Instructions for Groups of Believers
Although this section has affinities to several passages in both the PE and the rest of the NT, the material nonetheless appears here in a unique way. It picks up the framework of 1 Timothy 5:1–2, where people are grouped by age and sex, and in verses 2–8 fleshes out some details, not in terms of Titus’ relationship to them but of their own attitudes and conduct. The language of the details echoes that used for the overseers, deacons, and women in 1 Timothy 3:1–13 and 2:9–15. The passage then concludes in verses 9–10 with a word to slaves, reminiscent of 1 Timothy 6:1–2. Imbedded in the instructions for the younger men is a word to Titus himself (vv. 7–8), reminiscent of 1 Timothy 4:12–13.
Some have seen a similarity between this material and the so-called house codes in Colossians 3:18–4:1, Ephesians 5:21–6:9, and 1 Peter 2:18–3:7. However, the similarities are merely surface at best, since in those passages the entire concern was about relationships within the household. Here the concern is chiefly about character and conduct in general; only the instructions for the younger women and slaves is relational, and in both of these, submission is advised for the sake of the gospel’s reputation with outsiders.
Thus the concern throughout the passage is on observable behavior, obviously in contrast to that of the “opponents” described in 1:10–16, who are finally judged as unqualified for any good work. The language used is quite general and very much that which was current in pagan philosophical and religious circles, here adapted to Christian life. One gets the feeling, therefore, that the passage does not so much address ad hoc problems in Crete as it does in a more general way call for good works and a lifestyle on the part of Christians that will make the teaching about God our Savior attractive (v. 10).
All of this adds to the overall sense of the letter as being less urgent than 1 Timothy and somewhat prophylactic. Christians of both sexes and all ages are urged to consider their conduct, not so much toward one another, but before the world.
2:1 Beginning with the emphatic personal pronoun and the Greek adversative de (“But you”), this section stands in clear contrast to 1:10–16. The same formula occurred in 1 Timothy 6:11, immediately following the final indictment of the false teachers (cf. 2 Tim. 3:10, 14). However, in contrast to its occurrences in 1 and 2 Timothy, where Timothy himself was urged to stand in opposition to the false teachers, here Titus is urged to teach what is in accord with sound doctrine, so that the people themselves will live differently from the false teachers. The verb to teach literally means “to speak,” a milder term than the imperatives of 1 Timothy (“exhort,” “charge,” “teach”). Titus is to “rebuke sharply” the opponents (1:13); he is to “speak” to the people. On sound doctrine, see discussion on 1 Timothy 1:10 (cf. Titus 1:9, 13). Here it stands in contrast to the “human commandments” of 1:14–16. Again, it will be observed that what is in accord with sound doctrine has not so much to do with the cognitive side of the gospel as the behavioral.
2:2 Paul begins with instructions for the older men (cf. 1 Tim. 5:1; on this word, Philo, On the Creation 105, cites Hippocrates as referring to the sixth of seven periods of a man’s life, ages fifty to fifty-six; Philo himself uses it to refer to a man over sixty in On the Special Laws 2.33). It is chiefly from among these men that the elders/overseers of 1:5–9 will be selected. Hence it is not surprising that the qualities urged on them correspond to what is said of the overseers and deacons in 1 Timothy 3:2, 8. They are to be temperate (cf. 1 Tim. 3:2), worthy of respect (cf. 1 Tim. 3:8, “have a good character”), and self-controlled (cf. 1:8; 1 Tim. 3:2). This last word, sōphronas, which is a favorite in the PE, is repeated below of the younger women (v. 5) and younger men (v. 6). It has especially to do with being “sensible” or “sound-minded” (see disc. on 2 Tim. 1:7).
