Instructions for Living in State and Society: After a brief exhortation to Titus (2:15) to “teach these things” (at least 2:1–14), Paul returns in this section to the major concern of the letter—“good works” (i.e., genuinely Christian behavior) for the sake of the outsider (3:1–8) and in contrast to the false teachers (3:9–11).
This section, however, makes a decided turn in the argument. In 2:1–14 the concern for “good works” had to do largely with relationships between believers, which when seen by outsiders would keep them from “maligning the gospel” (2:5) and perhaps would even attract them to it (2:10). Now the interest centers in the effect of Christian behavior upon outsiders (3:1–2, 8). Again, as in 2:11–14, Paul offers a theological basis for such behavior (3:3–7), this time in the form of a semicreedal statement about salvation, with emphasis on God’s mercy and the Spirit’s regenerating work. God’s people were at one time like all others (v. 3), but in mercy God saved them (vv. 4–5a). He has recreated them by the rebirth and renewal effected by the Holy Spirit (vv. 5b–6), so that they are now heirs of eternal life (v. 7). The point, made clear by the direct way it is driven home in verse 8, advises that what God has done in mercy for the Cretan believers he wants to do for others, and their own behavior as Christians will help serve that end.
The argument of the letter will then conclude with some final exhortations that also serve as final warnings against the false teachers (vv. 9–11).
3:1–2 With the imperative, remind the people (lit., “them”), which flows naturally out of 2:15, Paul resumes the argument of 2:1. The verb remind (cf. 2 Tim. 2:14) implies that they should already know these things or should at least recognize them as genuine implications of the gospel. What follows, as often in these letters, is another list, which in this case combines some duties with attitudes and virtues.
Since the concern here is specifically with behavior toward outsiders, it begins at the logical place: behavior toward governing authorities. Titus’ people are to submit themselves (cf. 2:5, 9) to rulers and authorities, and are to be obedient. These imperatives raise all kinds of questions for today’s Christians: What about rulers who would force one to do things against conscience (cf. Acts 4:19)? What about authorities who are suppressing Christianity? What about civil disobedience in a participatory democracy when laws are blatantly unjust? But these instructions in fact are consonant with Romans 13:1–8 and reflect a time (Paul’s day) when the state was still a benefactor of Christians. For this positive attitude toward rulers and authorities, see also 1 Timothy 2:2. When the state turns against the church (as in the Revelation), believers still submit—unto death(!), and they do so precisely because they must not obey when it contravenes conscience (see Rev. 6:9–11; 12:11; 13–14).
Having begun with civil obedience as a Christian obligation, Paul next says that they should be ready to do whatever is good (cf. 1:16; lit., “be prepared for every good work”). Some see this as a further elaboration of civic duty (e.g., Scott: “Christians should be among the foremost in showing public spirit,” p. 172; cf. Kelly, Guthrie, Hendriksen). More likely this is a generalizing imperative that prepares the way for the rest of the list. It could include civic duty, but need not be so limiting.
Actually, this and the remaining items stand in sharp contrast to the false teachers. The latter are “unqualified for any good work” (1:16); believers are to be ready to do “any good work.” The false teachers are involved in “arguments” and “quarrels” (3:9); God’s people are to slander no one (blasphēmein; cf. 1 Tim. 6:5, blasphēmiai, “insults”); nor are they to be quarrelsome (better than NIV’s to be peaceable; see disc. on 1 Tim. 3:3). Moreover, they are to be considerate (the translation “conciliatory” of Moffatt and Kelly is to be preferred).
Finally, still in obvious contrast to the arguments and strife of the false teachers, God’s people, who are to be ready to do whatever is good, must show true humility (cf. 1 Tim. 6:11; 2 Tim. 2:25) toward all people (as in 1 Tim. 2:1, 4, 6; 4:10; Titus 2:11). This showing true humility toward all people is the clear concern of the paragraph. Furthermore, it seems to have evangelistic overtones, not simply an interest in Christian reputation in the world.
3:3 Just as verses 1–2 function as an appeal for good works directed specifically toward outsiders but in form take on the character of another “virtue” list, so also this verse functions as the evangelistic reason for the appeal of verses 1–2, but in form takes on the character of another “vice” list. In this case, however, as one might well expect given the content of verse 2, the sins listed are much less those of the false teachers and much more those of human fallenness in general (cf. Rom. 1:29–31; Gal. 5:19–21; and esp. 1 Cor. 6:9–11; this latter passage has several interesting parallels to vv. 3–7 in both form and content).
