Tit 2:1. Instructions to Timothy how he is to exhort the various members of families, down to Tit 2:10.
σὺ δέ] see 2Ti 3:10; 2Ti 4:5. A contrast with the heretics, not, however, as Chrysostom puts it: αὐτοί εἰσιν ἀκάθαρτοι· ἀλλὰ μὴ τούτων ἕνεκεν σιγήσῃς. It is with regard to their unseemly doctrine that Paul says: σὺ δὲ λάλει ἃ πρέπει τῇ ὑγιαιν. διδασκαλίᾳ. In contrast with their μῦθοι and ἐντολαὶ ἀνθρώπων, Titus is to speak things in harmony with sound doctrine, by which are meant not so much the doctrines of the gospel themselves, as the commands founded on them, Tit 2:3 ff. (Wiesinger). On τῇ ὑγ. διδ., see Tit 1:9.
Tit 2:2. The members of the family are distinguished according to age and sex. First, we have πρεσβύτας, which is not equivalent to πρεσβυτέρους, the official name, but denotes age simply: senes aetate; Phm 1:9; Luk 1:18.
νηφαλίους εἶναι] The accusative does not depend on a word understood such as παρακάλει, but is an object accusative to the verb preceding λάλει ἃ πρέπει: “viz. that the old men be νηφάλιοι.”
νηφαλίους] see 1Ti 3:2.
σεμνούς] see 1Ti 2:2.
σώφρονας] Tit 1:8; 1Ti 3:2.
ὑγιαίνοντας τῇ πίστει, τῇ ἀγάπῃ, τῇ ὑπομονῇ] On the use of the dative here, for which in Tit 1:13 there stands the preposition ἐν, see Winer, p. 204 [E. T. p. 272]; it is to be explained as equivalent to “in respect of, in regard to.”
To πίστις and ἀγάπη, the cardinal virtues of the Christian life, ὑπομονή (quasi utriusque condimentum, Calvin) is added, the stedfastness which no sufferings can shake. All three conceptions are found together also in 1Th 1:3 (ἡ ὑπομονὴ τῆς ἐλπίδος); ὑπομ. and πίστις in 2Th 1:4; ἀγ. καὶ ὑπομ., 2Th 3:5; comp. also 1Ti 6:11; 2Ti 3:10.
Tit 2:3. ΙΙρεσβύτιδας (“the aged women” = πρεσβύτεραι in 1Ti 5:2) ὡσαύτως (see 1Ti 2:9) ἐν καταστήματι ἱεροπρεπεῖς] κατάστημα is taken in too narrow a sense, only of the clothing (Oecumenius: τὰ περιβόλαια). It denotes the entire external deportment; Jerome: ut ipse earum incessus et motus, vultus, sermo, silentium, quandam decoris sacri praeferant dignitatem. Heydenreich, on the other hand, makes the conception too wide, when he includes under it the temper of mind.
ἱεροπρεπεῖς] (ἅπ. λεγ.) is equivalent to καθὼς πρέπει ἁγίοις, Eph 5:3; comp. also 1Ti 2:10. Luther rightly: “that they behave themselves as becometh saints.”
μὴ διαβόλους] see 1Ti 3:11.
μὴ οἴνῳ πολλῷ δεδουλωμένας is equivalent to μὴ οἴν. π. προσέχοντας in 1Ti 3:8.
καλοδιδασκάλους] (ἅπ. λεγ.) Beza: “honestatis magistrae; agitur hic de domestica disciplina;” but not so much by example as by exhortation and teaching, as appears from what follows.
Tit 2:4-5. Ἵνα σωφρονίζωσι τὰς νέας κ.τ.λ.] Since σωφρονίζειν must necessarily have an object, τὰς νέας κ.τ.λ. should not, like πρεσβύτας υηφαλίους εἶναι, Tit 2:2, and πρεσβύτιδας, Tit 2:3, be joined with λάλει, Tit 2:1 (Hofmann), but with σωφρονίζουσιν, so that the exhortations given to the young women are to proceed from the older women.
σωφρονίζειν] (ἅπ. λεγ.) is properly “bring some one to σωφροσύνη,” then “amend,” viz. by punishment; it also occurs in the sense of “punish, chastise;” it is synonymous with νουθετεῖν. According to Beza, it expresses opposition to the juvenilis lascivia et alia ejus aetatis ac sexus vitia.
The aim of the ΣΩΦΡΟΝΊΖΕΙΝ is given in the next words: ΦΙΛΆΝΔΡΟΥς (ἍΠ. ΛΕΓ.) ΕἾΝΑΙ, ΦΙΛΟΤΈΚΝΟΥς (ἍΠ. ΛΕΓ.) These two ideas are suitably placed first, as pointing to the first and most obvious circumstances of the ΝΈΑΙ.
Tit 2:5. ΣΏΦΡΟΝΑς ἉΓΝΆς] The latter is to be taken here not in the general sense of “blameless,” but in the more special sense of “chaste” (Wiesinger).
ΟἸΚΟΥΡΟΎς (Rec.); Wahl rightly: “ex οἶκος et ΟὖΡΟς custos: custos domus, de feminis, quae domi se continent neque ΠΕΡΙΈΡΧΟΝΤΑΙ, 1Ti 5:13.” Vulgate: domus curam habentes; Luther: “domestic.” The word ΟἸΚΟΥΡΓΟΎς (read by Tischendorf, see critical remarks) does not occur elsewhere; if it be genuine, it must mean “working in the house” (Alford: “workers at home”), which, indeed, does not agree with the formation of the word. The word οἰκουργεῖν occurring in later Greek means: “make a house;” see Pape, s.v.
ἈΓΑΘΆς] is rightly taken by almost all as an independent epithet: “kindly.” Some expositors, however, connect it with ΟἸΚΟΥΡΟΎς (so Theophylact, Oecumenius); but this is wrong, since ΟἸΚΟΥΡΟΎς is itself an adjective. Hofmann joins it with ΟἸΚΟΥΡΓΟΎς, and translates it “good housewives” (so Buttmann, in his edition of the N., T., has no comma between the two words); but where are the grounds for explaining ΟἸΚΟΥΡΓΟΎς to mean “housewives”?
ὑποτασσομένας τοῖς ἰδίοις ἀνδράσιν] On ΤΟῖς ἸΔΊΟΙς ἈΝΔΡ., comp. 1Co 7:2. The thought that wives are to be subject to their husbands is often expressed in the N. T. in the same words, comp. Eph 5:22; Col 3:18; 1Pe 3:1. It is to be noted that the apostle adds this ὙΠΟΤΑΣΣΟΜΈΝΑς after using ΦΙΛΆΝΔΡΟΥς. The one thing does not put an end to the other; on the contrary, neither quality is of the right kind unless it includes the other. How much weight was laid by the apostle on the ὙΠΟΤΆΣΣΕΣΘΑΙ may be seen from the words: ἽΝΑ ΜῊ Ὁ ΛΌΓΟς ΤΟῦ ΘΕΟῦ ΒΛΑΣΦΗΜῆΤΑΙ, which are closely connected with ὙΠΟΤΑΣΣΟΜΈΝΑς Κ.Τ.Λ.; comp. Tit 2:10, where the same thought is expressed positively, and 1Ti 6:1. The apostolic preaching of freedom and equality in Christ might easily be applied in a fleshly sense for removing all natural subordination, and thus disgrace be brought on the word of God; hence the express warning. The remark of Chrysostom: ΕἸ ΣΥΜΒΑΊῌ ΓΥΝΑῖΚΑ ΠΙΣΤῊΝ ἈΠΊΣΤῼ ΣΥΝΟΙΚΟῦΣΑΝ, ΜῊ ΕἾΝΑΙ ἘΝΆΡΕΤΟΝ, Ἡ ΒΛΑΣΦΗΜΊΑ ἘΠῚ ΤῸΝ ΘΕῸΝ ΔΙΑΒΑΊΝΕΙΝ ΕἼΩΘΕΝ, is unsatisfactory, because the apostle’s words are thereby arbitrarily restricted to a relation which is quite special.
Tit 2:6. Τοὺς νεωτέρους] “the younger men;” not, as Matthies supposes, the younger members of the church, without distinction of sex.
ὡσαύτως] here, as in Tit 2:3, on account of the similarity of the exhortation.