They are also to be sound (cf. v. 1 and 1:13) in the three cardinal virtues of faith, love, and endurance (hope?). These three words occur together in the exhortation to Timothy in 1 Timothy 6:11 (cf. 2 Tim. 3:10) and are found together in Paul as early as 1 Thessalonians 1:3 (though not quite in this way). The triad faith, love, and hope appears to be a very early piece of Christian ethical instruction (see note). That “hope” has been replaced by endurance probably reflects an emphasis on perseverance that the word hope itself does not always connote. Thus “what accords with sound doctrine” for the older men is that they should be respectable in every way (esp. in light of 1:12!); above all they should be exemplary of the cardinal Christian virtues: faith toward God, love toward all, endurance to the End. Although nothing like the latter is explicitly said of the following groups, it may be assumed that such is expected of all.
2:3 Likewise (a word that similarly connects 1 Tim. 2:9 to 8, and 3:8 and 11 to 3:2) Titus is to teach the older women (a related but different word from 1 Tim. 5:2; used by Philo, On the Special Laws 2.33, of women past sixty). Interestingly, especially in light of what is said next of the younger women, these instructions do not reflect 1 Timothy 5:9–10, but only 3:11.
First, they are to be reverent in the way they live. The word translated reverent, hieroprepeis, often means simply “holy” (e.g., 4 Macc. 9:25; 11:20), but it could also carry the more specialized sense of “acting like a priestess,” resulting from its use to describe the conduct of a priest. Since it is an unusual word (occurring only here in the Gk. Bible), it may well be that Paul intends this broader connotation. In demeanor they are to be what would be fitting for temple service.
Then he adds two injunctions: They must not be slanderers (as 1 Tim. 3:11) or addicted to much wine (cf. 1 Tim. 3:8, 11). It is a negative reflection on first-century culture itself, which often admired heavy drinkers, that both the older men and older women in the church are urged to set a different kind of example.
Finally, they must teach what is good. This represents a single compound word in Greek, kalodidaskalous, which occurs only here in all Greek literature. The word itself does not necessarily mean formal instruction. Indeed, it probably implies nothing more than informal teaching by word and example, since the content of the instruction in verses 4–5 has to do with being a model, godly wife.
2:4–5 Paul next directs his instruction to the younger women but does so by way of the “older women” in verse 3. The latter are to be teachers of good, so that they may train the younger women. The verb translated train, sōphronizōsin (see disc. on v. 2, sōphronas, “self-controlled”), is highly unusual, literally meaning to “bring someone to his or her senses,” although there is some evidence for it to mean something like “advise,” or “urge.” Since what follows is reminiscent of the instructions to the women in 1 Timothy 2:9–15 and 5:11–14, one wonders whether Paul, in mentioning the younger women, is not still smarting from the problem in Ephesus. If so, then the verb probably means something like “wise them up” as to their responsibilities as wives.
Therefore, the instructions that follow differ from verses 2–3—as well as verse 6—in that (a) they are very specific, all having to do with her being a good wife; and (b) in this case such demeanor is specifically enjoined so that outsiders will not disparage the gospel.
The younger women (“wives” is implied; the whole passage assumes a culture in which most younger women will be married) are advised to demonstrate six qualities—probably to be paired as the NIV suggests of the first four. They are to love their husbands and children (two words in Gk., found frequently in pagan antiquity in praise of “good wives”). One should note that although these two words do not appear in 1 Timothy, they are the implications behind 2:9–12, 15 and 5:9–10, 14.
The next word, self-controlled, is identical to what was said of the older men in verse 2. However, this is one of the most frequent words used by contemporary writers to describe a good wife, and most often it intends to describe her as a virtuous woman (see disc. on 1 Tim. 2:10). Therefore, in this context self-controlled and pure probably mean “virtuous and chaste.” The last two words in the list (to be busy at home, to be kind) probably also form a pair. The first word means “keepers of the home” (cf. 1 Tim. 5:14); the second means “good women.” However, the latter could also have the nuance, as NIV, of “being kind,” and some have suggested it might mean “goodness” or “kindness” to members of the household (including slaves). If so, then the whole list reflects her relationships at home.