The evangelistic intent emerges in the we too were like them. One should note that whenever Paul is moved to speak about the gospel he takes up the personal self-identification of we too (cf. 2:11–14; 2 Tim. 1:9–10; Gal. 1:4; etc.). What we too were—and they by implication still are—includes foolish (perhaps “without understanding,” Williams), disobedient (“to God” is implied; cf. 1:16), deceived (or “misguided” [Kelly]; it is Pauline theology that people living in sin are “duped” by Satan: cf. 1 Tim. 4:1–2; 2 Cor. 4:4). Because they are being led astray they become enslaved by all kinds of passions (cf. Gal. 4:8, 9; Rom. 6:6) and pleasures (interestingly, the only occurrence of this common Greek word in Paul). Furthermore, human fallenness involves us in malevolent behavior of all kinds: Like others, we lived in malice (cf. Rom. 1:29; Col. 3:8) and envy (cf. 1 Tim. 6:4; Rom. 1:29; Gal. 5:21). The self-centeredness of our sinfulness ultimately resulted in our being hated (this could mean “full of hate,” but probably is a passive idea, as in NIV) and in turn hating one another. It is not a pretty picture, but as always, such lists unerringly diagnose the human condition.
3:4 In verses 4–7, a single sentence in the Greek text, Paul offers the divine response to the human condition. As with 2:11–14, this theological statement about salvation has a twofold function in the argument: to set before the Cretan believers the gospel in capsule form, both as a reminder of the content of “sound teaching” and as a reinforcement of the evangelistic reasons for the appeals in verses 1–2 and 8—God is in the business of saving such people as described in verse 3—and at the same time to emphasize that salvation is not based on the “good works” to which he keeps appealing but depends totally upon God’s mercy.
Because the sentence is so loaded with theological content, it is often described as hymnic (e.g., Guthrie) or liturgical (e.g., Hanson; cf. Kelly, p. 254). However, despite the exalted nature of its prose, it altogether lacks the poetic elements of a hymn. More likely this is an early creedal formulation that presents Pauline soteriology (the doctrine of salvation) in a highly condensed form. Its language, as elsewhere in these letters, is a combination of Pauline elements and Hellenism (via Hellenistic Judaism), and as before, Paul is bringing such language into the service of the gospel in new forms.
The sentence begins (v. 4) with a when-clause. But even though “we too were” like others (v. 3), there came a time when God mercifully intervened in our behalf. Although the kindness and love of God our Savior appeared historically in the person and work of Christ (cf. 2:11), the emphasis here, as verses 5–7 make clear, is on the believers’ own experience of that kindness and love at the time of their rebirth and renewal. This clause in particular picks up Hellenistic themes. On appeared see discussion on 1 Timothy 6:14 (cf. Titus 2:11); on God our Savior see discussion on 1 Timothy 1:1. Although kindness (better, “goodness”) occurs in Paul (Rom. 2:4; 11:22; Eph. 2:7), the combination kindness and love (for mankind; philanthrōpia) occurs frequently in Hellenism and Hellenistic Judaism as the highest virtues of both deities and human rulers. Paul simply presses their language into the service of the gospel.
3:5 What God did, “when” his “kindness and love” for mankind appeared, was to save us. This is the main subject and verb of the whole sentence. The rest of the sentence gives the basis (his mercy), the what (rebirth, renewal, justified), the means (by the Holy Spirit, “by his [Christ’s] grace”), and the goal (the hope of eternal life) of salvation.
The basis of salvation is expressed in thoroughly Pauline terms. It was not because of any righteous things we had done (cf. Eph. 2:8–9; Phil. 3:9; 2 Tim. 1:9), emphasized in this way here (and not in terms of “works of Law”—found only in Romans and Galatians) because of his frequent appeal for good deeds in this letter (1:16; 2:7, 14; 3:1, 8, 14). On the contrary, “ ‘tis mercy all, immense and free.” As throughout the OT, salvation is God’s prior action, based entirely on his mercy (cf. 1 Tim. 1:12–16). Paul more often uses “grace” for this idea (but see Rom. 11:30–32); here, God in mercy … saved us (v. 5) “by [Christ’s] grace” (v. 7).