παρακάλει σωφρονεῖν] equivalent to σώφρονας εἶναι, opposed to omnibus immoderatis affectibus (Beza). Hofmann: “The whole purport of the apostle’s exhortations is included by the apostle in the one word σωφρονεῖν, which therefore contains everything in which the moral influence of Christianity may be displayed.”
Tit 2:7-8. The exhortation by word is to be accompanied by the exhortation of example.
περὶ πάντα does not belong to what precedes, but begins a new sentence, and is put first for emphasis. ΙΙάντα is not masculine: “towards every one,” but neuter: “in regard to all things, in all points.”
σεαυτὸν παρεχόμενος τύπον καλῶν ἔργων] On the use of the middle παρέχεσθαι with the pronoun ἑαυτόν, “show himself,” see Winer, p. 242 [E. T. p. 322] (comp. Xenophon, Cyrop. viii. 1.39: παράδειγμα … τοίονδε ἑαυτὸν παρείχετο).
τύπον, “type,” is in the N. T. only found here with the genitive of the thing.
καλὰ ἔργα] 1Ti 5:10; an expression often occurring in the Pastoral Epistles.
ἐν τῇ διδασκαλίᾳ ἀφθορίαν] This and the following accusatives are dependent on παρεχόμενος; see Col 4:1. Luther inaccurately: “with unadulterated doctrine, with sobriety,” etc.; Jerome: in doctrina, in integritate et castitate.
ἀφθορία, only in later Greek, is from ἄφθορος (in Artemidorus, ver. 2:95: de virginibus puerisque intactis et illibatis legitur; Reiche; Est 2:2 : κοράσια ἄφθορα καλὰ τῷ εἴδει), which is equivalent to “chaste,” and therefore means “unstained chastity.” Ἀδιαφθορία (Rec.) is of more general signification; it is also used of virgin chastity (Artac. 26, Diodorus Siculus, i. 59), but denotes in general soundness, also especially incorruptibility. Older as well as more recent expositors (Heydenreich, Mack, Wiesinger) refer the word here to the disposition: “purity of disposition;”[1] but it is more in accordance with the context to understand by it something immediately connected with the ΔΙΔΑΣΚΑΛΊΑ, to which ΣΕΜΝΌΤΗΤΑ also refers. Matthies, de Wette, and others refer it (as does Luther also) to the subject-matter of the doctrine; de Wette: “incorruptness in doctrine, i.e. unadulterated doctrine.” But in that case it would mean the same thing as the following λόγον ὑγιῆ; there is no justification for Bengel’s interpreting ἘΝ ΔΙΔΑΣΚΑΛΊᾼ to mean public addresses, and λόγον the talk of daily intercourse. According to its original meaning, ἈΦΘΟΡΊΑ is most suitably taken to mean chastity in doctrine, which avoids everything not in harmony with its true subject and aim, and it has a special reference to the form (comp. 1Co 2:1; 1Co 2:3). So, too, van Oosterzee: “the form of the doctrine which Titus preaches is to be pure, chaste, free from everything that conflicts with the nature of the gospel”
ΣΕΜΝΌΤΗΤΑ, on the other hand, denotes dignity in the style of delivery. Both these things, the ἈΦΘΟΡΊΑ and the ΣΕΜΝΌΤΗς, were injured by the heretics in their ΛΟΓΟΜΑΧΊΑΙς.[2]
λόγον ὑγιῆ ἀκατάγνωστου (ἄπ. λεγ.) refers to the subject-matter of the doctrine: “sound, unblameable word,” in opposition to the corruptions made by the heretics.
The purpose is thus given: ἵνα ὁ ἐξ ἐναντίας ἐντραπῇ] ὁ ἐξ ἐναντίας (ἅπ. λεγ.), qui ex adverso est; according to Chrysostom: ὁ διάβολος καὶ πᾶς ὁ ἐκείνῳ διακονούμενος; but the next words are against this interpretation. According to Tit 2:5 and 1Ti 6:1, it means the non-Christian opponent of the gospel, and not the Christian heretic (Heydenreich, Wiesinger).
ἐντραπῇ, “be ashamed, take shame to oneself;” 1Co 4:14; 2Th 3:14. The reason for the shame is contained in the words: μηδὲν ἔχων περὶ ἡμῶν (or ὑμῶν) λέγειν φαῦλον] “having nothing wicked to say of us.”
If περὶ ἡμῶν be the correct reading, it is not to be limited to Titus and Paul, but should be taken more generally. With the reading ὑμῶν, on the other hand, the apostle’s words refer to Titus and the churches that follow his example.
[1] Reiche, who prefers the reading ἀδιαφθορίαν, agrees with the exposition of Erasmus: integritas animi nullis cupiditatibus corrupti, non ira non ambitione non avaritia.
[2] Hofmann wishes to refer both words to the subject-matter and form alike, and so, also, with λόγον ὑγιῆ; but we cannot see why in that case Paul does not specially name the latter.
Tit 2:9-10. Exhortation in regard to slaves.
δούλους ἰδίοις δεσποταῖς (or δεσποταῖς ἰδίοις) ὑποτάσσεσθαι] The construction shows that Paul is continuing the instructions which he gives to Timothy in regard to the various members of families, so that Tit 2:7-8 are parenthetical; παρακάλει is to be supplied from Tit 2:6. Heydenreich and Matthies wrongly make this verse dependent on Tit 2:1. The harder the lot of the slaves, and the more unendurable this might appear to the Christian slave conscious of his Christian dignity, the more necessary was it to impress upon him the ὑποτάσσεσθαι. Even this is not sufficient, and so Paul further adds: ἐν πᾶσιν εὐαρέστους εἶναι. Ἐν πᾶσιν, equivalent to “in all points” (Tit 2:7 : περὶ πάντα; Col 3:20; Col 3:22 : κατὰ πάντα), is usually joined with εὐαρέστους εἶναι; Hofmann, on the contrary, wishes to connect it with ὑποτάσσεσθαι. Both constructions are possible; still the usual one is to be preferred, because the very position of the slaves made it a matter of course that the ὑποτάσσεσθαι should be evinced in its full extent, whereas the same could not be said of εὐαρέστοι εἶναι, since that goes beyond the duty of ὑποτάσσεσθαι. The word εὔαρεστος occurs frequently in the Pauline Epistles, but only in speaking of the relation to God. The two first exhortations refer to general conduct; to these the apostle adds two special points: μὴ ἀντιλέγοντας and μὴ νοσφιζομένους. Hofmann is wrong in saying that μὴ ἀντιλέγοντας is the antithesis of εὐαρέστους. The conduct of slaves, which is well-pleasing to masters, includes more than refraining from contradiction. Van Oosterzee says not incorrectly: “It is not contradiction in particular instances, but the habitus that is here indicated.” Luther: “not contradicting.” The verb νοσφίζεσθαι is found only here and in Act 5:2-3 : “not pilfering, defrauding.”
The next words: ἀλλὰ πᾶσαν πίστιν ἐνδεικνυμένους ἀγαθήν (Luther: “but showing all good fidelity”), is in the first place opposed to μὴ νοσφιζομένους, but includes more than merely to abstain from defrauding (in opposition to Hofmann). As in Tit 2:5, so, too, here, where the maintenance of the natural duties of subordinates is under discussion, the apostle adds ἵνα τὴν διδασκαλίαν κ.τ.λ., except that the expression is now positive, whereas before it was negative; the thought is substantially the same.
ἡ διδασκαλία is equivalent to ὁ λόγος, τὸ εὐαγγέλιον.
τοῦ σωτῆρος ἡμ. Θεοῦ] see 1Ti 1:1; not, as some expositors (Calvin, Wolf) think, Christ, but God.
κοσμῶσιν] “do honour to.”
ἐν πᾶσιν] Tit 2:9, “in all points,” not “with all, in the eyes of all” (Hofmann).
Tit 2:11-14. Foundation for the moral precepts given from the nature of Christianity: eximium ex evangelii medulla motivum inseritur (Bengel).
Chrysostom (πολλὴν παρὰ τῶν οἰκετῶν ἀπαιτήσας τὴν ἀρετὴν, ἀπάγει καὶ τὴν αἰτίαν δικαίαν, διʼ ἣν ὀφείλουσι τοιοῦτοι εἶναι οἱ οἰκέται) and others refer Tit 2:11 (γάρ) only to the exhortation to slaves which immediately precedes. It is more correct, however, to refer it to the whole sum of moral precepts, given from Tit 2:1 onwards (so, too, van Oosterzee, Plitt, Hofmann).
