Put them in mind to be subject to rulers, to authorities, to be obedient to rule, to be ready to do every good work,
Paul's closing instructions to Titus move to life under the rulers of Crete. They begin with a reminder, not with new teaching. What does subjection to rulers cover? Where does it stop? And why is readiness for good work joined to it?
Paul does not tell Titus to teach this from scratch. He tells him to keep bringing it back to mind. The reason lies in who these believers were, and in how easily people separate obedience inside the church from obedience in the world.
Now the apostle charges Titus, himself a Greek, to lay similar instructions again and again on the Cretan believers, whose countrymen were known for insubordination and other vices too. Such an exhortation was never needed more than now. The lawlessness of the age grows so fast that it shocks every right-minded person. Lawlessness in the world is no less blatant than a similar spirit in the church... But it is quite possible for people to hold a rigid theory of obedience inside the church and to trample underfoot and deny a similar responsibility in the world.
The motive is not that a government is competent or kind. Authority itself comes from God. So neither the form of government nor the character of the ruler changes the believer's duty.
Scripture is plain and decided: it is not enough to submit because of wrath; we submit for conscience. God is concerned in our subjection, for there is no authority except from God... whether monarchy, republic, or any mixture of the two, they are ordained by God... God ordered it in His providence that one of the cruellest tyrants was on the throne when the apostle wrote to the saints at Rome. Even so: "Let every person be subject to the governing authorities." The worst ruler is better than anarchy. Still, the word of God does not speak from this reason of usefulness.
Some older translations read this phrase as "to obey magistrates." Read that way, it merely repeats the clause before it — and a separate instruction is lost.
Titus was to remind them to be obedient in a general way. There is no good reason to translate it "to obey magistrates," as the King James Version does. That only loses an exhortation by making it repeat the clause before. Do people plead the rights of man? The true place of the saint is "to obey." But obedience always, and everywhere, is the duty of the saint. If he is not sure of the will of God, he ought to wait until he learns it.
Subjection is not unlimited. The believer does not weigh whether a ruler deserves obedience, but one demand can turn obedience into disobedience to God.
Obedience to the powers that be is the plain direction of the word of God for His people (Rom. 13:1; Titus 3:1; 1 Peter 2:13-17). It is not for us to raise questions about how the authority was set up, or about the character of the one holding it. Our part is to obey. But the will of man sometimes clashes with the word of God and tries to force that will on our consciences. Then we must obey God rather than man (Acts 4:19).
Subjection is not the whole of it. The verse moves to something active, and Christ's own life sets the standard.
The saint is called not only to be a righteous man in practice, but a good man. So our Lord here below went about doing good. If we cannot, like Him, heal those who were oppressed by the devil, we are still exhorted here to be ready for every good work. Where people hold and confess the truth and are also active in doing good, that is a real and effective testimony to Christ.
This attitude does not shift with circumstances. Each line answers a different provocation.
As strangers in this world, it is no part of our responsibility to interfere with its government. Whatever the character of the worldly powers, our place is to be subject and obedient to rule. Whatever evil may mark their works, our place is to be ready for every good work. Whatever the character of the rulers themselves, we are not to speak evil of anyone. Whatever violence or injustice we may meet, our place is to act in a spirit of gentleness and meekness. That spirit refuses to insist on our rights.
Verse 1 speaks about others. Two verses later Paul changes pronoun, and the shift is deliberate.
Obedience and subjection to authorities, and gentleness and meekness to all people, are features very much the opposite of everything the Cretans were by nature. They are also very much the opposite of what we all are, and the apostle puts this on record in verse 3. "We ourselves," he says — in contrast with the "them" of verse 1.
- Remind — this is not advanced teaching. It is a truth believers drift from: strict about order in the church, lawless in the world.
- Because God — we submit for conscience, not just to avoid punishment. Authority comes from God, whatever its form and whoever holds it.
- Obey, generally — "to be obedient" is its own command. It calls for a settled spirit of obedience, not just for obeying magistrates.
