Titus 1

Titus 1:1

I. SALUTATION (1:1-4) 1:1 Paul was both a bondservant of God and an apostle of Jesus Christ. The first pictures him as a slave of the Supreme Master, the second as an envoy of the Sovereign Lord. The first speaks of submission, the second of authority. He became a bondservant by personal commitment, an apostle by divine appointment. The goals of his ministry were to further the faith of God’s elect and the acknowledgement of the truth. Furthering their faith may mean either bringing them to faith or conversion in the first place, or leading them on in the faith after salvation. Since the phrase, the acknowledgement of the truth seems to cover the second meaning, we understand the apostle to mean that his two basic aims were: (1) evangelism furthering the faith of God’s elect; (2) educationfurthering their knowledge of the truth. It is an echo of Mat_28:20 preaching the gospel to all nations and teaching them to observe all things Christ commanded. In specifying without apology that it is the faith of God’s elect he is called to promote, the apostle confronts us with the doctrine of election. Few doctrines of Scripture have suffered more misunderstanding, provoked more debate, and strained more intellects. Briefly, it teaches that God chose certain ones in Christ before the foundation of the world with the ultimate intention that they should be holy and blameless before Him (Eph_1:4). Having spoken of his apostleship as being involved with the faith of God’s elect and their acknowledgement of the truth, Paul now adds that this truth accords with godliness. This means that the Christian faith is consistent with true holiness and is adapted to lead men to practical godliness. Soundness in faith demands purity in life. Nothing could be more incongruous than the preacher of whom it was said, When he was in the pulpit, the people wished he would never leave it. When he was out of the pulpit, they wished he would never enter it!1:2 Paul’s commission in connection with the gospel has a third great emphasis. It was not only concerned with: (1) evangelismfurthering the faith of God’s elect, past tense; and (2) educationfurthering their knowledge of the truth, present tense; but also (3) expectationin hope of eternal life, future tense. The NT speaks of eternal life as both a present possession and a future hope. The word hope does not imply uncertainty. The moment we trust Christ as Savior we have eternal life as a present possession (Joh_5:24) and become heirs to all the benefits of His redemptive work, but we will not experience the practical enjoyment of all of them until we reach our eternal home. We hope in the sense that we are looking forward to eternal life in its final form when we will receive our glorified bodies and be forever free from sin, sickness, sorrow, suffering, and death (Phi_3:20-21; Tit_3:7). The hope is sure because it was promised by God. Nothing is as sure as the word of God, who cannot lie, who cannot be deceived, and who would not deceive. There is no risk in believing what He says. In fact nothing is more reasonable than for the creature to believe his Creator. God promised eternal life before time began. This may be understood in two ways. First, God determined in past eternity to give eternal life to all who would believe on the Lord Jesus, and what He determined was the same as a promise. Or it may mean that all the blessings of salvation were contained in germ form in the promise of the Messiah found in Gen_3:15. This was before the ages of time or dispensations began to unfold. 1:3 In due time God made known this glorious program of eternal life which He had decided on in past ages. He had not fully revealed it in OT times. Believers then had a very hazy idea of life after death. But the vagueness disappeared with the coming of the Savior. He brought life and immortality to light through the gospel (2Ti_1:10). And the good news was broadcast by Paul and the other apostles in fulfillment of the commandment of God our Savior, that is, in obedience to the Great Commission. 1:4 The Letter is addressed to Titus, Paul’s true son in a common faith. But who is this Titus? We have to piece together his biography from sparse references to him in three of Paul’s Letters. A Greek by birth (Gal_2:3), he was born again by faith in the Lord Jesus, possibly through Paul’s ministry (Tit_1:4). A battle was then raging over what was the true gospel. On one side were Paul and all those who taught salvation by grace through faith plus nothing. On the other side were the Judaizers who insisted that circumcision (and thus lawkeeping) was requisite for first-class citizenship in God’s kingdom. Titus became a test case in the controversy.

