a trustworthy statement; and concerning these things I want you to speak confidently, so that those who have believed God will be careful to engage in good deeds. These things are good and profitable for men.”
“Speak confidently… Engage in good deeds.” Paul charged Titus with confidently leading others into lives of good deeds. Our good deeds do not save us (v.5), but now that we’re saved, we are called to engage in good deeds. Mounce writes, “Right theology and right practice are inextricably bound together.”[81]
Paul writes that Titus should speak “confidently” to believers about this subject. As leaders, we should never cower from calling people to a radical life of love for Christ and others.
“These things are good and profitable for men.” When believers engage in good works, this is good for “society in general.”[82] That is, the culture can see the goodness of Christian community.
Titus 3:9-11 (The nuclear option for false teachers)
(3:9) “But avoid foolish controversies and genealogies and strife and disputes about the Law, for they are unprofitable and worthless.”
Titus was battling some sort of false teaching on the island of Crete. This may have been similar to what Timothy faced in Ephesus (see “Introduction to 1 & 2 Timothy” for a description of the false teaching).
(3:10) “Reject a factious man after a first and second warning.”
A “factious man” (hairetikon) refers to someone who “promotes division by his views.”[83] This person creates “heretical parties [factions],”[84] pitting believers against each other.
“Reject” (paraiteomai) can be translated “request” (BDAG, p.764). However, the context warrants stronger language because this comes after lighter actions like giving a “warning” (nouthesia). Thus, this term should be rendered “discharge, dismiss, or drive out” (BDAG, p.764). Mounce[85] doesn’t understand this to refer to being “excommunicated” in an absolute sense, but he takes to refer to being “socially ostracized” from the Christian community—specifically their times of gathering together. Division is such a serious sin that Paul calls for church discipline.
“After a first and second warning.” Hiebert writes, “Further efforts would not be a good stewardship of his time and energies and would give the offender an undeserved sense of importance.”[86]
(3:11) “Knowing that such a man is perverted and is sinning, being self-condemned.”
“Perverted… sinning… self-condemned.” Such a person is “wholly out of touch with truth.”[87] The use of the passive voice (“is perverted”) could imply Satanic involvement.[88] This means that the Satan was actively perverting the person’s mind in addition to the corruption of his own sinful nature.
Titus 3:12-15 (Final greetings)
(3:12) “When I send Artemas or Tychicus to you, make every effort to come to me at Nicopolis, for I have decided to spend the winter there.”
“Make every effort to come to me at Nicopolis.” It seems that Artemas or Tychicus were going to be (temporary?) replacements for Titus in Crete.[89]
“Artemas” is otherwise unknown. All we know about him is that his name sounds Greek, and he was trusted by Paul as a leader whom he could send into difficult situations (i.e. the crisis in Crete).
“Tychicus” was a faithful believer (Acts 20:4). Paul trusted him to carry his letters to the Colossians and the Ephesians (Col. 4:7-8; Eph. 6:21), and to update them on “all my affairs” (Col. 4:7). This implies that Tychicus was close to Paul. Moreover, Tychicus likely carried 2 Timothy to Timothy as well (2 Tim. 4:12).
“Nicopolis” comes from the two word “victory” (nike) and “city” (polis). Thus, it was a very popular name for cities in the ancient world; indeed, seven cities had this name. Mounce,[90] Guthrie,[91] Lee, and Griffin[92] place the city in the region of Epirus “on the Ambraciot Gulf of the Adriatic Sea.”
(3:13) “Diligently help Zenas the lawyer and Apollos on their way so that nothing is lacking for them.”
“Zenas” and “Apollos” most likely brought this letter to Titus from Paul. We don’t know anything about Zenas beyond him being a lawyer. Since his name is Greek, this most likely refers to Roman law—not Jewish law.[93]
“Apollos” was a skilled teacher and leader (Acts 18:24-28; 19:1; 1 Cor. 1:12; 3:4-6; 4:6; 16:12).
“Diligently help… [them] on their way so that nothing is lacking for them.” Hiebert writes, “Titus must diligently assist them by seeing that their further needs are supplied. Such generous material assistance for Christian workers on their journeys characterized the early church (Acts 15:3; Rom. 15:24; 1 Cor. 16:6; 2 Cor. 1:16; 3 John 5-8).”[94]
(3:14) “Our people must also learn to engage in good deeds to meet pressing needs, so that they will not be unfruitful.”