- Until God — we do not judge whether a ruler deserves obedience. But when a command clashes with God's word, we obey God rather than man.
- Then good — subjection is only half of it. The Christian is to be not only righteous but good, ready for every good work. That is what makes the testimony to Christ real.
to speak evil of no one, not to be contentious, [to be] mild, shewing all meekness towards all men.
Paul tells Titus to keep reminding believers how to live in public. The orders are short and blunt: no slander, no quarrelling, gentleness, courtesy to everyone. Where does an ordinary person find the power to live like that?
These orders are about life outside the church. One writer warns against demanding order in one place while ignoring it in the other.
Lawlessness in the world is just as blatant as the same spirit in the church. No doubt it is especially hateful in the temple of God, where the Holy Spirit lives. But people can hold a strict theory of obedience inside the church and still trample on and deny the same duty out in the world. God has not taught them this. It may be even more common to insist on obedience to the world's authority and to deny it in the church, on the excuse that the church is in ruins. God's word condemns all such self-will.
The same writer knows how hard this command is, and he separates evil speaking from speaking for God.
This is not easy in a world full of evil, where much of that evil hits God's children in both word and deed. But God's word to us is plain: "speak evil of no one." There may be a duty to testify for a godly purpose. Let us make sure that is the only reason anyone can accuse us of speaking against another. No part of Scripture rebukes wrong more sharply than this letter, when wrong calls for it. That is not evil speaking; it is of God and for God.
The rule has no exceptions, and what separates honest correction from slander is the aim behind the words.
We are firmly told to "speak evil of no one": in no case is it right. Even when evil has to be exposed, we must do it with a real desire for the guilty person's recovery and blessing, not in a spirit of condemnation. There is to be no quarrelsome attitude, but gentleness, and "perfect courtesy toward all people." This does not mean giving in to evil, but it is not self-defence either.
The Greek word behind "gentle" resists any single English translation.
epieikes comes from epi and eiko, meaning to yield. It is the word rendered "gentle" here in Titus 3:2, and it is paired with amachos, "not a brawler" or "not given to fighting." No single English word carries it. It means fairness as against the strict letter of the law — a readiness to give up all harshness and severity, even where the law would rightly back you. It is the opposite of standing on your rights: "mild," "gentle."
A yielding spirit also decides how peaceful your own life is.
In our dealings with everyone we are to show a gentle, yielding spirit. If I am always standing on my dignity and my rights, I will be upset again and again. But if I show everyone the grace and gentleness of Him who had a right to everything and claimed nothing, I will walk through this world in the same calm that marked Him.
Christ Himself shows that firmness about wrong and tenderness toward people belong together.
Here again Christ has left us an example, that we should follow in His steps. No one exposed hypocrisy and self-righteousness more sharply. Yet no one was so tender and considerate toward those who wronged Him most. He was gentle and humble in heart, and He calls His own to take His yoke on them and learn from Him. That is the way to find rest for their souls, in a world where so much upsets and grieves us.
Grace does not just restrain this behaviour; it removes what drives it.
In how Christians behave toward the world, grace has driven out violence. It has driven out the spirit of rebellion and resistance that stirs up the heart of those who do not believe. That spirit comes from the self-will which fights to hold on to its own rights against others.
And the memory of what we once were keeps the gentleness honest.
For we are reminded that we too were once in the condition that now we dislike in others. This should both humble us, and give us a spirit of patient consideration towards them… In us, nothing could change this but the grace of God in Christ: others too need the same grace if their condition is to be any different.
- Grace banishes — violence, rebellion and self-defence all come from self-will insisting on its own rights. Grace pulls them out at the root.
- Grace silences — "speak evil of no one" has no exceptions. Honest rebuke for God's sake is not slander.
- Grace yields — "gentle" means giving up strictness even where the law would back you. It is the opposite of standing on your rights.
- Grace reaches — past fellow believers to everyone: rulers, strangers, even those who wrong you.