Finally, he urges that they also be subject to their husbands cf. 1 Tim. 2:11; Col. 3:18; Eph. 5:21–23; 1 Pet. 3:1). As with the list of virtues, this, too, assumes the cultural norm of what a good wife was expected to be like (see note). Thus, very much in keeping with 1 Timothy 2:9–15 and 5:9–15, Paul sets a standard, conditioned in part by the cultural norm of what was expected of a good wife, that the younger women’s place in Christ was to be found in the home.
The reason for their living out their faith in terms of this domestic code is for the sake of the gospel and how it would be viewed by outsiders: so that no one will malign the word of God. For this clause, see discussion on 1 Timothy 6:1. Here we have the first of several clear articulations of the need for good works for the sake of nonbelievers (see disc. on 1:6; cf. 2:10, 11, 14; 3:2, 8, 14).
2:6 Paul finally turns his attention to the young men (note the repeated hōsautōs, similarly; cf. v. 3, “likewise”). However, in this case instead of giving a list of virtues, he gives a single exhortation: Encourage them to be self-controlled. Paul now uses the verb form sōphroneō (cf. vv. 2, 4, 5) and emphasizes once again the need for clearheaded, sensible Christian living in the face of much that is false (both in terms of the truth itself and resulting behavior).
The prepositional phrase, in everything, (perhaps better, “in all respects”), may indeed go with verse 7 as in the NIV (cf. GNB, RSV); more likely it belongs with the exhortation for the younger men to “keep their heads” (as in NEB, NAB, Kelly, D-C). This usage fits the style of the PE and does not negate the otherwise emphatic use of seauton, “yourself,” in verse 7 (untranslated in NIV: you “yourself” set them an example).
2:7–8 In the context of exhorting the younger men to sensible Christian behavior, Paul emphatically urges Titus to fulfill the apostolic role of “modeling” genuine Christian behavior (lit., “putting yourself forward as an example of good works”). This is a common theme in Paul (see disc. on 1 Tim. 4:12; cf. 1 Thess. 1:7; 2 Thess. 3:9; Phil. 3:17) and stands in contrast to those in 1:16 who are “unqualified for any good work.”
This passage (vv. 7–8) is reminiscent of 1 Timothy 4:12, 13. However, instead of giving a list of what is good (“good works”) for him to set them an example by (as in 1 Tim. 4:12), he turns immediately to Titus’ own larger responsibilities in the community (as in 1 Tim. 4:13). There, the reason was for Timothy to save himself and his hearers (4:16); here, it is so that those who oppose you may be ashamed because they have nothing bad to say about us (v. 8).
Thus he exhorts Titus in his teaching to show integrity (lit., “be without corruption”), seriousness (semnotēta, see disc. on 1 Tim. 3:4; “your manner [be] such as to inspire respect,” Lock). Here teaching, as in 1 Timothy 4:13, 16; 2 Timothy 3:16, has to do with the activity of teaching, not its content, which will be emphasized in verse 8. The concern is first of all that in his teaching Titus set an example of pure motive and respectful demeanor (integrity and seriousness), in obvious contrast to the “rebels” of 1:10–16.
Also in contrast to them, Titus is to use soundness of speech (that word again! see disc. on 1:9, 13; 2:1, 2; cf. 1 Tim. 1:10) that cannot he condemned. This word occurs only here in the NT and means “uncondemned,” thus “beyond reproach.” It is not that Titus will not be condemned, but that in terms of the gospel itself, his teaching/preaching must be above contradiction.
If Titus’ teaching is pure in motive, demeanor, and content, his opponents may be ashamed. Those who oppose you is actually singular, “the one who is in opposition.” The primary reference is almost certainly to the opponents within, although in the full context of verses 1–10 it may also include the pagan critic.