ἐπεφάνη γὰρ ἡ χάρις τοῦ Θεοῦ] (see Tit 3:4) is used of the sun in Act 27:20. Possibly Paul is speaking here with this figure in mind (comp. Isa 9:2; Isa 60:1; Luk 1:79), as Heydenreich, Wiesinger, van Oosterzee suppose; but possibly, also, the expression simply means that the χάρις τοῦ Θεοῦ, formerly hidden in God, has come forth from concealment and become manifest and visible.
ἡ χάρις τοῦ Θεοῦ] The old writers on dogma give to this expression, which denotes the absolute ground of the work of redemption, too special a reference to Christ’s incarnation; Oecumenius: ἡ μετὰ σαρκὸς ἐπιδημία; Theodoret: τούτου χάριν ἐνηνθρώπησεν ὁ μονογενὴς τοῦ Θεοῦ υἱὸς, ἵνα κ.τ.λ. It need hardly be said that he is speaking here not simply of a revelation of the divine grace by teaching, but also of its appearance in act, viz. in the act of redemption.
To define the χάρις more accurately, there is added: σωτήριος πᾶσιν ἀνθρώποις] not: “as bringing salvation” (de Wette, van Oosterzee). This would make σωτήριος here the main point, which from the context it cannot be; the main point is not given till παιδεύουσα. Σωτήριος is rather an adjective qualifying the substantive χάρις: “there appeared the grace bringing salvation to all men.” With the Rec. ἡ σωτήριος this construction is beyond doubt.
πᾶσιν ἀνθρώποις] does not depend on ἐπεφάνη, but on σωτήριος. Matthies is not intelligible in regarding it as dependent on both.[3]
The emphasis laid on the universality of the salvation, as in 1Ti 2:4 and other passages of the Pastoral Epistles, is purely Pauline.
[3] Wiesinger translates: “for there appeared the grace of God which brings salvation to all men;” and on the construction of πᾶσιν ἀνθρώποις he afterwards says: “according to the context, it can only be construed with σωτήριος.”
Tit 2:12. Παιδεύουσα ἡμᾶς, ἵνα κ.τ.λ.] On this the chief emphasis is laid. By παιδεύουσα the apostle makes it clear that “the grace of God has a paedagogic purpose” (Heydenreich). Here, as also elsewhere in the N. T., παιδεύειν does not simply mean “educate,” but “educate by disciplinary correction.” Hence Luther is not incorrect in translating: “and chastises us.” This reference is to be noted here, as is shown by the next words: ἀρνησάμενοι κ.τ.λ. Ἵνα does not indicate the purpose here, but the object to be supplied, for παιδ. is not subjective, but objective; the sentence beginning with ἵνα might also have been expressed by the infinitive; comp. 1Ti 1:20; not therefore “in order that we,” but “that we.” On this use of ἵνα, see Winer, pp. 314 ff.[4] [E. T. pp. 420-426].
ἀρνησάμενοι] see Tit 1:16 : “denying,” i.e. renouncing, abandoning.
τὴν ἀσέβειαν] is not equivalent to ΕἸΔΩΛΟΛΑΤΡΕΊΑΝ ΚΑῚ ΤᾺ ΠΟΝΗΡᾺ ΔΌΓΜΑΤΑ (Theophylact), but is the opposite of ΕὐΣΈΒΕΙΑΝ: the behaviour of man, ungodly, estranged from God, of which idolatry is only one side.
ΚΑῚ ΤᾺς ΚΟΣΜΙΚᾺς ἘΠΙΘΥΜΊΑς] ΚΟΣΜΙΚΌς only here and in Heb 9:1, but there in another connection. The ΚΟΣΜ. ἘΠΙΘΥΜΊΑΙ are not “desires or lusts referring to the earthly, transient world” (first edition of this commentary; so, too, Wiesinger), but “the lusts belonging to the ΚΌΣΜΟς, i.e. to the world estranged from God,” which, indeed, is the same thing (so, too, van Oosterzee). Kindred conceptions are found ἐπιθυμία σαρκός, Gal 5:15; Eph 2:3; ἈΝΘΡΏΠΩΝ ἘΠΙΘΥΜΊΑΙ, 1Pe 4:2.
ΣΩΦΡΌΝΩς ΚΑῚ ΔΙΚΑΊΩς ΚΑῚ ΕὐΣΕΒῶς ΖΉΣΩΜΕΝ] see Tit 1:8 (ΣΏΦΡΟΝΑ, ΔΊΚΑΙΟΝ, ὍΣΙΟΝ). This denotes the life of Christian morality in three directions. Immediately after ἘΠΙΘΥΜΊΑΙ we have the opposing conception ΣΩΦΡΌΝΩς, which expresses self-control. ΔΙΚΑΊΩς denotes generally right conduct such as the divine law demands, having special reference here, as in Tit 1:8, to duty towards one’s neighbour. ΕὐΣΕΒῶς (opposite of ἈΣΈΒΕΙΑΝ) denotes holiness in thought and act.
Even the older expositors find in the collocation of these three ideas an expression for the whole sum of duties. Wolf: optime illi res instituunt, qui per ΤῸ ΕὐΣΕΒῶς officia adversus Deum, per ΤῸ ΔΙΚΑΊΩς officia adv. proximum, per ΤῸ ΣΩΦΡΌΝΩς vero illa adv. hominem ipsum indicari existimant; still it might be doubtful whether Paul regarded the ideas as so sharply distinct from each other.
ἘΝ Τῷ ΝῦΝ ΑἸῶΝΙ] Paul adds this to remind Titus that for the Christian there is another and future life towards which his glance is directed even in this;-still these words cannot be construed with ΠΡΟΣΔΕΧΌΜΕΝΟΙ.
[4] Wiesinger translates: “educating us, that we … live holily,” but thinks that ἵνα is to be retained in its proper signification as denoting the aim of the παίδευμα. In its proper signification, however, ἵνα does not give the aim, but the purpose. If it be taken in this sense here, we cannot but translate it “in order that.”
Tit 2:13. Προσδεχόμενοι τὴν μακαρίαν ἐλπίδα] The strange collocation of προσδεχ. and ἐλπίδα is found also in Act 24:15 : ἐλπίδα ἔχων … ἣν καὶ αὐτοὶ οὗτοι προσδέχονται; so, too, in Gal 5:5 : ἐλπίδα … ἀπεκδεχόμεθα. The reason of it is that ἐλπίς not only denotes actively the hope, but also passively the thing hoped for, the subject of the hope; comp. Col 1:5 : ἡ ἐλπὶς ἡ ἀποκειμένη ἐν τ. οὐρανοῖς; comp., too, Rom 8:24.
μακαρίαν] Paul thus describes the ἐλπίδα in so far as the expectation of it blesses the believer. Wolf wrongly interprets ἡ μακ. ἐλπίς as equivalent to ἡ ἐλπιζομένη μακαριότης.
This ἐλπίς is further defined by the epexegesis: καὶ ἐπιφάνειαν τῆς δόξης τοῦ μεγάλου Θεοῦ καὶ σωτῆρος ἡμῶν Ἰ. Χριστοῦ] According to Hofmann, the adjective μακαρίαν as well as the genitive τῆς δόξης κ.τ.λ. belongs to both substantives, to ἐλπίδα and to ἐπιφάνειαν, because, as he thinks, ἡ μακαρία ἐλπίς is not a conception complete in itself. But Rom 15:4 shows this to be wrong. The genitive could only be construed with the two substantives by giving it a different reference in each case. Hofmann, indeed, maintains that this presents no difficulty, as it occurs elsewhere; but he is wrong in his appeal to Rom 15:4 (comp. Meyer on the passage) and to 1Pe 1:2 and 2Pe 3:11 (comp. my commentary on the passages).