- Grace remembers — we were once what we now dislike in others. Only grace made the difference, and they need that same grace.
For we were once ourselves also without intelligence, disobedient, wandering in error, serving various lusts and pleasures, living in malice and envy, hateful, [and] hating one another.
Paul has just told Titus to urge believers to be gentle toward everyone (v. 1–2), and then he gives his reason in a single word: "For." What follows is not a picture of other people but a portrait of ourselves before grace found us — seven marks of the human heart without God.
The verse is an argument, not a digression. It supplies the first of two grounds for the meek behaviour just commanded.
In the last chapter (Titus 3) the exhortation continues, now about what lies more outside... Two reasons confirm believers in this. The first is that we ourselves were once so evil; the second is that God has been so good to us.
This shapes how we treat the people whose faults annoy us most.
It reminds us that we too were once in the condition that we now dislike in others. This should humble us, and give us a spirit of patient consideration toward them. The evils listed in verse 3 mark all people. Some show up more in one person than in another, but all have the same nature that produces them. Nothing but the grace of God in Christ could change this in us. Others need that same grace if their condition is to be any different.
The list is not a study of criminals. It answers a question.
It is a look backward at what they were before they were born again. These are the true marks of man in his natural state. Here is an answer to the question, What is sin? Sin is foolishness, disobedience and deception. It is slavery to lusts and to pleasures that never satisfy. It is a life of malice, envy and hatred. It is lawlessness. And that is the natural man in every age.
Note who signs his name to it. The writer of the sentence puts himself inside it.
The mind of Paul was of no mean order, and not uncultivated; yet by the Spirit he thus writes: — "We were once ourselves also without intelligence, disobedient, wandering in error, serving various lusts and pleasures, living in malice and envy, hateful [and] hating one another."
The folly named here has nothing to do with a low IQ. Education can even sharpen the contrast.
To the Greek mind especially, perhaps no description was less welcome than the one the apostle starts with: our folly, our lack of understanding before God... Picture a man full of science, sound information and learning, as in Romans 2. Yet he is prey to every falsehood about God, entirely without Him, and dead to any living relationship with Him... On earth the animals look down; man alone looks up. Sin has ruined this completely, while the responsibility remains.
Disobedience here is not a single stumble. It is the settled shape of a whole life.
This is the universal condition of man; so he lives and dies in his natural state, never once obeying God here below. Christ alone delivers us from a state so desperate. He is Himself the obedient Man, though far more than man, and He delivers by giving us His own life through faith.
The strangest thing about this slavery is that the slave feels free. Doing your own will is how the chain holds.
We were "slaves to various passions and pleasures" — all the more slaves because we flattered ourselves that we were the freest of people. We did our own will and pleased ourselves. We chose our pleasures here or there as we liked. What was this but to be slaves of the devil, each of us chasing his own passions and pleasures? To do our own will is to fall into his slavery. Christ was the blessed contrast. He did not please Himself but always did the will of God, whatever it cost.
Envy and malice come from a heart with no real love in it, however well it thought of itself. (Older translations read "hateful" where the ESV has "hated by others.")
Conflict of will broke through the calmest surface of good nature. Gusts of feeling, even of passion, swept us along now and then. In short we were, as it says here, "passing our days in malice and envy," whatever good opinion we had of ourselves or prized in one another. We had no love in any divine or real sense of doing good without thought of self. We disliked whatever condemned us. We envied in others what we did not have.
Verse 3 exists for the sake of verse 4. The dark list is there so the love that follows can be weighed against it.
Notice the sevenfold description of man's fallen condition, the exact and terrible picture of human depravity, guilt and ruin... Yet see the glorious, the surprising contrast: "But after the kindness and love of God toward man appeared." Divine love goes far beyond human depravity — in spite of all the judgment we deserved, in spite of the hateful condition... weigh the one against the other and see how greatly the love of God outweighs the guilt of man.
- Mirror — The verse looks back at what we were, not at what others are. Every item on the list belonged to the writer too.