Paul closes with the main message he has been making throughout the entire letter: Believers need to learn to do “good deeds” to meet “pressing needs.”
(3:15) “All who are with me greet you. Greet those who love us in the faith. Grace be with you all.”
“All who are with me greet you.” Paul wasn’t alone when he wrote this letter.
Questions for Reflection
Read verses 4-6. How does each member of the Trinity contribute to our salvation?
Read verse 10. Why does Paul treat division and divisiveness with such severity?
What is the difference between disagreement and division?
[1] William D. Mounce, Pastoral Epistles, vol. 46, Word Biblical Commentary (Dallas: Word, Incorporated, 2000), lix.
[2] William D. Mounce, Pastoral Epistles, vol. 46, Word Biblical Commentary (Dallas: Word, Incorporated, 2000), lx.
[3] William D. Mounce, Pastoral Epistles, vol. 46, Word Biblical Commentary (Dallas: Word, Incorporated, 2000), 385.
[4] D. Edmond Hiebert, “Titus,” in The Expositor’s Bible Commentary: Ephesians through Philemon, ed. Frank E. Gaebelein, vol. 11 (Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan Publishing House, 1981), 423.
[5] William D. Mounce, Pastoral Epistles, vol. 46, Word Biblical Commentary (Dallas: Word, Incorporated, 2000), lxi.
[6] William D. Mounce, Pastoral Epistles, vol. 46, Word Biblical Commentary (Dallas: Word, Incorporated, 2000), lxii.
[7] Scott Berkun, Confessions of a Public Speaker (Cambridge: O’Reilly Media, 2009), 57.
[8] William D. Mounce, Pastoral Epistles, vol. 46, Word Biblical Commentary (Dallas: Word, Incorporated, 2000), 379.
[9] William D. Mounce, Pastoral Epistles, vol. 46, Word Biblical Commentary (Dallas: Word, Incorporated, 2000), 379.
[10] Thomas D. Lea and Hayne P. Griffin, 1, 2 Timothy, Titus, vol. 34, The New American Commentary (Nashville: Broadman & Holman Publishers, 1992), 268.
[11] D. Edmond Hiebert, “Titus,” in The Expositor’s Bible Commentary: Ephesians through Philemon, ed. Frank E. Gaebelein, vol. 11 (Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan Publishing House, 1981), 427.
[12] Thomas D. Lea and Hayne P. Griffin, 1, 2 Timothy, Titus, vol. 34, The New American Commentary (Nashville: Broadman & Holman Publishers, 1992), 270.
[13] That being said, however, the message about Christ and the person of Christ are so closely combined that the two naturally go together.
[14] William D. Mounce, Pastoral Epistles, vol. 46, Word Biblical Commentary (Dallas: Word, Incorporated, 2000), 381.
[15] D. Edmond Hiebert, “Titus,” in The Expositor’s Bible Commentary: Ephesians through Philemon, ed. Frank E. Gaebelein, vol. 11 (Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan Publishing House, 1981), 427.
[16] Thomas D. Lea and Hayne P. Griffin, 1, 2 Timothy, Titus, vol. 34, The New American Commentary (Nashville: Broadman & Holman Publishers, 1992), 271.
[17] Thomas D. Lea and Hayne P. Griffin, 1, 2 Timothy, Titus, vol. 34, The New American Commentary (Nashville: Broadman & Holman Publishers, 1992), 272.
[18] William D. Mounce, Pastoral Epistles, vol. 46, Word Biblical Commentary (Dallas: Word, Incorporated, 2000), 382.
[19] Thomas D. Lea and Hayne P. Griffin, 1, 2 Timothy, Titus, vol. 34, The New American Commentary (Nashville: Broadman & Holman Publishers, 1992), 275.
[20] William D. Mounce, Pastoral Epistles, vol. 46, Word Biblical Commentary (Dallas: Word, Incorporated, 2000), 386.
[21] D. Edmond Hiebert, “Titus,” in The Expositor’s Bible Commentary: Ephesians through Philemon, ed. Frank E. Gaebelein, vol. 11 (Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan Publishing House, 1981), 429-430.
[22] William D. Mounce, Pastoral Epistles, vol. 46, Word Biblical Commentary (Dallas: Word, Incorporated, 2000), 387.
[23] Donald Guthrie, Pastoral Epistles: An Introduction and Commentary, vol. 14, Tyndale New Testament Commentaries (Downers Grove, IL: InterVarsity Press, 1990), 205.