Beyond doubt, the ἐπιφάνεια τῆς δόξης κ.τ.λ. denotes Christ’s second coming (1Ti 6:14); it may, however, be asked whether μεγάλου Θεοῦ is an independent subject or an attribute of Ἰησ. Χρ. The older expositors are of the latter opinion; the orthodox even appealed to this passage against the Arians. Ambrosius, however, distinguishes here between Christus and Deus Pater.[5] Erasmus, too, says: simul cum Patre apparebit eadem gloria conspicuus Dominus ac Servator noster J. Chr.; and Bengel says of ΘΕΟῦ simply: referri potest ad Christum. Among more recent expositors, Flatt, Mack, Matthies, Wiesinger, van Oosterzee, Hofmann, adopt the former view; while de Wette, Plitt, Winer, pp. 123 f.[E. T. p. 162], adopt the latter. Heydenreich leaves the question undecided.[6] It cannot be decided on purely grammatical grounds, for μεγ. Θεοῦ and σωτῆρος ἡμ. may be two attributes referring to Ἰησ. Χριστοῦ; still it may be also that σωτῆρ. ἡμῶν Ἰησ. Χρ. is a subject distinct from μεγ. Θεοῦ, even although only one article is used.[7] The question can only be answered by an appeal to N. T. usage, both for this passage and others like it: 2Pe 1:1; Jud 1:4; 2Th 1:12. In 2Pe 1:11; 2Pe 3:18, the unity of the subject is beyond doubt. The following points may be urged in favour of distinguishing two subjects:-(1) In no single, passage is Θεός connected directly with Ἰησοῦς Χριστός as an attribute (see my commentary on 2Pe 1:1); i.e. there never occurs in the N. T. the simple construction ὁ Θεὸς ἡμῶν Ἰησ. Χρ., or ὁ Θεὸς Ἰησοῦς Χρ., or Ἰησ. Χρ. ὁ Θεὸς ἡμῶν, whereas κύριος and σωτήρ are often enough construed in this way. (2) The collocation of God (Θεός) and Christus as two subjects is quite current, not only in the Pastoral Epistles (1Ti 1:1-2; 1Ti 5:21; 1Ti 6:13; 2Ti 1:2; 2Ti 4:1; Tit 1:4), but also in all the epistles of the N. T., Pauline or not, so much so, that when in some few passages the turn of the expression is such as to make Θεός refer grammatically to Christ also, these passages have to be explained in accordance with the almost invariable meaning of the expression. (3) The addition of the adjective μεγάλου indicates that Θεοῦ is to be taken as an independent subject, especially when it is observed how Paul in the First Epistle to Timothy uses similar epithets to exalt God’s glory; comp. 1Ti 1:17; 1Ti 4:10; 1Ti 6:15-16, especially Tit 1:11 : ἡ δόξα τοῦ μακαρίου Θεοῦ. It is true the expression ὁ μέγας Θεός is not found in the N. T., except in the Rec. of Rev 19:17, but it occurs frequently in the O. T.: Deu 6:21; Deu 10:17; Neh 9:32; Dan 2:45; Dan 9:4.[8]
For the unity of the subject only one reason can be urged with any show of force, viz. that elsewhere the word ἘΠΙΦΆΝΕΙΑ is only used in reference to Christ; but Erasmus long ago pointed out that it does not stand here ἘΠΙΦ. ΤΟῦ ΘΕΟῦ, but Τῆς ΔΌΞΗς ΤΟῦ ΘΕΟῦ. Wiesinger, too, has to admit “that, according to passages like Mat 16:27, Mar 8:38, Christ appears in the glory of the Father and at the same time in His own glory (Mat 25:31), and His appearance may therefore be called the appearance both of God’s glory and of His own.” Wiesinger, indeed, tries to weaken this admission by remarking that in reality it is Christ Himself who will appear ἘΝ ΔΌΞῌ ΤΟῦ ΠΆΤΡΟς, and not God, that therefore ΔΌΞΑ would be construed with the genitives in quite different relations, and that on grammatico-logical principles it must mean either ἘΝ ΣΩΤῆΡΙ ἩΜῶΝ ἸΗΣ. ΧΡΙΣΤῷ, or ΤΟῦ ΣΩΤῆΡΟς ἩΜῶΝ ἘΝ Τῇ ΔΌΞῌ ΤΟῦ ΜΕΓΆΛΟΥ ΘΕΟῦ (Matthies). But his remark is wrong. Even if the subjects be distinct, the genitive ΤΟῦ ΜΕΓ. ΘΕΟῦ stands in the same relation to Τῆς ΔΌΞΗς as does the genitive ΣΩΤῆΡΟς ἩΜ. Ι. ΧΡ. Nor is the form of expression necessary on which Matthies insists, because in the N. T. God and Christ are often enough connected simply by καὶ without marking their mutual relations. Wiesinger further remarks that no reason whatever can be found in the context for connecting ΘΕΌς here as well as Christ with the ἘΠΙΦΆΝΕΙΑ, but he has manifestly overlooked the relation of ΠΡΟΣΔΕΧΌΜΕΝΟΙ ΤῊΝ ἘΠΙΦΆΝΕΙΑΝ Τῆς ΔΌΞΗς ΤΟῦ ΜΕΓ. ΘΕΟῦ to ἘΠΕΦΆΝΗ Ἡ ΧΆΡΙς ΤΟῦ ΘΕΟῦ.[9]
Chrysostom rightly says: δύο δείκνυσιν ἐνταῦθα ἐπιφανείας· καὶ γάρ εἰσι δύο· ἡ μὲν πρότερα χάριτος, ἡ δὲ δευτέρα ἀνταποδόσεως. The χάρις of God has already appeared; the δόξα of God appears only at the day of completion, when Christ is made manifest in His δόξα, which is the δόξα of God. Though not so directly as it would have been if the subjects were identical, this passage is still a testimony in favour of the truth of the doctrine of Christ’s divinity.[10]
Matthies suggests that in the expression τοῦ μεγάλου Θεοῦ there is an allusion to the great Zeus worshipped in Crete, but that is more than improbable.
The genitive σωτῆρος is not dependent on ἐπιφάνειαν, but on τῆς δόξης. In 1Pe 4:13 also Christ’s second coming is called the revelation of His δόξα.
[5] The words of Ambrosius are: hanc esse dicit beatam spem credentium, qui exspectant adventum gloriae magni Dei, quod revelari habet judice Christo, in quo Dei patris videbitur potestas et gloria, ut fidei suae praemium consequantur. Ad hoc enim redemit nos Christus, ut, puram vitam sectantes, repleti bonis operibus, regni Dei haeredes esse possimus.
[6] Heydenreich wrongly supposes that δόξα here is the glory which God and Christ will give to believers.
[7] Hofmann wrongly asserts that because σωτῆρος ἡμῶν stands before Ἰησοῦ Χριστοῦ, and with μεγάλου Θεοῦ under one and the same article, therefore ἡμῶν must belong to μεγάλου Θεοῦ as much as to σωτῆρος, and μεγάλου to σωτῆρος as much as to Θεοῦ, and both together to Ἰησοῦ Χριστοῦ as predicate. There are instances enough of two distinct subjects standing under one article only, and we cannot see why these instances should not be quoted here. It cannot indeed be said that σωτῆρος ἡμῶν Ἰ. Χρ. needs no article; for, although σωτήρ as well as κύριος may be construed with Ἰ. Χρ. without the article, still there is no instance of κύριος ἡμῶν being without the article when construed with Ἰ. Χρ. But the article before μεγ. Θεοῦ may, according to N. T. usage, be also referred to σωτῆρος Ἰ. Χρ. without making it necessary to assume a unity of subject; comp. Buttm. pp. 84 ff.; Winer, pp. 118 ff. [E. T. p. 158]. Hofmann is no less wrong in what he says regarding the necessity of the reference of μεγάλου and of ἡμῶν Paul, indeed, might have written: τοῦ μεγ. Θεοῦ καὶ Ἰησ. Χρ. τοῦ σωτῆρος ὑμῶν, but he could also express the same thought in the way he has written it.
[8] Usteri (Paul. Lehrb. 5th ed. p. 326) says: “God the Father did not need the extolling epithet μέγας;” to which it may be replied: “Did Christ need such an epithet?”-If Hofmann be right in remarking that Christ is not ὁ Θεός, which is the subject-name of the Father, then it is very questionable that Paul would Call Him ὁ μέγας Θεός.
[9] Van Oosterzee has advanced nothing new in support of the view disputed above. The appeal to 2Pe 1:11 is of no use, unless it be proved in passages beyond dispute that Θεός, like κύριος, is joined with Ἰησοῦς Χριστός as an attribute.