The what of salvation is expressed in three metaphors: rebirth and renewal in this verse and justification in verse 7. Between them they condense the twofold aspect of Christian conversion: (1) a new (renewed, restored) relationship with God—the positional aspect—expressed by “justification” and (2) a radical change in one’s inner being—the regenerational aspect—expressed in new birth (palingenesia, “regeneration”) and renewal (anakainōsis). In this sentence the aspect of re-creation is mentioned first, with emphasis on the work of the Holy Spirit, who accomplished it through washing us. This latter expression is seen by the NIV (and more clearly in GNB), probably correctly so, as a metaphor for spiritual “cleansing,” although perhaps also alluding to baptism.
The NIV, however, as with many translations, is quite ambiguous as to the intent of a very difficult phrase, which literally reads: “through the washing of regeneration and renewal of the Holy Spirit.” For this collection of genitives (“of” phrases) there have basically been three positions (with various modifications within each):
(1) That washing refers to conversion (or baptism) and renewal to the coming of the Spirit, with both words dependent on through and referring to two distinct realities. Thus: “through the ‘washing’ found in rebirth and through the renewal that comes with the gift of the Spirit.” These two realities are variously seen as conversion and confirmation (the traditional view) or conversion and baptism in the Spirit (a Holiness-Pentecostal view). But there are some distinct disadvantages to this interpretation, including the fact that the words rebirth and renewal are nearly synonymous metaphors and that such an intent seems to need a repeated through in order to make it clear.
(2) That washing refers solely to baptism and as such controls both genitives, “regeneration and renewal,” which are effected at baptism by the Holy Spirit. Thus: “through the regenerating and renewing work of baptism effected by the Holy Spirit.” This is the more common interpretation, which in turn elicits considerable discussion over the meaning of baptism in Paul and in this passage. The two words “regeneration and renewal” can be seen either as synonyms (“the washing of regeneration and renewal, effected by the Holy Spirit”) or as one phrase explaining the other (“the washing of regeneration, that is, the renewal of the Holy Spirit”). Although this view is certainly to be preferred in terms of its understanding of the middle terms, “regeneration and renewal,” it tends to put more emphasis on baptism than the full context warrants.
(3) That washing probably alludes to baptism but is in fact a metaphor for spiritual cleansing and not a synonym for baptism itself, the emphasis in the entire phrase being on the cleansing, regenerative work of the Holy Spirit. Thus: “through the ‘washing’ by the Holy Spirit that brings rebirth and renewal.” This is probably the view of the NIV (since it does not repeat “the” before renewal); in any case, it seems most likely to be Paul’s own intent. It is fully in keeping with Pauline theology that the Holy Spirit is the absolute prerequisite of Christian existence (e.g., 1 Cor. 2:6–16; Rom. 6–8), and it seems confirmed by the emphases in the sentence itself (see disc. on v. 6).
Of the middle terms, rebirth is found frequently in Hellenism and Hellenistic Judaism for a whole variety of “rebirths”—of deities in the mystery cults (e.g., Plutarch, Isis and Osiris 35), of the Jewish homeland (Jos., Antiquities 11.66), of the reincarnation of souls (e.g., Plutarch, On the Eating of Flesh 1, 2), and of initiates into the mystery cults (see note). One might compare the eschatological “regeneration of all things” mentioned by Jesus in Matthew 19:28. The idea here, of course, reflects Paul’s “death, burial, new life” metaphor found in Romans 6:4–14. The term renewal occurs only in Paul (cf. Rom. 12:2), and later Christian literature dependent on Paul, in all of Greek literature. The idea is reflected elsewhere in Paul in 2 Corinthians 5:14–17. Thus the two words are twin metaphors for the same spiritual reality—the re-creating work of the Holy Spirit in the believer’s life.
3:6 This verse, a relative clause in Greek, seems to confirm the interpretation of verse 5 just given. The key to Christian conversion, and subsequent life, is the Holy Spirit, whom he poured out … generously (lit., “richly”; cf. 1 Tim. 6:17—no scrimping with God) on us. Thus, for Paul, Christian life is life in the Spirit (Romans 8; Galatians 5), and its basic imperative is, “Walk in the Spirit” (Gal. 5:16). The language of God’s pouring out the Spirit comes from Joel 2:28–30 (LXX, 3:1–2; cf. Acts 2:17–18). That God poured out his Spirit … through Jesus Christ our Savior is not expressly said elsewhere in Paul, but it is in keeping with the expressions in 1 Corinthians 6:11 and with the rest of the NT (cf. Acts 2:33, John 14:26; 16:7). One should also note the inherent Trinitarianism of this clause (cf. 1 Cor. 12:4–6; Eph. 1:3–14), which sees the Father, Son, and Spirit working conjointly for our salvation.