But what does it mean for them to be ashamed? Does Paul intend a kind of judgment; that is, they will be disgraced because they can find nothing in Titus’ conduct to reproach? Or, perhaps more likely (cf. 2 Thess. 3:14), does he intend something of an offer of hope, that is, shamed into repentance, since he has nothing bad to say about us? In either case, the word bad (“evil”) is used invariably of evil deeds. So Paul’s point is not that the opponent should not be able to point out evil in Titus’ doctrine—although that would follow—but in his conduct, which in turn would also implicate Paul (about us).
Thus a passage that began as an exhortation to the younger men turns out instead to be a word to Titus about his life and ministry. It does not thereby exclude the younger men, but includes them only indirectly.
2:9–10 This concluding exhortation to slaves comes as something of a surprise, since everything that has preceded is based on age and sex. It is nonetheless joined grammatically to verses 6–8 as a second indirect command with the verb “urge” in verse 6. The passage is reminiscent of 1 Timothy 6:1–2 and also has some interesting parallels with what is said to the younger women in verses 4–5. They are the two longest sections in the paragraph; in both submission is called for; and both conclude with a purpose clause on the possible effect of their behavior on how the gospel is viewed by outsiders. Although nothing specific is said in these two verses about whether the masters are pagan or Christian—and no decision has to be made—the close ties with verses 4–5 and 1 Timothy 6:1–2 probably presuppose activity within a Christian household.
Slaves are to be subject (better, “subject themselves,” reflecting the Gk. middle voice, and therefore better than the passive of the NIV, et al.) to their masters (despotais, as elsewhere in PE and 1 Peter; in earlier letters Paul uses kyrioi). Probably, as in verses 6–7, the in everything is intended to go with this verb, which in turn would strengthen the suggestions that the masters are believers. The rest of the passage (one sentence in the Gk.) spells out some details of Christian submission.
First, slaves are to please (“give satisfaction to,” Bernard) their masters. No one promised that Christian discipleship would be easy! This is the positive attitude that would cover all others (cf. esp. Col. 3:22–25; Eph. 6:5–8), but it is further elaborated by two injunctions: They are not to talk back to them, and not to steal from them. These must have been the two most common temptations of slaves, especially the latter (a word that implies “pilfering” [RSV] or “misappropriating funds”), since slaves were often entrusted with buying goods and also often had a degree of private ownership.
On the contrary (but, a strong adversative to the two negatives), to show that they can be fully trusted (lit., “demonstrate all good faith,” or “fidelity”). This use of “faith” (pistin) to mean faithfulness is a Pauline usage in the NT (see esp. Gal. 5:22).
These attitudes—and behavior—are again for the sake of the outsider. But what was said in a somewhat negative way in verse 5 (“lest they speak evil of the message”) is now given its flip side: so that in every way (the same as in everything in v. 9) they will make the teaching about God our Savior (see disc. on 1 Tim. 1:1) attractive (kosmōsin, lit., “adorn”).
Consequently, the final point about the conduct of Christian slaves also serves as the final point of the whole section regarding people who are to be “sound in their faith, love, and endurance” (v. 2). Paul wants the Christians in Crete not only to stand in contrast to the Cretan reputation exemplified by the insubordinates (1:10–16) but also to live in such a way that outsiders will not only not “blaspheme” the gospel (v. 5) but actually be attracted to it by the believers’ behavior (v. 10). This is precisely the point of the creedal basis for such concern and behavior that now follows (vv. 11–14).
Additional Notes
It is common among commentators (see, e.g., D-C) to see this section as reflecting the house codes sections in Colossians, Ephesians, and 1 Peter. But the dissimilarities are much greater than any similarities. In fact, if it were not for the section on slaves (vv 9–10), and to a lesser extent the young wives (vv. 4–5), one wonders what would ever have given scholars the suggestion. This is not a domestic code, but a call to exemplary behavior, with the outsider in view.
2:2 For a discussion of the triad faith, hope, and love as a common pre-Pauline formula for ethical instruction, see A. M. Hunter, Paul and His Predecessors, rev. ed. (London: SCM, 1961), pp. 33–35.
