Chapter 3
1 Remind them to be submissive to rulers and authorities, to be obedient, to be ready for every good work, [Tit 3:1 ESV]
2023 - Remember that these rulers and authorities were in Crete, where Paul had left Titus. I am not sure they were under local rule, a governor appointed by Rome, or perhaps even a Centurion backed by a garrison of soldiers. Whomever it was, the Christians there were to submit to their government.
We are to speak evil of no one. No one at all. There don't seem to be exceptions.
2021 - In fact there is another whole list here of how those who are submissive to God are to behave in the world. Here are both those verses:
1 Remind them to be submissive to rulers and authorities, to be obedient, to be ready for every good work, 2 to speak evil of no one, to avoid quarreling, to be gentle, and to show perfect courtesy toward all people. [Tit 3:1-2 ESV]
There is a TCV topic, Evil Speaking, 3304, that I think I would like to follow from start to finish in the Bible. I have never really used my TCV as the tool it is intended to be in Bible study. This would be a good place to start. What is meant by evil speaking? Is sarcasm included? Can I say "That guy drives like a moron", or worse, "That guy's a moron", because it says "of NO ONE", not just of those we truly have information about. These are only two short verses, but my my my how much ground is covered! Maybe even a FB post for next Thursday.
And right after we are given this "difficult" set of commands, our reaction is anticipated - our pride and arrogance in our saved condition, and Paul says this:
3 For we ourselves were once foolish, disobedient, led astray, slaves to various passions and pleasures, passing our days in malice and envy, hated by others and hating one another. [Tit 3:3 ESV]
There are those four fingers pointing backwards again. Paul says "we". He's included in the group that used to be like this. If he is, then we are. What a world to live in - hated, and hating. That's where the lost live. That is their day, every day, no matter how disguised inside popularity, riches, fame, and so on. Inside, it is all hating and being hated. Kind of gives all those "haters gonna hate" memes a different slant doesn't it? Another possible FB post.
2022 - This might be a good verse to express what I've been reading in the book Dwight gave me...It's opened up a door to some things I have been doing so so very wrong, and accusing others of it as if I'm not guilty. Why are Christians supposed to forgive, to overlook, to reply graciously to insults? What I am guilty of doing is, plain and simple, judging other people. When I hear someone that I know isn't perfect themselves gossip about someone else or hear someone rationalize doing the wrong thing because it is what they WANT to do, I set myself up as judge and jury and decide "Well. Gossip is a sin and in this case so very hypocritical, and that person really needs to do some repenting - I mean, they don't even recognize what a hypocrite they're being! Or I say, well, I'm never going to trust that person again because they are going to put themselves first, even if they have to completely disregard logic and published facts to do it. And then there is vs 3, just above. "...we ourselves were once...". And we still are, truth be told, and least I am.
Why should we give to those beggars at the street corners when there are help wanted signs everywhere, all they have to do is apply? I bet if I offered that guy 4 hour's work he'd turn me down. And he might. How many times did we turn down the offer of salvation to our absolutely corrupt and undeserving selves before we accepted? Is it so different? God offers salvation to the good and the bad. Good doesn't earn it, bad doesn't disqualify it. In point of fact, those farthest from the light are more likely to seek it than those who can see it peeping above their horizon. If all is well, we are unlikely to look for help. Jesus died for friend and enemy alike. He gave to the disciples and the tax collectors in equal measure. He offered salvation to lepers and Pharisees. And see also vs 5 below. Not because of works, but according to HIS mercy.
I have a lot to work on.
These important verses about what salvation does:
4 But when the goodness and loving kindness of God our Savior appeared, 5 he saved us, not because of works done by us in righteousness, but according to his own mercy, by the washing of regeneration and renewal of the Holy Spirit, 6 whom he poured out on us richly through Jesus Christ our Savior, [Tit 3:4-6 ESV]
We had nothing to do with it. It was up to him. As translated, it is THE washing. No article is used for renewal. Were both done by the Holy Spirit, or just the renewal? As I read the interlinear, neither actually has the article as a separate word. This too would be a good study...
MSB is pretty direct that the washing is in fact regeneration - not water - and that the Spirit is the agent of the washing - not water. Surely this is based on water not having any power at all to turn a heart of stone to a heart of flesh. That is "My Spirit" that does that. So if we take that OT reference to this "change" in believers, it cannot be about baptism. An interesting xref to this usage is Eph. 5: 26:
26 that he might sanctify her, having cleansed her by the washing of water with the word, [Eph 5:26 ESV] Can we use the same "rule of interpretation" in 5:26 that we are requiring of Titus 3:5 and still make sense both places? Ephesians actually uses the word water, but is about the word.
2021 - The proof that this is not about water baptism is in just reading what the point is, as shown in vs 5. He saved us, not by ANYTHING we did to earn it, not by any work at all, not even by submission to water baptism, but according to His mercy. I do not know why these words are not capitalized in the ESV. Here is how it should be...per GTP:
5 not by works of righteousness which we have done, but according to His mercy He saved us, through the washing of regeneration and renewing of the Holy Spirit, [Tit 3:5 NKJV] NKJV seems to stand alone in the use of capitalization here. Perhaps because the words being translated are "autos" and "sozos" and not "theos" in either situation. And I'm not sure arguing that they shouldn't be capitalized makes points for arguing that it is not God in view here.