Paul and Barnabas took him to Jerusalem (Gal_2:1) for a conference with the apostles and elders. The decision of the council was that a Gentile like Titus did not have to submit to Jewish laws and ceremonies in order to be saved (Act_15:11). Gentiles did not have to become Jews. Jews did not have to become Gentiles. Rather, Jews and Gentiles became a new creation when they believed in Jesus. Thereafter Titus became one of Paul’s most valuable assistants, serving as a trouble-shooter in Corinth and Crete. The apostle first sent him from Ephesus to Corinth, presumably to correct doctrinal and ethical disorders in the assembly there. When Titus later rejoined Paul in Macedonia, Paul was overjoyed to hear that the Corinthians had responded positively to his apostolic admonitions (2Co_2:12-13; 2Co_7:5-7, 2Co_7:13-16). From Macedonia, Paul sent Titus to Corinth again, this time to expedite a collection for poor saints in Jerusalem (2Co_8:6, 2Co_8:16-17; 2Co_12:18). Paul described him as my partner and fellow worker concerning you (2Co_8:23). We do not definitely know when Paul was with Titus in Crete, but it is generally believed to have been after the apostle’s first imprisonment in Rome. The last mention of Titus is in 2Ti_4:10. He was with Paul during part of his second imprisonment, but then Paul reports him as having left for Dalmatia, the Yugoslavia of today. Paul may have sent him there, though the general tone of the verse is that of a lonely and deserted man. The apostle speaks of Titus as his true son in a common faith. This may mean that Paul was instrumental in Titus’ conversion, but not necessarily. Paul also addressed Timothy as his true son in the faith (1Ti_1:2), yet it is possible that Timothy was already a disciple when Paul first met him (Act_16:1). So the expression may mean that these younger men exhibited spiritual qualities similar to Paul’s, and that in Christian service there was a filial bond. For his young lieutenant Paul wishes grace, mercy, and peace. In this context, grace means the divine strength needed for life and service. Mercy is compassion on man’s deep need. Peace means freedom from anxiety, panic, and distraction despite adverse circumstances. These come jointly from God the Father and the Lord Jesus Christ our Savior. In thus linking the Father and the Son as the sources of grace, mercy, and peace, the Spirit of God implies their complete equality.

Titus 1:5

II. ELDERS IN THE CONGREGATION (1:5-9) 1:5 When Paul left Crete, there were certain things that still needed to be set in order, there were false teachers to be silenced, and there was the pressing need for recognized spiritual guides in the assemblies. He left Titus to handle these matters. We do not know how the Christian faith first came to Crete. Perhaps the best guess is that Cretans who were in Jerusalem on the Day of Pentecost (Act_2:11) returned with the good news, and that local churches were subsequently established. Neither can we be sure as to when Paul was in Crete with Titus. We know that he touched in at Crete on his voyage to Rome as a prisoner (Act_27:12), but the circumstances would hardly have permitted active ministry in the churches. Since Acts makes no other reference to Paul’s being in Crete, it is generally supposed that the visit took place after his first Roman imprisonment. Resorting to a little biblical detective work, we can reconstruct the following itinerary from various references in Paul’s writings. First Paul sailed from Italy to Crete on his way to Asia (Western Turkey today). Leaving Titus in Crete (Tit_1:5), he traveled to Ephesus, the capital of Asia. At Ephesus he deputized Timothy to correct doctrinal errors that were creeping in there (1Ti_1:3-4). Then he sailed across the Aegean Sea to Macedonia to fulfill his prior intention while in prison to visit Philippi as soon as he was free (Phi_1:26). Finally, he traveled southwest across Greece to Nicopolis, where he planned to stay for the winter and where he expected Titus to join him (Tit_3:12). According to Homer, there were between ninety and one hundred cities in Crete as early as his time, and churches had apparently been formed in several of them. In each there was a need for responsible elders to be appointed.