2:3 That the older women are expected to be “teachers of good” to the younger is almost totally irrelevant to the hermeneutical concerns that are often raised in conjunction with 1 Tim. 2:11–12. Formal teaching is hardly in view; rather, it is that “everyday” kind of instruction that takes place in the home by word and example.
2:4–5 Most of the virtues mentioned for the young women occur regularly in non-Christian texts as the highest ideals of a good wife. For example, the first two appear together in Plutarch’s Dialogue on Love 23. Sōphronas, as the high ideal of being virtuous, occurs frequently in that essay and others (esp. Advice to Bride and Groom). In this latter essay (conj. praec. 33) Plutarch also notes: “So it is with women also; if they subordinate themselves to their husbands, they are commended, but if they want to have control, they cut a sorrier figure than the subjects of their control” (Loeb). On these matters Plutarch speaks for all antiquity.
2:8 There has been general disagreement about to whom Paul is referring in speaking of “the one who is in opposition” (NIV, those who oppose you). Chrysostom, alone and certainly incorrectly, suggested Satan. Bernard argued for the opponents within the church (1:10–16); Spicq, for the pagan critic (generally, in view in 2:1–3:2). Scott, Kelly, and Hanson take the middle ground of allowing either, although seeing the emphasis to lie differently (within the church [Kelly]; outside [Hanson]).
The Theological Basis for Christian Living
This marvelous passage (vv. 11–14), like its companion in 3:4–7 (cf. 2 Tim. 1:8–10), displays so much theological grist that it is easy to analyze it solely on its own merits and thereby overlook its place in the context of the letter. Furthermore, the language employed, while reflecting Pauline usage, also evidences a rather large number of affinities with Hellenism (probably by way of Hellenistic Judaism), so that for some scholars the investigation of these matters has become the major interest.
The paragraph, in fact, serves a major function in the letter—providing the theological basis (the “indicative”) for the instructions of 1:10–2:10 (the “imperative”). It begins (v. 11) by picking up the concern for the “outsider” from 2:10, reiterating a major concern from 1 Timothy—the universal scope of salvation (see disc. on 1 Tim. 2:3–7; 4:10). Then Paul appeals that the same grace that makes salvation available to all should instruct God’s people in proper behavior (v. 12). Salvation, however, is not merely a present reality; it also includes a sure future for God’s people (v. 13), because the same Lord Jesus Christ who has already come as the manifestation of God’s grace (v. 14) will come again as the manifestation of God’s glory (v. 13). The aim of that grace was to create a people for God who would be characterized by their “zeal for good works” (v. 14b).
Although the whole passage reflects Paul’s theology of salvation as a past-present-future reality, the structure reveals that Paul’s chief concern is to advise God’s people about what salvation means for their present behavior (vv. 12 and 14b). This is apparently motivated by his further concern for the universality of salvation, including the “outsiders” on Crete.
This concern to remind the people that the gospel is the basis for Christian life (repeated in a more thorough way in 3:4–7) again suggests the more prophylactic nature of this letter, whose hearers would be more recent converts than those in Ephesus (1 Timothy).
2:11 An explanatory for opens the paragraph and thus closely ties verses 11–14 to 2–10. It proceeds to explain why God’s people should live as exhorted in 2–10 (so that the message from God will not be maligned [v. 5] but instead will be attractive [v. 10]): because the grace of God that brings salvation to all people has appeared.
In the Greek text all of verses 11–14 form a single sentence, of which the grace of God stands as the grammatical subject. But contrary to the NIV (and KJV), Paul does not say that this grace appeared to all men; rather, as almost all other translations have it, and as both Paul’s word order and the usage in 1 Timothy 2:3–6 demand it, what has appeared (see disc. on 1 Tim. 6:14; epiphaneia) is grace from God that offers salvation to all people.