[10] Calvin: Verum brevius et certius repellere licet Arianos, quia Paulus, de revelatione magni Dei locutus, mox Christum adjunxit, ut sciremus, in hujus persona fore illam gloriae revelationem, ac si diceret, ubi Christus apparuerit, tunc patefactum nobis iri divinae gloriae magnitudinem.
Tit 2:14. The thought in this verse is very closely related to Tit 2:12 : παιδεύουσα ἡμᾶς, ἵνα κ.τ.λ., as it shows how far the appearance of the grace of God exhorts us to deny ἀσέβεια κ.τ.λ. In construction, however, it is connected with σωτῆρος ἡμ. Ἰ. Χρ.
ὃς ἔδωκεν ἑαυτόν] comp. Gal 1:4, equivalent to παρέδωκεν ἑαυτόν, Eph 5:25. The conception of the voluntary submission to death is not contained in ἑαυτόν (Heydenreich) so much as in the whole expression.
ὑπὲρ ἡμῶν] is not equivalent to ἀντὶ ἡμῶν, but: “for us, on our behalf;” the notion of ἀντί, however, is not excluded (Mat 20:28). The purpose of this submission is given in the next words: ἵνα λυτρώσηται ἡμᾶς] λυτροῦσθαι: “set free by means of a ransom.” In Luk 24:21 (comp. too, 1Ma 4:11, and other passages in the Apocrypha) the reference to ransom falls quite into the background; but in 1Pe 1:18-19, where, as here, the redemption through Christ is spoken of, the τίμιον αἷμα of Christ is called the ransom. The same reference is indicated here by the previous ἔδωκεν ἑαυτόν, comp. 1Ti 2:6. The middle form includes the reference which in the next clause is expressed by ἑαυτῷ.
ἀπὸ πάσης ἀνομίας] “from all unlawfulness.” Ἀνομία is regarded as the power from which Christ has redeemed us; it is opposed to σωφρόνως καὶ δικαίως καὶ εὐσεβῶς ζῆν: “the unrighteousness in which the law of God is unheeded.” It is wrong to understand by ἀνομία “not only the sin, but also the punishment incurred by sin” (Heydenreich), or only the latter; comp. Rom 6:19, 2Co 6:14, and especially 1Jn 3:4 : ἡ ἁμαρτία ἐστὶν ἡ ἀνομία.
καὶ καθαρίσῃ ἑαυτῷ λαὸν περιούσιον] positive expression of the thought which was expressed negatively in the previous clause. De Wette and Wiesinger without reason supply ἡμᾶς as the object of καθαρίσῃ; the object is λαὸν περιούσιον.
περιούσιος (ἅπ. λεγ. in N. T.). Chrysostom wrongly interprets it by ἐξελεγμένος, οὐδὲν ἔχων κοινὸν πρὸς τοὺς λοιπούς; Theodoret more correctly by οἰκεῖος; so, too, Beza: peculiaris, and Luther: “a people for a possession.” The phrase λαὸς περιούσιος belongs to the O. T., and is a translation of the Hebrew עַם סְגֻלָּה, Exo 19:5; Deu 7:6; Deu 14:2; Deu 26:18, LXX.; in the church of the N. T. the promise made to the people of Israel is fulfilled; comp. 1Pe 2:9 : λαὸς εἰς περιποίησιν.
ἑαυτῷ corresponds with λυτρώσηται ἀπό. The sentence is pregnantly expressed, and its meaning is: “that He by the purifying power of His death might acquire for Himself (ἑαυτῷ) a people for a possession.”
The moral character of the λαὸς περιούσ. is declared by the words in apposition, ζηλωτὴν καλῶν ἔργων: accensum studio bonorum operum.
De Wette is inaccurate in saying that the apostle is speaking here not of reconciliation, but only of moral purification. Wiesinger rightly asks: “What else are we to understand by ἔδωκεν ἑαυτὸν ὑπὲρ ἡμῶν than the reconciling death?” But de Wette is so far right, that reconciliation is not made the chief point here, but rather, as often in the N. T., e.g. 1Pe 1:17-18, the design is mentioned for which Christ suffered the death of reconciliation; comp. Luther’s exposition of the second article of faith.
Tit 2:15. Ταῦτα (viz. these moral precepts, see Tit 2:1, with the reasons given for them, Tit 2:11-14) λάλει καὶ παρακάλει καὶ ἔλεγχε] The distinction between these words is correctly given by Heydenreich. Λαλεῖν denotes simple teaching, παρακάλ. pressing exhortation, ἐλέγχ. solemn admonition to those who neglect these duties. “The theoretic, the paraenetic-practical, and the polemic aspects of the preaching of the gospel are combined” (Matthies).
μετὰ πάσης ἐπιταγῆς] According to 1Co 7:6, συγγνώμη is the opposite of ἐπιταγή; this clause therefore enjoins that Titus is not to leave it to the free choice of the church whether his exhortations shall be obeyed or not, but to deliver them as commands. De Wette translates: “with all recommendation,” which is right in sense; still ἐπιταγή is not properly recommendation but command, and it is therefore better to say, “with entire full command.”
With this the final words are closely connected: μηδείς σου περιφρονείτω] περιφρονεῖν (ἅπ. λεγ.); properly: “consider something on all sides;” then: “think beyond, despise,” equivalent to καταφρονεῖν; comp. 1Ti 4:12. Luther is right in sense: “let no man despise thee,” viz. by not receiving thy teachings, exhortations, and admonitions as commands, and by thinking lightly of them. There is nothing to suggest that Titus is to conduct himself so that no one may be right in despising him.
1. But speak thou the things which become sound doctrine He points out the remedy for driving away fables, namely, that Titus should devote himself to edification. He gives the appellation of sound doctrine to that which may instruct men to godliness; for all trifles vanish away, when that which is solid is taught. When he enjoins him to speak those things which agree with “sound doctrine,” it is as if he had said, that Titus must be continually employed in this preaching; for to mention these things once or twice would not be enough. And Paul does not speak of the discourse of a single day; but so long as Titus shall hold the office of pastor, he wishes him to be employed in teaching this doctrine.
“Sound doctrine” is so called from the effect produced by it; as, on the contrary, he says, that unskillful men dote about questions which do no good. Sound, therefore, means wholesome, that which actually feeds souls. Thus, by a single word, as by a solemn proclamation, he banishes from the Church all speculations which serve rather to promote ostentation than to aid godliness, (238) as he did in both of the Epistles to Timothy.
He makes “sound doctrine” to consist of two parts. The first is that which magnifies the grace of God in Christ, from which we may learn where we ought to seek our salvation; and the second is that by which the life is framed to the fear of God, and inoffensive conduct. Although the former, which includes faith, is far more excellent, and therefore ought to be more zealously inculcated; yet Paul, in writing to Timothy, was not careful about attending to order; for he had to deal with an intelligent man, to whom he would offer an insult, if he dictated to him word by word, as is usually done to apprentices or beginners. Under the person of Titus, indeed, he instructs the whole church of Crete; yet he attends to the rules of propriety, that he may not appear to distrust his prudence. Besides, the reason why he is longer in his exhortations is, that they who gave their whole attention to idle questions — needed especially to be exhorted to the practice of a good and holy life; for nothing is better fitted to restrain the wandering curiosity of men than to know in what duties (239) they ought to be employed.
(238) “Let the doctrine which proceeds from thy mouth be sound. For he expressly uses this word, because it is the means of upholding us in true integrity, that the word of God, which is preached to us, be our spiritual pasture. This will not be perceived at first sight, but such is the fact. And why do we not perceive it? Because we are too sensual and earthly. For when we are in want of food for our body, we are immediately terrified, we become alarmed, we have not a moment of repose, for it touches us nearly. We are sensitive as to this fading life, but we are insensible to all that affects our souls; there is such brutal stupidity that we do not know our wants, though they press heavily upon us. Yet let it be observed that there is nothing but weakness in us, if we are not fed with the doctrine of God. And that is the reason why it is called ‘sound,’ for in this consists the health of our souls. As our bodies are kept in their proper condition by well-regulated nourishment, so our souls are supported by that doctrine which serves not only for nourishment but for medicine. For we are full of vices which are worse than diseases; and therefore our soul must be purged, and we must be healed of them. The method of doing this is, that we profit by the word of God. And so it is not without good reason that Paul gives to it this designation, that it is ‘sound,’ or that it is ‘wholesome.’” —Fr. Ser.