EXCURSUS ON ELDERS Elders in the NT sense are mature Christian men of sterling character who provide spiritual leadership in a local assembly. The name elder, which refers to the spiritual maturity of the man, is translated from the Greek word presbuteros, (which turned into the English presbyter). The Greek word episkopos, translated bishop, overseer or guardian, is also used in reference to elders, describing their function as undershepherds of God’s flock. The names elders and bishops are generally understood to refer to the same persons for the following reasons. In Act_20:17, Paul called for the elders (presbuteroi) from Ephesus; in verse 28 he addressed them as guardians (episkopoi). In 1Pe_5:1-2, Peter similarly uses the terms interchangeably. The qualifications for bishops (episkopoi) in 1 Timothy 3 and those for elders (presbuteroi) in Titus 1 are substantially the same. In modern usage, bishop has come to mean a prelate who supervises a diocese or a group of churches in a district. But the word never means this in the NT. The scriptural pattern is to have several bishops in one church rather than one bishop over several churches. Nor should an elder be confused with the modern pastor, who is primarily responsible for preaching, teaching, and administering the sacraments in a local church. It is generally acknowledged that there was no such person in the early church. The primitive assemblies were composed of saints, bishops, and deacons (Phi_1:1)that is all. The clerical system did not rise until the second century. A pastor in the NT sense is one of the special-service gifts which the risen, ascended Christ bestowed to build up the saints for the work of ministering (Eph_4:11-12). In many respects the work of pastors and elders is similar; both are called to tend and feed the flock of God. But the two are never equated. Conceivably, a pastor may have a traveling ministry, while an elder is usually associated with one local assembly. The functions of elders are given in considerable detail:

1. They shepherd and care for the church of the Lord (Act_20:28; 1Ti_3:5; 1Pe_5:2).
2. They are alert to protect the church from attacks, both from without and within (Act_20:29-31).
3. They lead and rule, but by guiding, not driving (1Th_5:12; 1Ti_5:17; Heb_13:7, Heb_13:17; 1Pe_5:3).
4. They preach the word, teach sound doctrine, and refute those who contradict it (1Ti_5:17; Tit_1:9-11).
5. They moderate and arbitrate in doctrinal and ethical matters (Act_15:5-6; Act_16:4.
6. By their life they are an example to the flock (Heb_13:7; 1Pe_5:3).
7. They seek to restore the believers who have been overtaken in any trespass (Gal_6:1).
8. They keep watch over the souls of Christians in the local assembly as those who will have to give account (Heb_13:17).
9. They exercise a ministry of prayer, especially with regard to the sick (Jam_5:14-15).
10. They are involved in the care of poor saints (Act_11:30).
11. They share in the commendation of gifted men to the work to which God has called them (1Ti_4:14). It is clear that in the early church, elders were appointed by the apostles and their representatives (Act_14:23; Tit_1:5). This does not mean, however, that the apostles and their delegates had the power to make a man an elder. In order to become a bishop, there must be both divine enablement and human willingness. Only the Holy Spirit can make a man a bishop or guardian (Act_20:28), but the man must aspire to the work (1Ti_3:1). There must be this mingling of the divine and the human. When local churches were first established in the apostolic days, there were no elders in them; all the believers were novices. But as time passed, the Lord prepared certain ones for this important ministry. Since the NT was not yet available in written form, Christians in general did not know the qualifications and duties of elders. Only the apostles and their assistants knew. On the basis of this knowledge, they singled out the men who met the divine standards and publicly named them as such. Today we have the complete NT. We know what an elder is and what he is supposed to do. When we see qualified men who are actively serving as over seers, we recognize them (1Th_5:12) and obey them (Heb_13:17). It is not a question of our electing them but of recognizing those whom God has raised up for this work. The qualifications of elders are found in 1Ti_3:1-7 and here in Titus. Sometimes we hear the remark that if these are the requirements, then there are no bishops today. This idea downgrades the authority of the Scriptures by implying that they don’t mean what they say. There is nothing unreasonable or unattainable in the standards given. We betray our own low spiritual state when we treat the Bible as excessively idealistic.