Paul does not indicate here the reference point for this revelation of God’s grace. Most likely he is thinking of the historical revelation effected in the saving event of Christ (v. 14; cf. 2 Tim. 1:9–10), but it could also refer existentially to the time in Crete when Paul and Titus preached the gospel and the Cretans understood and accepted its message (cf. 1:3 and 3:3–4). That at least is when the educative dimension of grace, emphasized in verse 12, took place.
2:12 If the concern in this paragraph were to present a creedal or liturgical formula, as some believe, then theological logic would demand that the content of verse 14 appear next, since that verse expresses the historical revelation of God’s grace. Instead, however, the issue is first of all Christian behavior. Hence Paul appeals to the Cretans through Titus to recall their own reception of that grace, which occurred at their conversion, when they first heard the gospel.
As he will spell out in more theological detail in verse 14, God’s grace teaches us ethically in two directions. First, negatively, God’s people must say “No” to ungodliness (asebeia, cf. Rom. 1:18, the opposite of eusebeia, for which see disc. on 1 Tim. 2:2) and worldly passions (for this idea Paul usually says “fleshly” passions; cf. Gal. 5:16, 24). They are to give up such living, he says in verse 14, because Christ “gave himself for us to redeem us from all wickedness:”
Second, positively, they must live self-controlled (sōphronōs; see vv. 2, 5, 6 above), upright (dikaiōs; cf. 1 Thess. 2:10; see disc. on 1 Tim. 6:11), and godly (eusebōs; in contrast to asebeia) lives in this present age (in contrast to “the age to come”; see disc. on 1 Tim. 1:16). This likewise corresponds to the second statement about Christ’s work in verse 14 (“to purify for himself a people … eager to do what is good”). Together these two sides to Christian behavioral response reflect the “two ways” tradition, found in Judaism as early as Qumran and elaborated in detail in Christian documents at the beginning of the second century (Barnabas 18–21; Didache 1–6). Paul often presents Christian ethical instruction in this form (cf. “putting to death/bringing to life,” Rom. 6:5–14; “works of the flesh/fruit of the Spirit,” Gal. 5:16–26; “putting off/putting on” like a garment, Col. 3:8–14). Regularly, as here, what one must say “No” to (better, “renounce,” NEB) are worldly passions (Rom. 6:12; Gal. 5:24; Eph. 4:22), that is, desires that reflect the values of the present age with its antigodly mind-set.
The positive side in this passage picks up language regularly used in these letters, which is also that of Hellenistic moralism. Many in fact see the three words self-controlled, upright, and godly as expressing three of the four cardinal virtues of Platonism-Stoicism. One can scarcely doubt the correspondence, but in this passage, conditioned as it is by verses 13–14 and the three cardinal Christian virtues in verse 2, Paul is borrowing and adapting such language for Christian purposes, just as in Philippians 4:8–9.
2:13 As in other places in the PE, Paul sets the Christian imperative in the context of “already/not yet” eschatology (see disc. on 1 Tim. 6:11–16; 2 Tim. 1:8–12). We are “to live godly lives in the present age,” while we also wait for its future consummation, the glorious appearing … of Jesus Christ. However, the way Paul expresses this hope in this passage has been the subject of lengthy discussion. Literally, the text reads: “awaiting the blessed hope and appearing of the glory of the great God and our Savior Jesus Christ.” Some of the ambiguities in the clause can be easily resolved. The blessed hope probably means “the hope that brings blessing, or blessedness.” The first “and” is almost certainly equal to “even” or “namely” (thus, “the hope that brings blessing, namely, the appearing …”).
But after that there is wide disagreement at three points: First, how are we to understand “of the glory”? Is it descriptive (the glorious appearing, as NIV)? Or is it objective, the “what” of the manifestation (as GNB, RSV, et al.). In this case the latter have the better of it. The Second Coming is the final manifestation of God’s full glory, as the first advent was the manifestation of God’s “grace” (v. 11) or, as in 1 Timothy 1:11, was the beginning of the manifestation of God’s glory through the gospel.