(239) “En quels devotes et bones oeuvres.” — “In what duties and good works.”
2. That aged men be sober He begins with particular duties, that the discourse may be better adapted to the instruction of the people. And he does so, not only that he may accommodate himself to their capacity, but that he may press every one more closely; for a general doctrine produces a less powerful impression; but when by holding out a few cases, he has instructed every person about his duty, there is no one who may not easily conclude, that the Lord has sufficiently instructed him as to the work in which he ought to be employed. We must not therefore, look for a regular method here; for Paul’s design was only to state briefly what were the subjects concerning which godly teachers ought to speak, and not to undertake to treat largely of those subjects.
“Aged men” are mentioned by him in the first place. He wishes them to be “sober,” because excessive drinking is a vice too common among the old. Gravity, which he next mentions, is procured by well-regulated morals. Nothing is more shameful than for an old man to indulge in youthful wantonness, and, by his countenance, to strengthen the impudence of the young. In the life of old men, therefore, let there be displayedσεμνότης “a becoming gravity,” which shall constrain the young to modesty. This will be followed chiefly by temperance, which he immediately adds.
Sound in faith I do not know whether the word “sound” or “healthy” contains an indirect allusion to the various diseases of old men, with which he contrasts this health of the soul; at least, I think so, though I do not affirm it. With good reason does he include in these three parts — faith, love, patience — the sum of Christian perfection. By faith we worship God; for neither calling upon him, nor any exercises of godliness, can be separated from it. Love extends to all the commandments of the second table. Next follows patience as the seasoning of “faith” and “love;” for without “patience” faith would not long endure, and many occurrences are taking place every day — instances of unhandsome conduct or evil temper, which irritate us so much that we should not only be languid, but almost dead, to the duties of love towards our neighbor, if the same “patience” did not support us.
3. That aged women in like manner We very frequently see, that females advanced in age either continue to dress with the lightness of youthful years, or have something superstitious in their apparel, and seldom hit the golden mean. Paul wished to guard against both extremes, by enjoining them to follow a course that is agreeable both to outward propriety and to religion; or, if you choose to express it in simpler language, to give evidence, by their very dress, that they are holy and godly women.
He next corrects another two vices, to which they are often addicted, when he forbids them to be slanderers and slaves to much wine Talkativeness is a disease of women, and it is increased by old age. To this is added, that women never think that they are eloquent enough, if they are not given to prattling and to slander — if they do not attack the characters of all. The consequence is, that old women, by their slanderous talkativeness, as by a lighted torch, frequently set on fire may houses. Many are also given to drinking, so that, forgetting modesty and gravity, they indulge in an unbecoming wantonness.
4. That they may teach young women temperance That they may be more attentive to duty, he shows that it is not enough if their own life be decent, if they do not also train young women, by their instructions, to a decent and chaste life. He therefore adds, that by their example they should train to temperance and gravity those younger women whom the warmth of youth might otherwise lead into imprudence.
To love their husbands and their children I do not agree with those who think that this is a recapitulation of the advices which elderly women should give to those who are younger for a careful perusal of the context will enable any one easily to perceive that Paul goes on in explaining the duties of women, which apply equally to those who are older. Besides, the construction would be inappropriate, σωφρονίζωσι, σώφρονας εἶναι (240) Yet while he instructs elderly females what they ought to be, he at the same time holds out to the younger the example which they ought to follow. Thus he indiscriminately teaches both. In short, he wishes women to be restrained, by conjugal love and affection for their children, from giving themselves up to licentious attachments, he wishes them to rule their own house in a sober and orderly manner, forbids them to wander about in public places, bids them be chaste, and at the same time modest, so as to be subject to the dominion of their husbands; for those who excel in other virtues sometimes take occasion from them to act haughtily, so as to be disobedient to their husbands.
(240) “ Ινα σωφρονίζωσι τὰς νέας “ These words point at the chief purpose of the instructions — namely, that they should teach them to beσώφρονες acting as monitresses and regulators of their morals. Those instructions (as appears from what follows) were to turn on the domestic duties suitable to young married women, and each in the order of importance. The first is, as it were, their cardinal virtue; for it was well said by Socrates, (Ap. Stob. p. 488,)εὐσέβεια γυναικεία, ὁ πρὸς τὸν ἄνδρα ἔρως (‘female piety is love to her husband.’) In like manner, modesty is, by Pericles, in his Funeral Oration (Thucyd. 2:45) called ‘the virtue of the female sex.’” — Bloomfield.
When he adds, that the word of God may not be evil spoken of, it is supposed that this relates strictly to women who were married to unbelieving husbands, who might judge of the gospel from the wicked conduct of their wives; and this appears to be confirmed by 1Pe 3:1. But what if he does not speak of husbands alone? And, indeed, it is probable that he demands such strictness of life as not to bring the gospel into the contempt of the public by their vices. As to the other parts of the verse, the reader will find them explained in the Commentary on the First Epistle to Timothy. (241)
(241) See p. 135.
6. Exhort likewise younger men He merely enjoins that young men be instructed to be temperate; for temperance, as Plato shows, cures the whole understanding of man. It is as if he had said, “Let them be well regulated and obedient to reason.”
7. In all things shewing thyself For doctrine will otherwise carry little authority, if its power and majesty do not shine in the life of the bishop, (242) as in a mirror. He wishes, therefore, that the teacher may be a pattern, which his scholars may copy. (243)
A pattern of good works in doctrine, uprightness, gravity In the original Greek the style is here involved and obscure, and this creates ambiguity. First, he makes use of the words in doctrine, and then adds, in the accusative case, integrity, gravity, etc. (244) Without mentioning the interpretations given by others, I shall state that which appears to me to be the most probable. First, I connect these words, of good works in doctrine; for, after having enjoined Titus that, in teaching he shall inculcate the practice of good works, he wishes that good works, which correspond to this doctrine, may be visible in his life; and consequently the preposition in means that they shall be suitable, or shall correspond, to the doctrine. What follows is in no degree obscure; for; in order that he may exhibit a representation of his doctrine in morals, he bids him be “upright and grave.”
(242) “En la vie du pasteur.” — “In the life of the pastor.”
(243) “As if he had said, that the man who has the office and duty of proclaiming the word of God ought to preach throughout his whole life, since God has chosen him to that condition; when it shall be seen how he governs, when it is found that it is an approbation of the doctrine which he teaches, and that he profits and edifies not only by the mouth, showing what ought to be done, but likewise by his example, when it shall be known that he speaks in sincerity, and not in hypocrisy, that he may be edified by it. And would to God that this were duly observed; for the truth of God would be received with greater reverence than it is. But however that may be, we shall not be held excused, since God wishes to make use of us so as to regulate others, and to direct our life in such a manner that, when they shall follow as with one accord, we may strive to honor God, and give no occasion to despise the sacred word, since God has made us instruments, and wishes that his doctrine should be received from us, as if he spoke in his own person.” — Fr. Ser.
(244) “Atἐν τὣ διδασκαλίᾳ ἀδιαφθορίαν repeat παρεχόμενος in the sense ἐνδεικνύμενος .” —Bloomfield.
8. Sound speech, unblamable (245) “Sound speech” relates (in my opinion) to ordinary life and familiar conversation; for it would be absurd to interpret it as relating to public instruction, since he only wishes that Titus, both in his actions and in his words, shall lead a life that agrees with his preaching. He therefore enjoins that his words shall be pure and free from all corruption.
Unblamable may apply either to the words or the person of Titus. I prefer the latter view, that the other nouns in the accusative case (which the Greek syntax easily allows) may depend upon it in this sense — “that thou mayest shew thyself unblamable in gravity, in integrity, and in sound words.”
That the adversary may be ashamed. Although a Christian man ought to look at other objects, yet this must not be neglected, to shut the mouth of wicked men, as we are everywhere taught that we should give no occasion for slander. Everything that they can seize on as improper in our conduct is maliciously turned against Christ and his doctrine. The consequence is, that, through our fault, the sacred name of God is exposed to insult. Accordingly, the more we perceive that we are keenly observed by enemies, let us be the more attentive to guard against their calumnies, and thus let their malignity strengthen in us the desire of doing well.
(245) “Irreprehensible, ou qu’on ne puisse condemner.” — “Unblamable, or that cannot be condemned.”