1:6 Elders are men who are blameless, that is, of unquestioned integrity. No charge of false doctrine or irregular behavior can be proved against them. It does not mean that they are sinless, but that if they do minor wrongs, they are prompt to make them right by confession to God, by apology to the person(s) wronged, and by restitution, if applicable. The second qualification, that they be the husband of one wife, has been understood in at least seven different ways: (1) a man must be married; (2) he must not be divorced; (3) he must not be remarried after divorce; (4) he must not be remarried after the death of his first wife; (5) he must not be a polygamist; (6) he must not have concubines or lesser wives; (7) in general, he must be a faithful husband and an example of strict morality. If the phrase husband of one wife means that a man must be married, then by the same reasoning he must have children, because this same verse states that his children must be believers. Certainly it is preferable for an elder to have a family; he can deal more intelligently with family problems in the congregation. But it is doubtful that this verse prohibits any unmarried man from being an elder. It probably does not mean that he must not be divorced under any circumstances, because the Savior taught that divorce is permissible in at least one instance (Mat_5:32; Mat_19:9). Neither can it be taken as an absolute prohibition of remarriage after divorce in all cases. For example, a believer who is entirely innocent might be divorced by an unbelieving wife who then remarries. In such a case, the Christian was not responsible. Since the first marriage was broken by the divorce and remarriage of his unbelieving partner, he is free to remarry. The interpretation that eligibility for the work of an elder is forfeited if a man remarries after the death of his first wife is ruled out by the principle stated in 1Co_7:39 : A wife is bound by law as long as her husband lives; but if her husband dies, she is at liberty to be married to whom she wishes, only in the Lord.Certainly the expression the husband of one wife means that an elder must not be a polygamist nor have a concubine or mistress. In summary, it means that his married life must be an example of purity to the flock. In addition he must have faithful children not accused of dissipation or insubordination. More than most of us care to admit, the Bible holds parents responsible for the way their children turn out (Pro_22:6). When a family is well-governed and well-trained in the word of God, the children generally follow the godly example of their parents. Although a father cannot determine the salvation of his children, he can prepare the way of the Lord by positive instruction in the word, by loving discipline, and by avoiding hypocrisy and inconsistency in his own life. If children are spendthrifts and rebels against parental authority, the Scriptures lay the responsibility at the father’s door. His indulgence and permissiveness have been to blame. If he cannot rule his own family well, it is unlikely that he would be a suitable elder, since the same principles apply in each case (1Ti_3:5). There is a question whether this requirement concerning faithful children applies only as long as children are under parental authority in the home, or whether it includes those who are away from home. We favor the first view, remembering, however, that home training is one of the principal determinants of ultimate character. 1:7 A bishop is a steward of God. It is not his congregation that he helps to oversee. He is deputized to handle God’s affairs in God’s assembly. For the second time it is specified that he must be blamelesssurely this is repetition for emphasis. Let there be no doubthe must be a man who is above reproach both doctrinally and morally. He must not be self-willed. If a man is headstrong, obstinately right with no possibility that those who differ might be, if he is unyielding and impatient of contradiction, then he is unsuited to be a spiritual leader. An elder is a moderator, not a dogmatic autocrat. He must not be quick-tempered. If