[24] William D. Mounce, Pastoral Epistles, vol. 46, Word Biblical Commentary (Dallas: Word, Incorporated, 2000), 388.
[25] Thomas D. Lea and Hayne P. Griffin, 1, 2 Timothy, Titus, vol. 34, The New American Commentary (Nashville: Broadman & Holman Publishers, 1992), 109.
[26] William D. Mounce, Pastoral Epistles, vol. 46, Word Biblical Commentary (Dallas: Word, Incorporated, 2000), 170.
[27] William D. Mounce, Pastoral Epistles, vol. 46, Word Biblical Commentary (Dallas: Word, Incorporated, 2000), 170.
[28] Thomas D. Lea and Hayne P. Griffin, 1, 2 Timothy, Titus, vol. 34, The New American Commentary (Nashville: Broadman & Holman Publishers, 1992), 109-110.
[29] William D. Mounce, Pastoral Epistles, vol. 46, Word Biblical Commentary (Dallas: Word, Incorporated, 2000), 178.
[30] William D. Mounce, Pastoral Epistles, vol. 46, Word Biblical Commentary (Dallas: Word, Incorporated, 2000), 179.
[31] George W. Knight, The Pastoral Epistles: A Commentary on the Greek Text, New International Greek Testament Commentary (Grand Rapids, MI; Carlisle, England: W.B. Eerdmans; Paternoster Press, 1992), 289.
[32] Thomas D. Lea and Hayne P. Griffin, 1, 2 Timothy, Titus, vol. 34, The New American Commentary (Nashville: Broadman & Holman Publishers, 1992), 283.
[33] In Greek, “me” is one way to show the negation in Greek.
[34] William D. Mounce, Pastoral Epistles, vol. 46, Word Biblical Commentary (Dallas: Word, Incorporated, 2000), 176.
[35] Thomas D. Lea and Hayne P. Griffin, 1, 2 Timothy, Titus, vol. 34, The New American Commentary (Nashville: Broadman & Holman Publishers, 1992), 111.
[36] Thomas D. Lea and Hayne P. Griffin, 1, 2 Timothy, Titus, vol. 34, The New American Commentary (Nashville: Broadman & Holman Publishers, 1992), 284.
[37] Donald Guthrie, Pastoral Epistles: An Introduction and Commentary, vol. 14, Tyndale New Testament Commentaries (Downers Grove, IL: InterVarsity Press, 1990), 96.
[38] William D. Mounce, Pastoral Epistles, vol. 46, Word Biblical Commentary (Dallas: Word, Incorporated, 2000), 177.
[39] Thomas D. Lea and Hayne P. Griffin, 1, 2 Timothy, Titus, vol. 34, The New American Commentary (Nashville: Broadman & Holman Publishers, 1992), 110.
[40] Thomas D. Lea and Hayne P. Griffin, 1, 2 Timothy, Titus, vol. 34, The New American Commentary (Nashville: Broadman & Holman Publishers, 1992), 286.
[41] William D. Mounce, Pastoral Epistles, vol. 46, Word Biblical Commentary (Dallas: Word, Incorporated, 2000), 395-396.
[42] Donald Guthrie, Pastoral Epistles: An Introduction and Commentary, vol. 14, Tyndale New Testament Commentaries (Downers Grove, IL: InterVarsity Press, 1990), 208.
[43] Thomas D. Lea and Hayne P. Griffin, 1, 2 Timothy, Titus, vol. 34, The New American Commentary (Nashville: Broadman & Holman Publishers, 1992), 288.
[44] Donald Guthrie, Pastoral Epistles: An Introduction and Commentary, vol. 14, Tyndale New Testament Commentaries (Downers Grove, IL: InterVarsity Press, 1990), 208.
[45] Donald Guthrie, Pastoral Epistles: An Introduction and Commentary, vol. 14, Tyndale New Testament Commentaries (Downers Grove, IL: InterVarsity Press, 1990), 208.
[46] D. Edmond Hiebert, “Titus,” in The Expositor’s Bible Commentary: Ephesians through Philemon, ed. Frank E. Gaebelein, vol. 11 (Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan Publishing House, 1981), 432.
[47] Philip H. Towner, The Letters to Timothy and Titus, The New International Commentary on the New Testament (Grand Rapids, MI: Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Co., 2006), 700.