Second, did Paul mean to say our great God and Savior (NIV, GNB, = a twofold designation of one divine Person) or “the great God and our Savior” (GNB margin, KJV, referring to the two divine Persons)? Here the NIV (GNB, RSV) has the better of it, since (a) the single definite article before great God is best understood as controlling both nouns together, (b) the term God and Savior is stereotyped terminology both in the LXX and Hellenistic religions, and (c) nowhere else is God the Father understood to be joining the Son in the Second Coming.
Third, to what, then, does Jesus Christ stand in apposition? All who side with the KJV on the second question see it as in apposition to our Savior, as a kind of balance to the adjective great. Thus: “Our great God [the Father] and our Savior Jesus Christ:” Most of those who take the position of the NIV on the second question see it as in apposition to our great God and Savior. It thus becomes one of the few unambiguous statements in the Pauline corpus that Jesus is God (cf. NIV, RSV contra GNB on Rom. 9:5). If so, then Paul may well be using it in opposition to Hellenistic cults, including the imperial cult, as an affirmation that Jesus Christ alone is the great God and Savior (see Harris, Hanson). The third option, which resolves the difficulties and carries none of its own, is to see it in apposition to “the glory of God.” What will finally be manifested is God’s glory, namely, Jesus Christ. (On the use of glory, see disc. on 1 Tim. 1:11; cf. 2 Cor. 4:4, 6; for a similar grammatical construction see Col. 2:2 lit., “the knowledge of the mystery of God, namely, Christ himself.”)
In order to make his present point Paul would not have had to use the name of Christ at all. What he has said about the parousia is sufficient: We wait for the manifestation of the glory of our great God and Savior, which all would automatically understand to refer to the Second Coming of Christ. But he then adds the personal name, Jesus Christ, because he has some more things he wants to say about him (as in Col. 2:2), which leads to verse 14.
2:14 What more he has to say concerns salvation as a past event, effected in the crucifixion of Christ, in which he gave himself for us. This is thoroughly Pauline language (e.g., Gal. 1:4), echoing the words of Jesus in Mark 10:45. In this instance Paul offers two reasons for Christ’s giving himself for us, corresponding to the “two-way” ethical response in verse 12. It reflects the imagery of the Exodus, where God redeemed his people by delivering them from Egypt. First, he died to redeem us (NIV, RSV; “rescue us,” GNB; “free us,” Goodspeed) from all wickedness (a direct verbal parallel to the LXX, Ps. 129:8 [130:8 in English]). This corresponds to the believers’ renouncing “ungodliness and worldly passions” in verse 12. Second, he died to purify for himself a people that are his very own. Much of this language is verbally dependent on the LXX of Ezekiel 37:23. The adjective translated that are his very own, meaning “a people set apart for himself,” is from Exodus 19:5 (cf. Deut. 7:6; 14:2; 26:18). Again, Paul has appropriated the language used of God’s people in the OT for the new people of God (cf. 1:1).
The purpose of this two-sided redemptive act was to create “a people for himself” who are characterized as eager to do what is good (lit., “full of zeal for good works”; cf. Deut. 26:18). This of course corresponds to living “self-controlled, upright, and godly lives in this world” (v. 12). With this, the paragraph has come full circle. The concern throughout has been with these “good works,” but they are to be seen as the proper response to God’s grace revealed and made effective in the saving death of Jesus Christ.
2:15 Having set before them the theological basis for “good works” (God’s saving grace manifested in Christ’s redemptive act), Paul now turns to urge Titus to teach these things. Such tauta (these things) imperatives are frequent in 1 Timothy (see 4:6, 11, 15; 5:7, 21; 6:2, 11); this is the only occurrence in Titus (again, suggesting it is less urgent). These things refers at least to 2:2–14, perhaps to 1:10–16 as well. In any case the charge picks up three verbs that appear earlier. Teach (“speak”) these things (cf. 2:1), he is told, which is a two-sided command. Encourage (“urge”; 2:6) the church; rebuke (1:13) the wayward. And do this with all authority, which, of course, is his by his relationship to Paul.