- Diagnosis — Seven words define sin: foolishness, disobedience, deception, slavery, malice, envy and hatred. That is the natural man in every age.
- Chains — Those who do their own will feel the freest of all. That is what makes the slavery complete.
- Contrast — The list is dark so that the "but" of verse 4 can outweigh it. Set God's love beside human ruin, and the love far outweighs it.
- Conduct — Grace alone made the difference in us. So the same evils in others call for gentleness, not contempt.
But when the kindness and love to man of our Saviour God appeared,
Verse 3 has just described what we all once were, right down to hateful. Then the sentence turns. Two things about God broke into that scene: His goodness and His love for man.
The turn comes at the worst possible moment, and that is the point.
Man's extremity was God's opportunity, as always, then above all. When judgment might have seemed most due, His kindness and His dear love toward man appeared. Rescues on earth fell far short of the dire need. Prophets had spoken about it in vain. The most striking powers, miracles and signs were in vain too. Man was lost. Would God appear to save him?
Translations do not agree on how the two words relate.
God's love toward man is a single word, philanthrōpia. The Authorised Version falls short here: it merges "the philanthropy" of God into His kindness. But in the Greek each of the two has its own article, so they are presented separately, however closely connected they are.
That word gives us our English word "philanthropy." It means more than general goodwill.
Hateful we were, every one of us. Each of us was blind to the hateful features in ourselves. Yet we were quite alive to what was hateful in other people, and so the world is full of hatred. Now God looks down on this scene, and the light of His kindness and love breaks into that world of hatred. That God should love the unlovable is wonderful. That He should love the truly hateful is more wonderful still! … The word shows more than that God loves man as He loves all His creatures. It shows that He has a special affection for man — a warm corner in His heart kept for man, if we may put it that way.
The word points to something already done, and done in the open.
God, who is holy and unbending in righteousness, is also the God of gracious goodness in His own nature, and He has a most special love toward man. This is no longer hidden. It is no longer something to wait for. It has appeared so fully that God Himself could not add to the full expression of His love. "The law was given through Moses; grace and truth came through Jesus Christ." It is true that no one has ever seen God. But that in no way hindered His kindness at work, or the proof of His love to man. On the contrary, it only gave occasion for its richest display. "The only Son, who is at the Father's side, He has made Him known."
The verse does not say a kind Jesus rescued us from a stern God. The Saviour named here is God Himself.
"God our Saviour" is a wonderful title. That He should Himself seek to save rebels against His own majesty is a marvel indeed. … He was under no obligation to save any of His rebellious creatures. He might have declared Himself "God our Judge" to men as He has to angels. … "God our Saviour" is not so familiar a thought to some as "Jesus our Saviour." The popular idea is a severe God and a gracious Jesus. … "God our Saviour" means that the very One we have sinned against has Himself, in His great love, provided all that His throne demanded. Who would distrust such a God?
The same letter gives that title to both God and Christ.
It is striking how this letter uses the term Saviour for both God and the Lord Jesus, in a way that assures us that Jesus is God. In Titus 3, it is "God our Saviour" in verse 4, and "Christ our Saviour" in verse 6. In Titus 2, it is "our great God and Saviour Jesus Christ" in verse 13.
Sun and rain fall on everyone, but that is not the kindness this verse means.
I don't deny that God is good. He sends His rain on the just and the unjust. He makes His sun shine on the evil as well as on the good. But that is only in the way of providence. The real kindness and love of God come out in the giving of His own blessed Son, and in that Son dying on the tree — the just for the unjust. The kindness of God! Do you know it? Have you tasted it?
God's dealing with us sets the pattern for how we deal with others.
What has made us different from others is not some merit in ourselves, some personal superiority: we were once just as they are. It is the tender love and grace of the God of mercy. … We act towards others who are still in the mire of this world as God has acted towards us to bring us out of it.
- Timing. The kindness appeared exactly where judgment seemed due — man's extremity was God's opportunity.