3:7 Having mentioned “Jesus Christ our Savior” (cf. 1:4), Paul reflects again on the what and the means of salvation, with his more well known metaphor of “justification by grace,” before bringing the sentence to an end by noting the eschatological goal of salvation.
By an act of sheer grace, Christ justified us. This, as always in Paul, is also a metaphor, expressing the forensic (legal), positional aspect of salvation. Some have argued that the usage here, because it lacks “by faith,” is not quite Pauline. But such a view both misses Paul’s emphasis elsewhere (he uses “by faith” to contrast “by works of Law,” but he always means “by grace through faith” as in Eph. 2:8–9) and overlooks 1 Corinthians 6:11 (with its order, “washed, sanctified, justified,” and its coordinate “in [by] the name of our Lord Jesus Christ and in [by] the Spirit of our God,” without any mention of “faith”).
Finally, as always in Paul (cf. 2:11–14; 1 Tim. 1:16; 4:8–10; 6:12–14), salvation is to be fully realized eschatologically. Through Christ Jesus believers will ultimately become heirs of God’s full glory (cf. Gal. 4:7; Rom. 8:17), having the hope (cf. Titus 1:2; 1 Tim. 4:10) of eternal life (see disc. on 1 Tim. 1:16; 6:12; Titus 1:2).
3:8 As it turns out, the preceding piece of exalted prose is another of the trustworthy sayings of the PE (cf. 1 Tim. 1:15; 3:1; 4:9; 2 Tim. 2:11). This is the second instance (cf. 1 Tim. 4:9) where the formula follows the saying (although Scott curiously suggests that it is to be found in v. 8).
Because the other “faithful sayings” are more pithy and formulaic, there has been considerable debate over the extent of the actual saying (vv. 3–7, D-C; 5b–6, Kelly; 5–7; Spicq, Guthrie; 4–7, the majority). Surely here the majority view is correct, since verses 4–7 are the complete sentence. Some are simply overconvinced that the author has used a prior source and that logos must mean a prior, established saying (see disc. on 1 Tim. 3:1). Both the position of the “formula” words and their meaning become clear when one takes them as the beginning of a new compound sentence, joined by an “and”: “This is a trustworthy saying, and I want you to give special emphasis to these matters” (i.e., the content of vv. 1–7, but esp. of 4–7), which will bring the whole argument back to the concern that they do good works for the sake of outsiders.
Thus Paul wants (not as strong a verb as “urge”; used also at 1 Tim. 2:8 and 5:14) Titus to stress (a verb used of the confident assertions of the false teachers in 1 Tim. 1:7) these things. The word tauta (these things) refers at least to verses 4–7, but perhaps Paul intends to include all of verses 1–7. As in 2:11–14, and elsewhere in Paul (cf., e.g., Rom. 12:1–2; Gal. 5–6), the appeal for truly Christian behavior is predicated on a proper hearing of the gospel.
The reason that Titus should stress the things of verses 1–7 is so that those who have trusted in God may be careful to devote themselves to (on this verb, see disc. on 1 Tim. 3:4) doing what is good (cf. the purpose of redemption as expressed in 2:14). By those who have trusted in God, Paul obviously means Christian believers, those who have trusted God’s mercy for salvation as expressed in verses 4–7 (here is the “by faith” some see as missing in that passage; see note on v. 5). By what is good, as elsewhere, Paul intends all kinds of Christian behavior, including attitudes.
The expressed goal of such Christian behavior is that it be excellent and profitable for everyone. In the Greek text this forms a new sentence, which literally says: “These things [tauta] are good and useful for people.” Kelly thinks “these things” refers to the previous tauta (these things) in the verse and therefore translates: “These are admirable truths and useful for people.” However, since the corresponding “unprofitable” in verse 9 refers to the “evil works” of the false teachers, it is much more likely that these things here refers to the believers’ “good deeds.” The goal, therefore, is at least partly “evangelistic.” Doing what is good “benefits” (is profitable for) people, not only by affecting them positively, but also by attracting them to the truth of the gospel.