8 "The saying is trustworthy..." This is like the third time in this book that Paul has used this phrase of some statement he made.
Look at the rest of this passage though...
8 The saying is trustworthy, and I want you to insist on these things, so that those who have believed in God may be careful to devote themselves to good works. These things are excellent and profitable for people. [Tit 3:8 ESV]. Being GOOD to others, without regard to merit, is excellent and profitable! This saying is trustworthy, which means "Carve this one in granite".
2021 - This verse:
9 But avoid foolish controversies, genealogies, dissensions, and quarrels about the law, for they are unprofitable and worthless. 10 As for a person who stirs up division, after warning him once and then twice, have nothing more to do with him, 11 knowing that such a person is warped and sinful; he is self-condemned. [Tit 3:9-11 ESV]
This likely points back at the verses in 1:15. Perhaps some additional detail on how often they are to be confronted. Confrontation is not ongoing. Twice, then done.
2021-2, Quarrels "about the law" are unprofitable and worthless. All in the list are, but it is interesting that he did not say quarrels about the Psalms, or quarrels about the Major Prophets. Only the law is mentioned. I don't think though, that it would be fair to say only the things in this list are to be avoided. There was also a list for Timothy.
2021-2, I looked for a list, but didn't really find one as we have here. I found these, though, just not in list form:
7 Have nothing to do with irreverent, silly myths. Rather train yourself for godliness; [1Ti 4:7 ESV]
23 Have nothing to do with foolish, ignorant controversies; you know that they breed quarrels. [2Ti 2:23 ESV]
These are the only two along these lines that I found, the rest of the admonitions to Timothy being more about a preacher's duties than general commands. So Titus receives the longer list. It is interesting that Titus is also overseeing a church, and charged with keeping them doctrinally sound - just as Timothy was - though perhaps Titus is older and not the favorite that Timothy is. So it could be that Paul had received specific information that the list in vs 9 was causing problems in Crete. Even so, it is a good list for us about what is to be avoided.
2021-2, this verse:
10 As for a person who stirs up division, after warning him once and then twice, have nothing more to do with him, [Tit 3:10 ESV]
I have never heard of a church doing this. How many such commands are there in the NT, directed specifically at the "shepherd" let's say, and they are never used today. This seems to give the preacher - not a committee of elders or deacons - both the responsibility and the authority to warn divisive members and if ignored, to sort of "Wash their hands of them". It doesn't say excommunicate them, it doesn't say this is church action, but "preacher" action. How in the world would this play out.
Pulling out all the disciplinary instructions given to the church in the NT would make a very interesting study.
I don't think we are to be tattle tales on each other. Neither do I think we are to ignore sin in our fellow church members and leave it to the deacons or elders to both notice and correct. I think the NT teaches that church discipline starts with individual members confronting sin when they see it. But my oh my how difficult it is when we ourselves have to go up to someone and say "Ma'am, your shorts are too short for church." Would any of us do that? Or how about "Sir, I saw you touching the young girls in your class, and that has to stop." Would we do that? Just where is our "line", beyond which we will not let others go without confronting them? I am firm that if it is not a big enough deal to you to overcome your fear of confrontation or repercussions, then you have no business mentioning it to anyone else. Unless...what if it is to check yourself. Is it possible for two women to discuss the attire of a third, with the idea that if they agree, then they will together go and confront that third woman. Hmm...This would make it a lot easier, I think, to confront such a thing. And also for the guy touching the girls inappropriately. If two observe it, and two agree that it was too much, how much easier for two people to confront than one. As I read the instructions, the one is to go first, and if rebuffed, then and only then do two or three go. I need to move on though, got pretty side-tracked here. Church discipline is sort of a favorite subject of mine.
Titus is given just about the same instructions about things to avoid as Paul gave Tim in 1Tim. Avoid foolish controversies. Don't argue about things that don't matter anyway. Quarrels about the law are mentioned specifically. Why argue about the law since the law is no more anyway? Those who are divisive were to get 2 warnings, and then be ignored completely. That would be confrontational...
12 When I send Artemas or Tychicus to you, do your best to come to me at Nicopolis, for I have decided to spend the winter there. [Tit 3:12 ESV] Paul is obviously not writing this letter from prison. So it must have been written either before prison in Rome, or during the implied release between his first and last imprisonment there. It is this second that the Chronological assumes - because of where it is placed in the chronology. If we go this way with our thinking, then we must assume that 2 Tim was written during Paul's second and final imprisonment. I further note that Nicopolis is not on any of the missionary routes Paul took. It is not even on the maps. BUT, if you look it up in Strong's, there were many cities with this name, since it means "City of Victory". Every conqueror there was seems to have renamed the conquered city Nicopolis. So for the argument above to carry real weight, you need to locate them all, and see if ANY of them could have been visited on a missionary journey.