- Two words. Kindness and philanthrōpia stand apart. God shows not just general goodness, but a special affection for man.
- Appeared. No longer hidden and no longer awaited — displayed so fully that God could add nothing more to it.
- Saviour. "God our Saviour" is the very One we sinned against. This letter gives Christ the same title, assuring us who Jesus is.
- Result. Since nothing in us earned it, we treat others still in the mire exactly as God treated us to get us out.
not on the principle of works which [have been done] in righteousness which *we* had done, but according to his own mercy he saved us through [the] washing of regeneration and renewal of [the] Holy Spirit,
Paul has just described the kind of people he and Titus once were, and the picture is not flattering. Then God becomes the subject of the sentence: if our own record ruled us out, what did He act on instead?
Paul does not say our works were too few. He says the kind of works needed were never there at all.
God rules out a man's works as a ground for salvation, and how merciful that is. By nature we stood before God as unrighteous. How could an unrighteous man do works in righteousness? There is indeed one work done in righteousness, and it is infinite. Christ, the Righteous One, came to do God's will and did it all perfectly. As He said when dying, "It is finished."
God acted on His own mercy instead. Nothing in us could change our nature — Cretan or otherwise.
The Holy Spirit begins by excluding all works of righteousness of our own, for these could not change the nature of a Cretan, nor of any other son of Adam. Mercy would come down to us where we were; there was divine pity and compassion for such wretches.
In most passages salvation is a work achieved outside us. This one is different.
In Scripture salvation is generally connected with a work accomplished for us... This passage, however, is an exception to that general rule. Here we are saved by a work done upon us and in us. The work in us is quite as necessary as the work for us. This is very plain if we consider the picture of Israel's deliverance from Egypt. God's mighty work for them saved them out of the land of slavery. Yet despite all the wonders done on their behalf, the vast majority of them fell in the wilderness and never reached the land of promise.
The word "regeneration" appears just once more in the New Testament, and that other use shapes its meaning here.
The word is used in only one other place in the New Testament, Matthew 19:28. There it points to the new order of things that God will set up in the day of Christ's glory. We do not have that new order yet. But we have come under the washing, the cleansing, the moral and spiritual renewal that fits that day.
Commentators differ on what the "washing" itself points to. Some read it as the new birth, the thing Jesus explained to a man named Nicodemus, and they rule out any link with baptism:
The washing (or bath) of regeneration is the new birth. Of this our Lord spoke to Nicodemus (John 3)... The washing has nothing whatever to do with water-baptism. Water-baptism cannot save a sinner, or help save him, or produce regeneration.
Others read it as a change of standing, with baptism as its picture rather than its cause:
The "washing of regeneration" does not refer to that inward work done in the soul when a person is born through the word of truth. That inward work comes in the next clause, "the renewing of the Holy Spirit." The washing refers instead to the new place or position into which God brings the believer through the death and resurrection of the Lord Jesus. And of this, baptism is not the means but the sign, or "figure," as Peter speaks (1 Peter 3:21).
Whichever reading you take, the two phrases do not repeat each other.
It is not to be thought that these two things are exactly the same. The washing of regeneration looks at our old condition, and it places us outside of that condition. The renewing of the Holy Spirit looks more at that inward work which the Spirit of God makes ours.
That inward work does not stop at the new birth.
What is the renewing of the Holy Spirit? It is distinct from regeneration. The Holy Spirit is the active agent in the new birth. He gives the new nature and then lives in the believer, and He does His blessed work by renewing the inward man day by day (2 Corinthians 4:16).
Paul tells Titus to keep insisting on this, and the reason is practical.
The apostle is laying down the only ground of power for a life that bears fruit. So he urges Titus to insist, always and fully, on the sure but exclusive truth of salvation by grace, in all its fullness and reality... Without it there is no readiness or power for good works. Without it the conscience is clouded and the heart hardened.
- Mercy, not merit. Works in righteousness were never an option for the unrighteous; Christ alone did the one perfect work.
- Mercy came down. Nothing in us could change our nature, so God's compassion reached us where we were.