With these words Paul concludes the more “positive” dimension of the letter—except for the final parting word in v. 14. The concern is with Christian behavior, especially as it should positively affect the non-believer. But that is not the only concern of the letter, so Paul turns once more (vv. 9–11) to warn Titus of the corrupting influence of the false teachers, who promote the opposite of this—unprofitable and useless deeds.
Additional Notes
3:1 There has been considerable debate over the terms used here for rulers [“powers”] and authorities (archai, exousiai). The latter is used alone of governing authorities in Rom. 13:1–7. When used together elsewhere in Paul (e.g., Col. 1:16; 2:15; Eph. 6:12), they refer to spiritual powers. Luke, however, uses them together to refer to earthly authorities (12:11). The debate has focused on whether spiritual powers are seen to be controlling the government authorities (as in O. Cullmann, The State in the New Testament [London: SCM, 1957], et al.) and whether the “powers” are demonic or angelic. For the latest full discussion, with bibliography, see W. Carr, Angels and Principalities SNTSMS 42 (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1981), although he seems quite wrong on the Colossians and Ephesians passages.
3:4 On the question as to whether or not vv. 4–7 comprise a hymnic or liturgical fragment, it should be noted that NT scholarship is all too prone to use such language even when the barest poetic requirements (structure and meter) are missing. No poetic elements appear in this sentence (despite the way it is set out in the Nestle-Aland Greek NT); it forms a compressed theological compendium, which looks as if it could be creedal, although it lacks any “we believe” formulation. On this matter see A. Lesky, A History of Greek Literature (New York: Crowell, 1963), pp 759–63; and W. Goodwin, A Greek Grammar (Boston: Ginn, 1892), pp. 348–49.
For the Hellenistic background to the terms kindness and love, see D-C, pp. 143–46. S. C. Mott (see “Greek Ethics and Christian Conversion”) sees these terms as personifications; however, both the language and Philonic parallels are pressed a bit too hard in order to draw such a conclusion.
3:5 It is of more than passing interest to watch NT scholarship, already convinced of the non-Pauline authorship of these letters, argue that many features in this sentence (vv. 5–7), including the not … but clause in this verse, are not fully Pauline. In this case the failure to say “works of Law” or “by faith” is seen to be the giveaway (cf. Barrett, p. 141). But if one were to presuppose that Paul did not write 1 Corinthians, the same arguments could be used to demonstrate the non-Pauline character of 6:11 or 8:5–6! This passage, as Barrett et al. acknowledge, “conveys accurately enough Pauline doctrine.” The matter of language in such a passage reflects the difference in historical setting, not authorship.
For a thorough discussion of the first two alternatives for understanding the middle terms of this verse, see G. R. Beasley-Murray, Baptism in the New Testament, pp. 209–16. For a presentation similar to the one adopted here (alternative 3), see J. D. G. Dunn, Baptism in the Holy Spirit, pp. 165–70.
For a discussion of rebirth in Hellenism, see D-C, pp. 148–50, although their fascination with parallels in the mysteries seems to preclude their hearing the passage in terms of Pauline theology.
3:7 Beasley-Murray (Baptism in the NT) argues that the verb “to justify” has more a dynamic than a forensic sense in this passage, as in 1 Cor. 6:11. He may be correct, but it may also be that he has not taken seriously enough the metaphorical sense of this word group in Paul.
3:8 For a discussion of the extent and meaning of this trustworthy saying, see G. W. Knight, The Faithful Sayings in the Pastoral Letters, pp. 80–111.
The expression devoting themselves to doing what is good is translated by Moffatt “make a point of practicing honorable occupations” (cf. RSV), thus tying it back to a narrower view of “every good work” in v. 1. However, both the immediate context of vv. 9–11 and the full context of the letter make it clear that the concern is not with “occupations” but with Christian behavior of all kinds.
Final Exhortations and Warnings Against Errors
With these final exhortations Paul brings the “argument” of the letter, which began in 1:5, to its fitting conclusion. Actually these verses do not so much form a new paragraph as bring the paragraph begun in 3:1 to a conclusion, by way of some contrasts with verse 8 (through the motif of profitable and unprofitable deeds). At the same time, however, the contrasts in verse 9 also reach back to 1:10–16, thus bringing the whole letter to conclusion.