This little interlude is then concluded with a rare personal word to Titus: Do not let anyone despise you. This is reminiscent of 1 Timothy 4:12, but it lacks any mention of Titus’ youth. This may suggest that Titus is older than Timothy; at least, it reflects a slightly different concern toward what Timothy was encountering in Ephesus from what Titus might be expected to in Crete.
Following this brief aside, reminding the people, as it were, of why Titus is there and of his authority, Paul will return in 3:1–11 to his concern that God’s people exhibit good works, not only as the proper response to his love, but also for the sake of the “lost” who observe their behavior.
Additional Notes
For further reading on the nature of the language of this paragraph, see esp. D-C, pp. 142–46, who see the paragraph as a wholesale adoption of Hellenistic moral-religious language, including terms from the cult of the emperor. S. C. Mott (“Greek Ethics and Christian Conversion: The Philonic Background of Titus 2:10–14 and 3:3–7”) sees an adoption of Philonic ideas. However, in both cases what seems to be missed is the thoroughly “Paulinized” way the language is now used (as with “wisdom” in 1 Cor. 1–3; “knowledge,” etc., in Colossians; and “the heavenlies” in Ephesians). Paul has regularly shown himself a master at using the language of opponents or the situation to which he is writing and “breaking” and “molding” it to his own ends (cf. on autarkēs, “self-sufficiency,” in Phil. 4:10–13; see disc. on 1 Tim. 6:6–8).
For a very readable discussion of Paul’s theology reflecting the scheme of salvation as a past-present-future reality based on the work of Christ, see A. M. Hunter, The Gospel According to St. Paul (Philadelphia: Westminster, 1966).
2:11 Because of the combination of grace being “manifested” (epephanē) and “instructing” (paideuousa, see note on v. 12), D-C comment: “ ‘Grace’ in this context does not recall the grace of God of which Paul writes, but rather the ‘graces’ of the epiphanous gods in their manifestations (as they are praised, e.g., in the cult of the ruler)” (p. 144). One can hardly imagine a comment that is at once more influenced by presuppositions and more thoroughly off the mark than this one.
2:12 The word for teaches (paideuousa), which Paul uses in its more common LXX sense of “discipline” in 1 Tim. 1:20 (cf. 1 Cor. 11:32), is seen as the “giveaway” for the non-Pauline character of this paragraph, since it is a key word in Hellenistic moral philosophy. See, e.g., the classic on the Hellenistic mind by W. Jaeger, entitled Paideia: The Ideals of Greek Culture (Oxford, 1939). Thus Barrett contends: “In Paul grace is not educative, but liberating:” But two things must be noted: First, the use of paideuō reflected here has already been taken over into Hellenistic Judaism (Wis. 6:11, 25 [cf. 11:19, showing the author knew both meanings of the word]; Sir. 6:32). Thus this usage fits with what is found throughout the letters—the language of Hellenistic Judaism. Second, ethical instruction regularly occurred as a part of Paul’s gospel. Otherwise, passages like 1 Thess. 1:5b–10 (cf. 4:1ff.) and 1 Cor. 4:17 (cf. 10:33–11:1) make little sense at all.
On the matter of the possible relationship of Paul’s language to the four cardinal virtues, see especially S. C. Mott (“Greek Ethics and Christian Conversion”).
2:13 There is a considerable literature on this verse. The most recent and up-to-date discussion, which will also put one in touch with this literature, is by M. J. Harris, The position espoused in the present commentary was first suggested by F. J. A. Hort, The Epistle of St. James (London: Macmillan, 1909), pp. 47, 103–4.
2:14 It should be noted that this concern for “good works” is not non-Pauline, as some suppose. Paul avoids this language in the earlier controversial letters because his opponents were trying to establish a righteousness based on “works of Law.” But from the beginning Paul expected the encounter with grace to issue in proper behavior, which only later he calls “good works” (cf. Eph. 2:8–10).