9. Servants, that they be subject to their masters It has been already said that Paul merely glances at some things by way of example, and does not explain the whole of these subjects, as if he undertook, expressly, to handle them. Accordingly, when he enjoins servants to please their masters in all things, this desire of pleasing must be limited to those things which are proper; as is evident from other passages of a similar nature, in which an exception is expressly added, to the effect that nothing should be done but according to the will of God.
It may be observed that the Apostle dwells chiefly on this point, that they who are under the authority of others shall be obedient and submissive. With good reason he does this, for nothing is more contrary to the natural disposition of man than subjection, and there was danger lest they should take the gospel as a pretext for becoming more refractory, as reckoning it unreasonable that they should be subject to the authority of unbelievers. So much the greater care and diligence ought pastors to use for either subduing or checking this rebellious spirit.
10Not thievish but shewing all good faith He censures two vices that are common among servants, petulant replies, and a propensity to steal. (246) The comedies are full of instances of excessively ready talk, by which servants cheat their masters. Nor was it without reason that an exchange of names took place in ancient times, by which “servant “and “thief “became convertible terms. Thus prudence requires that we make our instructions apply to the morals of each individual.
Byfaith he means fidelity to their masters; and therefore, to shew all faith is to act faithfully, without using fraud or doing injury, in transacting the affairs of their masters.
That they may adorn the doctrine of God our Savior in all things This ought to be a very sharp spur of exhortation to us, when we learn that our becoming conduct adorns the doctrine of God, which, at the same time, is a mirror of his glory. And, indeed, we see that this usually happens; as, on the other hand, our wicked life brings disgrace upon it; for men commonly judge of us from our works. But this circumstance ought also to be observed, that God deigns to receive an “ornament” from shaves, whose condition was so low and mean that they were wont to be scarcely accounted men; for he does not mean “servants,” such as we have in the present day, but slaves, (247) who were bought with money, and held as property, like oxen or horses. And if the life of those men is an ornament to the Christian name, much more let those who are in honor take care that they do not stain it by their baseness.
(246) “Here we see how strictly Paul observed those of whom he was speaking. For the slaves who were in that age were addicted to pillage; and besides, they were contradictory, as if they had not dreaded the strokes with which they were chastised. We find that they sometimes grew hardened, because their masters did not use them gently, but treated them as brute beasts, struck them, teased them, put them to the torture, and frequently beat them, when they were absolutely naked, so that the blood flowed on all sides. Being thus hardened to evil, we must not be astonished if they had such corruption as to take revenge on their masters when they had any opportunity. But now Paul does not fail to exhort them to please their masters, that is, in everything that was good and right — an exception which he makes in other passages” —Fr. Ser.
(247) “Des esclaves ou serfs.” — “Slaves or serfs.”
11For the grace of God (248) hath appeared He argues from the design of redemption, which he shews to be a desire to live a godly and upright life. Hence it follows, that the duty of a good teacher is rather to exhort to a holy life than to occupy the minds of men with useless questions. “He hath redeemed us,” says Zacharias in his song, —
“that we may serve him in holiness and righteousness
all the days of our life.” (Luk 1:74.)
For the same reason Paul says, the grace of God hath appeared, teaching us; for he means that it ought to hold the place of instruction to us to regulate our life well. What is proclaimed concerning the mercy of God is seized by some as all occasion of licentiousness; while others are hindered by slothfulness from meditating on “newness of life.” But the manifestation of the grace of God unavoidably carries along with it exhortations to a holy life.
Bringing salvation to all men, (249) That it is common to all is expressly testified by him on account of the slaves of whom he had spoken. Yet he does not mean individual men, but rather describes individual classes, or various ranks of life. And this is not a little emphatic, that the grace of God hath let itself down even to the race of slaves; for, since God does not despise men of the lowest and most degraded condition, it would be highly unreasonable that we should be negligent and slothful to embrace his goodness.
(248) “We have seen that we ought to preach daily that grace which was declared at the coming of our Lord Jesus Christ. This is a wonderful mystery, that God was manifested in the flesh, and that, at the same time, he hath shewn to us his heavenly glory, that we may be united to it. In this manner all pastors ought to be employed; for when they shall unceasingly illustrate that wisdom which God hath declared to us in the person of his Son, it is certain that the time will not be lost. And this is what Paul says in another passage, (Eph 3:18,) that it is the height, and depth, and length, and breadth, and thickness of all knowledge. When we shall have extended our views to explore as far as possible — when we shall descend into the depth to search out all that is concealed from us — when we shall go beyond the length and breadth of the sea, we shall have a wisdom (he says) as high and as deep, as long and as broad as this: when we shall know the infinite love of God which God hath showed to us in the person of his only begotten Son.” — Fr. Ser.
(249) “We now see why Paul speaks of all men, and thus we may judge of the folly of some who pretend to expound the Holy Scriptures, and do not understand their style, when they say, ‘And God wishes that every person should be saved; the grace of God hath appeared for the salvation of every person; it follows, then, that there is free-will, that there is no election, that none have been predestinated to salvation.’ If those men spoke it ought to be with a little more caution. Paul did not mean in this passage, or in 1Ti 2:6, anything else than that the great are called by God, though they are unworthy of it; that men of low condition, though they are despised, are nevertheless adopted by God, who stretches out his hand to receive them. At that time, because kings and magistrates were mortal enemies of the gospel, it might be thought that God had rejected them, and that they cannot obtain salvation. But Paul says that the door must not be shut against them, and that, eventually, God may choose some of this company, though their case appear to be desperate. Thus, in this passage, after speaking of the poor slaves who were not reckoned to belong to the rank of men, he says that God did not fail, on that account, to show himself compassionate towards them, and that he wishes that the gospel should be preached to those to whom men do not deign to utter a word. Here is a poor man, who shall be rejected by us, we shall hardly say, God bless him! and God addresses him in an especial manner, and declares that he is his Father, and does not merely say a passing word, but stops him to say, ‘Thou art of my flock, let my word be thy pasture, let it be the spiritual food of thy soul.’ Thus we see that this word is highly significant, when it is said that the grace of God hath appeared fully to all men.” — Fr. Ser.
12Teaching us that, denying, ungodliness He now lays down the rule for regulating our life well, and how we ought to begin, namely, with renouncing our former life, of which he enumerates two parts, “ungodliness and worldly desires.” Under ungodliness, I include not only superstitions, in which they had gone astray, but irreligious contempt of God, such as reigns in men, till they have been enlightened in the knowledge of the truth. Although they have some profession of religion, yet they never fear and reverence God sincerely and honestly, but, on the contrary, have consciences that are useless, so that nothing is further from their thoughts than that they ought to serve God. (250)
By worldly desires (251) he means all the affections of the flesh; because we look at nothing but the world, till the Lord has drawn us to himself. Meditation on the heavenly life begins with regeneration. Before we have been regenerated, our desires lean towards the world, and rest on the world.
That we may live temperately, and righteously, and piously As he formerly mentioned those three, when he wished to give a comprehensive summary of Christian life, so he now makes it to consist of those three, “piety, righteousness, and temperance.” “Piety” is religion towards God. “Righteousness” has place among men. He who is endowed with both of these lacks nothing for perfect virtue; and, indeed, in the law of God there is absolute perfection, to which nothing whatever can be added. But as the exercises of godliness may be regarded as appendages to the first table, so “temperance,” which Paul mentions in this passage, aims at nothing else than keeping the law, and, as I said before about patience, (252) is added to the former as a seasoning. Nor does the Apostle contradict himself, when at one time he describes patience, and at another time temperance, as the perfection of a holy life; for they are not distinct virtues, sinceσωφροσύνη (here translated temperance) includes patience under it.
He adds, in this world, (253) because the Lord has appointed the present life for the trial of our faith. Although the fruit of good actions is not yet visible, yet the hope should be sufficient for stimulating us to doing well; and this is what he immediately adds, —
(250) “It presents us with the strongest motives to obedience. ‘The grace of God teacheth us to deny ungodliness.’ What chains bind faster and closer than love? Here is love to our nature in his incarnation, love to us, though enemies, in his death and passion: encouragements to obedience by the proffers of pardon for former rebellions. By the disobedience of man God introduces his redeeming grace, and engages his creature to more ingenuous and excellent returns than his innocent state could oblige him to. In his created state he had goodness to move him, he hath the same goodness now to oblige him as a creature, and a greater love and mercy to oblige him as a repaired creature; and the terror of justice is taken off, which might envenom his heart as a criminal. In his revolted state he had misery to discourage him; in his redeemed state he hath love to attract him. Without such a way, black despair had seized upon the creature exposed to a remediless misery, and God would have had no returns of love from the best of his earthly works; but if any sparks of ingenuity be left, they will be excited by the efficacy of this argument.” — Charnock.