[48] George W. Knight, The Pastoral Epistles: A Commentary on the Greek Text, New International Greek Testament Commentary (Grand Rapids, MI; Carlisle, England: W.B. Eerdmans; Paternoster Press, 1992), 298.
[49] George W. Knight, The Pastoral Epistles: A Commentary on the Greek Text, New International Greek Testament Commentary (Grand Rapids, MI; Carlisle, England: W.B. Eerdmans; Paternoster Press, 1992), 298.
[50] Donald Guthrie, Pastoral Epistles: An Introduction and Commentary, vol. 14, Tyndale New Testament Commentaries (Downers Grove, IL: InterVarsity Press, 1990), 209.
[51] Donald Guthrie, Pastoral Epistles: An Introduction and Commentary, vol. 14, Tyndale New Testament Commentaries (Downers Grove, IL: InterVarsity Press, 1990), 209.
[52] Donald Guthrie, Pastoral Epistles: An Introduction and Commentary, vol. 14, Tyndale New Testament Commentaries (Downers Grove, IL: InterVarsity Press, 1990), 209.
[53] D. Edmond Hiebert, “Titus,” in The Expositor’s Bible Commentary: Ephesians through Philemon, ed. Frank E. Gaebelein, vol. 11 (Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan Publishing House, 1981), 434.
[54] Donald Guthrie, Pastoral Epistles: An Introduction and Commentary, vol. 14, Tyndale New Testament Commentaries (Downers Grove, IL: InterVarsity Press, 1990), 211.
[55] Thomas D. Lea and Hayne P. Griffin, 1, 2 Timothy, Titus, vol. 34, The New American Commentary (Nashville: Broadman & Holman Publishers, 1992), 292.
[56] William D. Mounce, Pastoral Epistles, vol. 46, Word Biblical Commentary (Dallas: Word, Incorporated, 2000), 401.
[57] William D. Mounce, Pastoral Epistles, vol. 46, Word Biblical Commentary (Dallas: Word, Incorporated, 2000), 401.
[58] William D. Mounce, Pastoral Epistles, vol. 46, Word Biblical Commentary (Dallas: Word, Incorporated, 2000), 402.
[59] Thomas D. Lea and Hayne P. Griffin, 1, 2 Timothy, Titus, vol. 34, The New American Commentary (Nashville: Broadman & Holman Publishers, 1992), 293.
[60] Donald Guthrie, Pastoral Epistles: An Introduction and Commentary, vol. 14, Tyndale New Testament Commentaries (Downers Grove, IL: InterVarsity Press, 1990), 213.
[61] William D. Mounce, Pastoral Epistles, vol. 46, Word Biblical Commentary (Dallas: Word, Incorporated, 2000), 409.
[62] Donald Guthrie, Pastoral Epistles: An Introduction and Commentary, vol. 14, Tyndale New Testament Commentaries (Downers Grove, IL: InterVarsity Press, 1990), 213.
[63] William D. Mounce, Pastoral Epistles, vol. 46, Word Biblical Commentary (Dallas: Word, Incorporated, 2000), 410.
[64] William D. Mounce, Pastoral Epistles, vol. 46, Word Biblical Commentary (Dallas: Word, Incorporated, 2000), 410.
[65] Thomas D. Lea and Hayne P. Griffin, 1, 2 Timothy, Titus, vol. 34, The New American Commentary (Nashville: Broadman & Holman Publishers, 1992), 299.
[66] Donald Guthrie, Pastoral Epistles: An Introduction and Commentary, vol. 14, Tyndale New Testament Commentaries (Downers Grove, IL: InterVarsity Press, 1990), 217.
[67] Thomas D. Lea and Hayne P. Griffin, 1, 2 Timothy, Titus, vol. 34, The New American Commentary (Nashville: Broadman & Holman Publishers, 1992), 308.
[68] Anthony A. Hoekema, The Bible and the Future (Grand Rapids, MI: Eerdmans, 1979), 171-172.
[69] D. Edmond Hiebert, “Titus,” in The Expositor’s Bible Commentary: Ephesians through Philemon, ed. Frank E. Gaebelein, vol. 11 (Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan Publishing House, 1981), 440.
[70] Thomas D. Lea and Hayne P. Griffin, 1, 2 Timothy, Titus, vol. 34, The New American Commentary (Nashville: Broadman & Holman Publishers, 1992), 310.