- Mercy works inside. Here salvation is a work done upon us and in us. Israel was saved out of Egypt by a work done for them, yet most of them fell in the wilderness.
- Mercy in two parts. The washing puts us outside our old condition; the renewing is the Spirit's inward work. Commentators differ over whether the washing is new birth itself or a change of position pictured in baptism.
- Mercy produces fruit. Grace received in full is the only power for good works; where it is unknown, the conscience stays clouded.
which he poured out on us richly through Jesus Christ our Saviour;
Verse 5 has just spoken of the washing of regeneration and the renewing of the Holy Spirit. Verse 6 turns to the Spirit Himself. One small word, "richly," sets the measure. Two questions follow. How much does God give? And on what ground can He give it?
The verse interrupts the flow of the sentence. One reading treats it as a deliberate aside about the Spirit's power, dropped into a sentence that runs on into verse 7.
The Holy Spirit is shed on us abundantly through Jesus Christ our Saviour. The grace of this Saviour has justified us, so that we should be heirs according to the hope of eternal life. I think the word "that" in verse 7 points back to "the washing of regeneration and the renewing of the Holy Spirit." The sentence, "which He shed on us abundantly through Jesus Christ our Saviour," is a parenthesis added alongside it. It shows us that we enjoy these things in their fullness by the power of the Holy Spirit.
Verse 5 speaks of a work done in us. Verse 6 adds more than a work: God gives a Person.
Here we have three very distinct statements. First, He has saved us. Second, He saved us "by the washing of regeneration and renewing of the Holy Spirit" — that is, as in John 3, "born of water and the Spirit." This means moral cleansing, or purification, and a new life or nature. Third, "which He poured out on us richly through Jesus Christ our Saviour." Here we have more than the life-giving work of the Holy Spirit. We have the special Christian privilege, the Spirit of adoption, by whom we can call God Abba, Father. We have the gift of the Spirit, with all the fullness of spiritual blessing that comes with His abiding presence in us and with us.
The word rules out any idea of a rationed supply, and the reason lies in who the Spirit is.
The Spirit has been poured out on us abundantly through Jesus Christ our Saviour. God does not give the Spirit by measure, for the Spirit is a living Person, and not limited by human limitations. And this blessing has come through Jesus Christ our Saviour. God has given Him all His riches, and He delights to share them generously with His saints.
New birth is not new with Christianity. What is new is the measure, and it had to wait.
What we have here is not being born anew, or born of God. That, in my judgment, is common to all saints at all times. What we have here is the form and fullness that now belongs to the Christian... New birth is universal. But the new place, and the gift of the Holy Spirit in this rich way, waited until redemption was accomplished.
The verse names one channel: Jesus Christ our Savior. That shuts out every other ground for the gift, and it makes the gift certain.
He does not merely work in us with real effect; He also remains with us for ever. This is of immense value. It stands in clear contrast with Old Testament privilege, where believers feel the danger of His leaving and pray against it, as we see in Psalm 51... Certainly this could not be except "through Jesus Christ our Saviour." Those words are added here for two reasons. First, so that we would imagine no other ground. Second, so that we would have the fullest assurance of abundant and unfailing grace, in the power of the Spirit Himself, through such a Saviour.
Two things are easy to mix up: the Spirit Himself, and the signs and miracles that once served as outward proofs.
No mistake could be more damaging than to confuse the gift of the Holy Spirit with those gifts and signs and miracles which were outward proofs... The presence of the Spirit Himself, our Helper, is far higher and deeper than all the mighty deeds He worked.
The abundance is not stored up for a future day. It shows itself in the ordinary progress of a Christian's life.
Given in this way, He energises the new life we now have. He works a day-by-day renewing within us. That renewing works out a continuous and growing salvation from the old life we once lived... He has been poured on us abundantly, and so we may enjoy what really is life in abundant measure.
- Ground — God pours out the Spirit only "through Jesus Christ our Savior." No other ground is open, and redemption came first.