he has a volatile temperament, he has learned to bridle it. If he has a hot temper, he never lets it show. He must not be given to wine. In our culture, this might seem so elementary as to scarcely need mentioning. But we must remember that the Bible was written for all cultures. In countries where wine is used by Christians as a common beverage, there is the danger of overindulgence and disorderly conduct. That lack of self-control is in view here. The Bible distinguishes between the use of wine and its abuse. Its use in moderation as a beverage was allowed when Jesus turned the water into wine at the wedding in Cana (Joh_2:1-11). Its use for medicinal purposes is prescribed by Paul for Timothy (1Ti_5:23; see also Pro_31:6). The abuse of wine and strong drink is condemned in Pro_20:1; Pro_23:29-35 While total abstinence is not demanded in the word, there is one situation in which refraining is called for, namely, when drinking wine would offend a weaker brother or cause him to stumble (Rom_14:21). This is the overriding consideration which causes great numbers of Christians in North American to abstain from alcohol entirely. With the elder, the question is not the total prohibition of wine, but rather the excessive use of wine, which leads to brawling. Neither should he be violent. He must not resort to the use of physical force by striking others. We have heard of officious clerics who gave an occasional blow to refractory members of their parish. This type of overbearing intimidation is forbidden for a bishop. He must not be greedy for money, insatiably determined to get rich, but careless as to the means employed. It is true, as Samuel Johnson said, that the lust of gold, unfeeling and remorseless, is the last corruption of degenerate man. A true elder can say with Paul: I have coveted no one’s silver or gold or apparel (Act_20:33). 1:8 On the positive side, a bishop must be hospitable. His home should always be open to strangers, to those with personal problems, to the disheartened and the oppressed. It should be a place of happy Christian fellowship, where every guest is received as if he were the Lord Himself. Next he must be a lover of what is goodgood people and good things. His speech, his activities, and his associations should reveal that he is separated from all that is shady, questionable, or wrong. He must be sober-minded. This means that he is prudent, discreet, and master of himself. The same word is used in Tit_2:2, Tit_2:5-6, Tit_2:12, where it has the thought of being sensible, self-controlled, and sober. In his dealings with others, the elder must be just. In relation to God he must be holy. In respect to himself he must be self-controlled. This is what Paul referred to in Gal_5:22-23 : The fruit of the Spirit is … self-control. It means that a person has every passion and appetite under control to obey Christ. While the power for this can only come from the Holy Spirit, there must be discipline and cooperation on the part of the believer. 1:9 The bishop must be sound in the faith. He must hold tenaciously to the spiritually healthful doctrines taught by the Lord Jesus and the apostles which have been preserved for us in the NT. Only then will he be able to give the saints a balanced diet of sound doctrine, and silence those who speak against the truth. These are the qualifications of spiritual guides in the local assembly. It should be noticed that nothing is said about their physical prowess, educational attainments, social status, or business acumen. A hunchbacked street sweeper, homespun and unlettered, might be a qualified elder because of his spiritual stature. It is not true, as is sometimes suggested, that the same qualities that make a man successful in business also fit him for leadership in the church. One other point should be mentioned. The picture that emerges of a godly elder is not that of a man who arranges for speakers, disburses funds, contracts for building repairs, and that’s all! The true elder is deeply and vitally involved in the spiritual life of the church by his instruction, exhortation, encouragement, rebuke, and correction.