The net result is that the argument from 1:10 (which hinges on 1:9) to 3:11 forms a kind of chiasmus:
a 1:10–16—warnings against the false teachers, with their “false works”
b 2:1–14—specific “good works” for specific believers, with the outsider in view, plus their theological basis
b′ 3:1–8—once again, “good works” for outsiders, this time directed toward them, and again with their theological basis
a′ 3:9–11—final warning against the false teachers and their “false works”
3:9 With the adversative conjunction but, Titus is now told to avoid some “evil works” that stand in obvious contrast to the “good deeds” of verse 8, as they were delineated in verses 1–2. Although the imperative is to Titus personally, the context makes it clear that the imperative is intended for the whole church as well. It is also evident, both from the language itself and from verses 10–11 that follow, that the false teachers are once more in purview.
Four of their unprofitable and useless deeds are mentioned. Titus—and the Cretans—are to avoid: foolish (cf. 2 Tim. 2:23) controversies (cf. 1 Tim. 6:4; 2 Tim. 2:23), and genealogies (see disc. on 1 Tim. 1:4) and arguments (or “strife”; see disc. on 1 Tim. 6:4, a word that frequently makes Paul’s “vice” lists: e.g., Rom. 1:29; 13:13; 1 Cor. 3:3; 2 Cor. 12:20; Gal. 5:20), and quarrels (cf. 2 Tim. 2:23 and the compound “word battles” in 1 Tim. 6:4; 2 Tim. 2:14, plus the negated form, “not quarrelsome.” in v. 2 and 1 Tim. 3:3) about the law. The addition of this final adjective (translated about the law) helps to put some other items in these letters into focus (see esp. disc. on 1:14–16; cf. 1 Tim. 1:6–7; 4:1–5). Here is certain evidence, along with 1:10, that the errors in these churches stem basically from Hellenistic Judaism. More than reflecting a later phenomenon, this language indicates a much earlier period, when the distinctions between church and synagogue were not so fully defined. Apparently some Hellenistic Jews on Crete, who had “accepted Christ,” were also promoting continuing connections with Judaism, especially in the form of speculative teaching and rigorous devotion to rules and regulations. Thus it is not only the theological aberrations (1:10–16) of the false teachers, but their unprofitable (the opposite of “profitable” in v. 8) and useless behavior as well, that distresses Paul.
3:10 Having mentioned these evil deeds (obviously of the false teachers) that Titus and the people are to avoid, Paul turns his attention once more to the teachers themselves. Here they are described as divisive person[s]. Because the adjective hairetikon (divisive) in later times came to be used of those who held to false doctrines (as these teachers obviously do), the KJV (cf. NEB, NAB, et al.) translated it heretic. But that is to read later ideas back into the text. The context (v. 9) makes it clear that the problem is with these people’s behavior, not their theology per se. Hence it is their divisiveness (cf. RSV, “factious”) that is in view (cf. the use of the noun in 1 Cor. 11:19; Gal. 5:20). Unfortunately, all too often in the church the “orthodox,” in ferreting out “heretics” (i.e., people who hold different views from mine), have become the divisive ones!
Titus is to warn (or “admonish”) such a person once, and then warn him a second time. Thus he still holds out the hope of redeeming such people, as elsewhere in the PE (2 Tim. 2:25–26; see also disc. on 1 Tim. 1:20) and in Paul (2 Thess. 3:14–15; 2 Cor. 2:5–11).
But when the divisive person pays no heed to the “admonitions,” he is to be rejected: Have nothing to do with him (the same verb as in 1 Tim. 5:11). Does this mean then that Paul has now become untrue to himself and to what he has just said about divisive people? Hardly, as verse 11 will make clear.
3:11 The reason the “divisive person” is to be rejected is precisely that, in his divisiveness, such a man demonstrates that he is warped and sinful; he is self-condemned. In persisting in divisive behavior, the false teacher “has become perverted” or “turned aside” (Gk. perfect tense) “and is continuing in his sinning” (Gk. present tense), thus being self-condemned. That is, by his very persistence in his sinful behavior he has condemned himself, thus putting himself on the outside, hence to be rejected by Titus and the church.
It is of more than passing interest that a warning against those who cause divisions, similar to these verses, appears at the same place at the end of Romans (16:17–20).