- Gift — verse 5 gives a new nature; verse 6 gives a Person, who brings the cry "Abba, Father" and stays for ever.
- Measure — "richly" means no measure at all; Christ, who holds all the riches of God, shares generously.
- Not signs — the Spirit's own presence stands far above the signs and miracles. Never confuse the gift with them.
- Result — enjoy that fullness now. The Spirit energises the new life day by day, in the hope of eternal life.
that, having been justified by *his* grace, we should become heirs according to [the] hope of eternal life.
This verse ends Paul's account of what God has done for the believer: grace has justified us, and that makes us heirs. To be justified is to be declared righteous — so on what ground can God say that of the guilty, and what inheritance does this hope hold out?
Scripture speaks of justification in more than one way. Each phrase answers a different question. One writer sets the three side by side, and this verse names the source of them all.
We may note in passing that Scripture speaks of justification in three ways, since man by nature is unrighteous. It is justified by His grace (Titus 3:7), if we speak of the source. It is justified by His blood (Rom. 5:9), if we look for the cause that obtained it in the work of our Lord Jesus Christ. And it is justified by faith, if we ask how each soul is brought into the blessing (Rom. 5:1).
Grace is the source. So nothing in the person justified adds to it, and the source itself never dries up.
Our text, Titus 3:7, points us to the cause that produces justification. It is the grace of God, and not any merit in those who receive it. This shuts out all boasting for ever. So it is a source that never fails. It rests on Christ's work, which justifies God just as much as it justifies the repentant soul who lays hold of Christ by faith.
The tense matters. Paul does not say we are being justified, or that we hope to be. He states a finished fact. And once grace is the cause, earning has no place.
Here it stands as a fact, with emphasis. "Being, or having been, justified by His grace." It is already done. Now grace on His part rules out any deserving on ours... Work rightly calls for wages or reward. But what can justify the ungodly — and that is what we once were — except God's sovereign favour?
The verse follows a description of what God does inside a person by His Spirit. Commentators note that this inward work, real as it is, could never by itself have made anyone an heir.
The work in us is quite as necessary as the work for us. And the work for us is quite as necessary as the work in us. Verse 7 shows this. We could not become heirs of God merely by the work of the Spirit in us. We needed to be justified before God, and the grace that worked for us in Christ accomplished that. Once we were washed, renewed and justified, grace could go further and make us heirs. But all three were equally necessary.
Paul writes "heirs" and stops. He does not say heirs of something. Some have felt this to be a gap; one writer argues the silence is the point.
Some object to "heirs" standing alone; but it is all the more absolute because it does... It is not inheriting this or that but "heirs also," and, to make it rich beyond limit, "heirs of God and Christ's joint-heirs."... All is sovereign grace. It is He who made us His heirs; and we are to inherit what Christ will inherit in glory. In writing to Titus, the apostle leaves "heirs" undefined, and that makes the word all the larger.
The inheritance itself is not material. It matches the life it belongs to.
So He has saved us by this renewing, that we may be heirs according to the hope of eternal life. It is nothing outward, earthly, or bodily. Grace has given us eternal life. There is energy, power, hope, through the rich gift of the Holy Spirit. So that we may share in it, we have been justified by His grace, and our inheritance is in the incorruptible joy of eternal life.
Eternal life is already the believer's; yet the verse calls it a hope. The reason lies in the body, which has not yet caught up with the soul.
It is "hope," because that life does not reach its full completion until Christ comes. Then the body will be as alive with it as the inner man already is by faith. Only then does hope reach its glorious fulfilment.
- Source. Grace is where justification starts — Christ's blood is the ground, faith the way in, but no merit in us plays any part.
- Settled. "Having been justified" states a finished fact. Wages belong to work; God justifies the ungodly by His own favour.
- Necessary. The Spirit's work inside us could never make anyone an heir on its own. God had to justify us as well.
- Unlimited. "Heirs" stands with nothing named — not this or that portion, but what Christ Himself will inherit in glory.