(251) “On the expressionτὰς κοσμικὰς ἐπιθυμίας, the best comment is 1Jo 2:16Σωφρόνως denotes virtue as regards ourselves; δικαίως, as regards our fellow-creatures; andεὐσεβῶς, as respects God. Similar divisions are found in passages of the classical writers cited by the commentators.” — Bloomfield.
(252) See p. 311.
(253) “En ce present monde.” — “In this present world.”
13Looking for that blessed hope From the hope of future immortality he draws an exhortation, and indeed, if that hope be deeply seated in our mind, it is impossible that it should not lead us to devote ourselves wholly to God. On the contrary, they who do not cease to live to the world and to the flesh never have actually tasted what is the worth of the promise of eternal life; for the Lord, by calling us to heaven, withdraws us from the earth.
Hope is here put for the thing hoped for, otherwise it would be an incorrect mode of expression. He gives this appellation to the blessed life which is laid up for us in heaven. At the same time he declares when we shall enjoy it, and what we ought to contemplate, when we desire or think of our salvation.
And the appearing of the glory of the great God and Savior I interpret the glory of God, to mean not only that by which he shall be glorious in himself, but also that by which he shall then diffuse himself on all sides, so as to make all his elect partakers of it. He calls God great, because his greatness — which men, blinded by the empty splendor of the world, now extenuate, and sometimes even annihilate, as far as lies in their power — shall be fully manifested on the last day. The luster of the world, while it appears great to our eyes, dazzles them so much that “the glory of God” is, as it were, hidden in darkness. But Christ, by his coming, shall chase away all the empty show of the world — shall no longer obscure the brightness, shall no longer lessen the magnificence, of his glory. True the Lord demonstrates his majesty every day by his works; but because men are prevented by their blindness from seeing it, it is said to be hidden in obscurity. Paul wishes that believers may now contemplate by faith that which shall be manifested on the last day, and therefore that God may be magnified, whom the world either despises, or; at least, does not esteem according to his excellence.
It is uncertain whether these words should be read together thus, “the glory of our Lord Jesus Christ, the great God and our Savior,” or separately, as of the Father and the Son, “the glory of the great God, and of our Savior, the Lord Jesus Christ.” (254) The Arians, seizing on this latter sense, have endeavored to prove from it, that the Son is less than the Father, because here Paul calls the Father “the great God” by way of distinction from the Son. The orthodox teachers of the Church, for the purpose of shutting out this slander, eagerly contended that both are affirmed of Christ. But the Arians may be refuted in a few words and by solid argument; for Paul, having spoken of the revelation of the glory of “the great God,” immediately added “Christ,” in order to inform us, that that revelation of glory will be in his person; as if he had said that, when Christ shall appear, the greatness of the divine glory shall then be revealed to us.
Hence we learn, first, that there is nothing that ought to render us more active or cheerful in doing good than the hope of the future resurrection; and, secondly, that believers ought always to have their eyes fixed on it, that they may not grow weary in the right course; for, if we do not wholly depend upon it, we shall continually be carried away to the vanities of the world. But, since the coming of the Lord to judgment might excite terror in us, Christ is held out to us as our “Savior,” who will also be our judge.
(254) “Of these words the most natural sense, and that required by the ‘proprietas linguae,’ is, beyond all doubt, the one assigned by almost all the ancients from Clem. Alex. downwards, and by the early modern expositors, as Erasmus, Grotius, and Beza, and also by some eminent expositors and theologians of later times, as Bishops Pearson and Bull, Wolff, Matthaei, and Bishop Middleton, namely, ‘Looking for (or rather, looking forward to; comp. Job 2:9, and see Grotius) the blessed hope, even the glorious appearing of our great God and Savior Jesus Christ.’ The cause of the ambiguity in our common version is ably pointed out, and the above version established on the surest grounds, by Bishop Middleton and Professor Scholefield. But, besides the argument founded on the ‘propriety of language,’ that of Beza, who urges thatἐπιφάνεια is nowhere used of God, but Christ, is unanswerable. So in an able critique on Dr. Channing’s works, in the British Critic, the Reviewer justly maintains that ‘Christ must be the God here spoken of, because it is his “glorious appearing” which all Christians here are said to expect, but of God the Father we are expressly told that him “no man hath seen, nor can see.”’ Other convincing arguments for the construction here laid down may be seen in Dr. Routh’s Reliquiae Sacrae, vol. 2, p. 26. The reader is also particularly referred to Clem. Alex. Colhort. ad Gentes, sub init., where verses 11-14 are cited by that Father, and the view ofΣωτὢρος here maintained is adopted. The whole of the context there is deserving of great attention, as containing such plain and repeated attestations to the divinity of Jesus Christ as can rarely be found. The passage itself may be seen in Bishop Bull’s Def Fid. Nic., p. 87.” — Bloomfield.
14Who gave himself for us. This is another argument of exhortation, drawn from the design or effect of the death of Christ, who offered himself for us, that he might redeem us from the bondage of sin, and purchase us to himself as his heritage. His grace, therefore, necessarily brings along with it “newness of life,” (Rom 6:4,) because they who still are the slaves of sin make void the blessing of redemption; but now we are released from the bondage of sin, in order that we may serve the righteousness of God; and, therefore, he immediately added, —
A peculiar people, zealous of good works; by which he means that, so far as concerns us, the fruit of redemption is lost, if we are still entangled by the sinful desires of the world. And in order to express more fully, that we have been consecrated to good works by the death of Christ, he makes use of the word purify; for it would be truly base in us to be again polluted by the same filth from which the Son of God hath washed us by his blood. (255)
(255) “Christ expiated sin, not encouraged it; he died to make your peace, but he died to make you holy; ‘to purify a people to himself,’ (Tit 2:14.) The ends of Christ’s death cannot be separated. He is no atoner, where he is not a refiner. It is as certain as any word the mouth of God hath spoken, that ‘there is no peace to the wicked,’ (Isa 48:22.) A guilty conscience, and an impure, will keep up the amity with Satan and enmity with God. He that allows himself in any sin deprives himself of the benefit of reconciliation. This reconciliation must be mutual; as God lays down his wrath against us, so we must throw down our arms against him. As there was a double enmity, one rooted in nature, another declared by wicked works; or rather, one enmity in its root, and another in its exercise, (Col 1:21,) so there must be an alteration of state, and an alteration of acts.” — Charnock.
15Speak these things, and exhort, and reprove This conclusion is of the same meaning as if he enjoined Titus to dwell continually on that doctrine of edification, and never to grow weary, because it cannot be too much inculcated. He likewise bids him add the spurs of “exhortations and reproofs;” for men are not sufficiently admonished as to their duty, if they be not also vehemently urged to the performance of it. He who understands those things which the Apostle has formerly stated, and who has them always in his mouth, will have ground not only for teaching, but likewise for correcting.
With all authority I do not agree with Erasmus, who translatesἐπιταγή “diligence in commanding.” There is greater probability in the opinion of Chrysostom who interprets it to mean severity against more atrocious sins; through I do not think that even he has hit the Apostle’s meaning; which is, that Titus should claim authority and respect for himself in teaching these things. For men given to curious inquiries, and eager about trifles, dislike the commandments to lead a pious and holy life as being too common and vulgar. In order that Titus may meet this disdain, he is enjoined to add the weight of his authority to his doctrine. It is with the same view (in my opinion) that he immediately adds, —
Let no man despise thee Others think that Titus is instructed to gain the ear of men, and their respect for him, by the integrity of his life; and it is indeed true that holy and blameless conduct imparts authority to instruction. But Paul had another object in view; for here he addresses the people rather than Titus. Because many had ears so delicate, that they despised the simplicity of the gospel; because they had such an itch for novelty, that hardly any space was left for edification; he beats down the haughtiness of such men, and strictly charges them to desist from despising, in any way, sound and useful doctrine. This confirms the remark which I made at the outset, that this Epistle was written to the inhabitants of Crete rather than to any single individual.