[71] James White points out, “Sharp’s study of the text of the New Testament led him to recognize that when the writer used a particular construction of “article (the word “the”)—substantive (noun)— καί,—substantive,” and when the personal nouns involved were singular and not proper names, they always referred to the same person.” James R. White, The Forgotten Trinity (Minneapolis, MN. Baker Publishing Group. 1998), 77-78.
[72] Daniel B. Wallace, Greek Grammar beyond the Basics: An Exegetical Syntax of the New Testament (Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan, 1996), 276.
[73] William D. Mounce, Pastoral Epistles, vol. 46, Word Biblical Commentary (Dallas: Word, Incorporated, 2000), 431.
[74] Thomas D. Lea and Hayne P. Griffin, 1, 2 Timothy, Titus, vol. 34, The New American Commentary (Nashville: Broadman & Holman Publishers, 1992), 316.
[75] Thomas D. Lea and Hayne P. Griffin, 1, 2 Timothy, Titus, vol. 34, The New American Commentary (Nashville: Broadman & Holman Publishers, 1992), 318.
[76] George W. Knight, The Pastoral Epistles: A Commentary on the Greek Text, New International Greek Testament Commentary (Grand Rapids, MI; Carlisle, England: W.B. Eerdmans; Paternoster Press, 1992), 333.
[77] D. Edmond Hiebert, “Titus,” in The Expositor’s Bible Commentary: Ephesians through Philemon, ed. Frank E. Gaebelein, vol. 11 (Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan Publishing House, 1981), 443.
[78] Francis Schaeffer, Genesis in Space and Time (Downers Grove: IL, InterVarsity Press, 1972), 90.
[79] Dr. Ananya Mandal, MD, “Study busts myth that men think about sex every seven seconds.” News Medical (December 4, 2011).
[80] J. Guhrt, New International Dictionary of New Testament Theology (Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan Publishing House, 1986), 184.
[81] William D. Mounce, Pastoral Epistles, vol. 46, Word Biblical Commentary (Dallas: Word, Incorporated, 2000), 452.
[82] Thomas D. Lea and Hayne P. Griffin, 1, 2 Timothy, Titus, vol. 34, The New American Commentary (Nashville: Broadman & Holman Publishers, 1992), 326.
[83] Donald Guthrie, Pastoral Epistles: An Introduction and Commentary, vol. 14, Tyndale New Testament Commentaries (Downers Grove, IL: InterVarsity Press, 1990), 230.
[84] D. Edmond Hiebert, “Titus,” in The Expositor’s Bible Commentary: Ephesians through Philemon, ed. Frank E. Gaebelein, vol. 11 (Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan Publishing House, 1981), 448.
[85] William D. Mounce, Pastoral Epistles, vol. 46, Word Biblical Commentary (Dallas: Word, Incorporated, 2000), 455.
[86] D. Edmond Hiebert, “Titus,” in The Expositor’s Bible Commentary: Ephesians through Philemon, ed. Frank E. Gaebelein, vol. 11 (Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan Publishing House, 1981), 448.
[87] D. Edmond Hiebert, “Titus,” in The Expositor’s Bible Commentary: Ephesians through Philemon, ed. Frank E. Gaebelein, vol. 11 (Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan Publishing House, 1981), 448.
[88] D. Edmond Hiebert, “Titus,” in The Expositor’s Bible Commentary: Ephesians through Philemon, ed. Frank E. Gaebelein, vol. 11 (Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan Publishing House, 1981), 448.
[89] William D. Mounce, Pastoral Epistles, vol. 46, Word Biblical Commentary (Dallas: Word, Incorporated, 2000), 457.
[90] William D. Mounce, Pastoral Epistles, vol. 46, Word Biblical Commentary (Dallas: Word, Incorporated, 2000), 457.
[91] Donald Guthrie, Pastoral Epistles: An Introduction and Commentary, vol. 14, Tyndale New Testament Commentaries (Downers Grove, IL: InterVarsity Press, 1990), 232.
[92] Thomas D. Lea and Hayne P. Griffin, 1, 2 Timothy, Titus, vol. 34, The New American Commentary (Nashville: Broadman & Holman Publishers, 1992), 331.
[93] Donald Guthrie, Pastoral Epistles: An Introduction and Commentary, vol. 14, Tyndale New Testament Commentaries (Downers Grove, IL: InterVarsity Press, 1990), 233.
[94] D. Edmond Hiebert, “Titus,” in The Expositor’s Bible Commentary: Ephesians through Philemon, ed. Frank E. Gaebelein, vol. 11 (Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan Publishing House, 1981), 449.