Titus 1:10

III. ERROR IN THE CONGREGATION (1:10-16) 1:10 In the early church there was the liberty of the Spirit, that is, freedom for the men to participate in the meetings as led by the Holy Spirit. Paul describes such an open meeting in 1Co_14:26 : How is it then, brethren? Whenever you come together, each of you has a psalm, has a teaching, has a tongue, has a revelation, has an interpretation. Let all things be done for edification. It is an ideal situation when the Spirit of God is thus free to speak through various members of the congregation. But human nature being what it is, wherever such liberty exists, you almost invariably find men rushing in to abuse it with false doctrine, unedifying nit-picking, or seemingly endless rambling, devoid of the Spirit. This had happened in the Cretan congregations. Paul realized that there must be strong spiritual leadership to control the abuses and to preserve the liberty of the Spirit. He also realized that great care was needed in appointing elders who were fully qualified. So here he rehearses the conditions which called for prompt action in appointing elders in the churches. Many insubordinate men had risen up to defy the authority of the apostles and deny their teachings. They were both idle talkers and deceivers. Their talk produced no spiritual benefits. Rather, it robbed people of the truth and led them into error. The principal troublemakers were those of the circumcision party, that is, Jewish teachers who professed to be Christians and yet insisted that Christians must be circumcised and observe the ceremonial law. This was a practical denial of the all-sufficiency of the work of Christ. 1:11 Men like this must be muzzled. They must learn that the assembly is not a democracy, and that freedom of speech has limits. They had been overturning whole households. Does this suggest that they had been peddling their pernicious doctrines behind the scenes in private homes? It is a favorite method of the cults (2Ti_3:6). Their motives were suspect as well. They were out for money, using the ministry as a front for a lucrative business. Their message appealed to the legalistic streak in man, encouraging him to believe that he can gain God’s favor by going through religious motions even though his life may be corrupt and defiled. They taught for dishonest gain what they had no right to teach. 1:12 Here Paul reminds Titus of the kind of people he is dealing with. The unusually blunt and caustic description was true of the false teachers in particular and of the Cretans in general. He quotes Epimenides, one of their own poetic spokesmen who lived around 600 b.c., as calling them inveterate liars, evil beasts, lazy gluttons. It seems that every people has national characteristics, but few could beat the Cretans in depravity. They were habitual and compulsive liars. They were like fierce animals, living to indulge gross and wild passions. Allergic to work and addicted to gluttony, they lived lives that were all kitchen and no chapel! 1:13 The apostle confirms the accuracy of the character sketch. Titus had unpromising raw materials to work withenough to discourage any missionary! But Paul did not write the people off or counsel Titus to abandon them. Through the gospel there is hope for the worst of men. So Paul advises his assistant to rebuke them sharply, that they may be sound or healthy in the Christian faith. Some day these men might be not only exemplary believers, but also godly elders in the local churches. This passage overflows with encouragement for Christian workers in difficult fields of the world (and what field is not difficult?). Beyond the grossness, denseness, and unresponsiveness of the people, there is always the vision of their becoming gracious, pure, and fruitful saints. 1:14 In severely rebuking the false teachers, Titus was charged to warn them against Jewish fables and commandments of men who turn from the truth. The Judaizers lived in a world of religious fantasies and of rules centering around clean and unclean foods, the observance of days, and the avoidance of ceremonial defilement. It was of this which Paul wrote in Col_2:23 : These things indeed have an appearance of wisdom in self-imposed religion, false humility, and neglect of the body, but are of no value against the indulgence of the flesh.1:15 What the apostle says next has given rise to such misinterpretation that it requires a detailed explanation. He writes: To the pure all things are pure, but to those who are defiled and unbelieving nothing is pure; but even their mind and conscience are defiled.If we take the words to the pure all things are pure out of context as a statement of absolute truth in all areas of life, we are in trouble! All things are not pure, even to those whose minds are pure. Yet people have actually used this verse to justify vile magazines, suggestive movies, and even immorality itself. This is what Peter speaks of as twisting the Scriptures to their own destruction (2Pe_3:16). Let it be clearly understood that this verse has absolutely nothing to do with things that are sinful in themselves and condemned in the Bible. This proverbial saying must be understood in the light of the context. Paul has not been speaking about matters of clear-cut morality, of things that are inherently right or wrong. Rather, he has been discussing matters of moral indifference, things that were ceremonially defiling for a Jew living under the law but that are perfectly legitimate for a Christian living under grace. The obvious example is the eating of pork. It was forbidden to God’s people in the OT, but the Lord Jesus changed all that when He said that nothing entering into a man can defile him (Mar_7:15).

In saying this He pronounced all foods clean (Mar_7:19). Paul echoed this truth when he said: But food does not commend us to God; for neither if we eat are we the better, nor if we do not eat are we the worse (1Co_8:8). When he says: To the pure all things are pure, he means that to the born again believer all foods are clean, but to those who are defiled and unbelieving nothing is pure. It is not what a person eats that defiles him but what comes out of his heart (Mar_7:20-23). If a man’s inner life is impure, if he does not have faith in the Lord Jesus, then nothing is pure to him. The observance of dietary rules won’t do a thing for him.

More than anything else he needs to be converted, to receive salvation as a free gift rather than trying to earn it through rituals and legalism. The very minds and consciences of defiled people are corrupted. Their mental processes and their moral powers are defiled. It is not a question of external ceremonial defilement, but of inward corruption and depravity. 1:16 Obviously speaking of the false teachers, that is, the Judaizers, Paul says that they profess to know God, but by their works they deny Him. They pose as Christian believers, but their practice does not match their profession. To amplify his stinging castigation, the apostle denounces them as being abominable, disobedient, and disqualified. Their personal behavior was abhorrent. In God’s eyes, theirs was a record of crass disobedience. As for good works toward God or man, they were worthless.

Was it within the bounds of Christian love for Paul to speak about others in such strong language? The answer is an emphatic yes! Love never glosses over sin. These men were perverting the gospel, dishonoring the Person and work of the Lord Jesus, and deluding the souls of men. To be indulgent with such deceivers is sin.