- Awaited. The inheritance is not earthly. It is the incorruptible joy of eternal life — called hope until the body shares it when Christ comes.
The word [is] faithful, and I desire that thou insist strenuously on these things, that they who have believed God may take care to pay diligent attention to good works. These things are good and profitable to men.
After setting out how God saved us by His own mercy and justified us by His grace, Paul turns to Titus with a charge about what to do with that message. It ties the deepest truth of the gospel to plain daily conduct. That raises a hard question: if works save no one, why press them so hard?
Does "the saying" point back to the salvation just described, or forward to the good works? One writer rejects the second reading, and shows what is at stake.
Some older translations could leave you thinking that the faithful saying was only the call of believers to maintain good works. That is an unworthy sense, and both the text and the truth as a whole disprove it. The apostle is laying down the only ground of power for a life that bears fruit. So he presses Titus to insist, constantly and thoroughly, on the sure but exclusive truth of salvation by grace, in all its fulness and reality.
Paul limits the charge to "those who have believed in God." What does believing God mean here?
Believing "God" means receiving His testimony, especially in the gospel, as just laid down, no less needed by Jews than by Gentiles.
Does free salvation make people casual about how they live? One writer answers that from this verse.
It seems that Titus was to keep bringing before these converted Cretans the way they had been washed and renewed and justified and made heirs. The aim was to stir them up to maintain the good works that match such grace — works that are not only in keeping with grace but also good and profitable to people. This shows clearly what is often said: all fitting conduct flows from understanding the place God has set us in. Here again we see that knowing grace promotes practical holiness and does not lead to carelessness.
This verse can look like a clash with Paul's teaching that works do not save. The clash disappears once you see whom he is speaking about.
Works done to gain justification are ruled out altogether. Works that flow from the faith that justifies are pressed hard, and not only by James but by Paul too... The works to be maintained are those done by "those who have believed"; that is, they are the works of faith.
Older translations render the charge "maintain good works," where the ESV has "devote themselves to good works." Paul uses "good works" again at the end of the chapter, and one writer warns against reading verse 8 down to that narrower sense.
I must also object here to lowering this expression ("to maintain good works"), as if it only echoed verse 14. It is not so. In verse 8 good works have nothing to do with "necessary uses"; they must be taken in their full extent. They are the honourable works that suit a believer. They are not merely kind acts. They fit people who are the objects of divine favour and of everlasting blessing, in a world where evil abounds and God is unknown except to faith.
The call goes beyond dropping what you used to do. It asks for action, and other people will see it.
This is not just a matter of giving up the wrongdoing that once held us while we were in our sins. It is a matter of actively doing good for the sake of others. These things are good and profitable to people, because these are what people see. They do not see the inner motives; God alone sees those.
Titus was working on Crete, and the island had a reputation. That background gives the charge its edge.
They could not stick to the truth. They rampaged about and injured one another like wild beasts. They did not want to work, but they wanted to eat a lot. That was the character of the Cretans.
Grace justified us. One writer says that leaves us owing something back.
It may not be too much to say that, if His grace justifies us, our faithfulness from then on ought to justify Him, however poor our measure may be.
- Cause — The trustworthy saying is the salvation Paul has just described. That message is "the only ground of power for a life that bears fruit."
- Charge — Titus must not mention grace once. He must keep insisting on it, because right conduct flows from knowing the place God has given us.
- Qualification — Paul speaks only to "those who have believed in God." Works done to gain justification are shut out; works that flow from faith are pressed hard.
- Content — Not just stopping the old wrongdoing, but actively doing good, taken "in their full extent," even in a place as rough as Crete.
- Consequence — People see these works, though they cannot see motives. And the works answer God's grace: if He justified us, our faithfulness should justify Him.
But foolish questions, and genealogies, and strifes, and contentions about the law, shun; for they are unprofitable and vain.
Paul has just told Titus to press the truths that lead believers into good works. Now he names the opposite: a short list of religious topics that produce nothing. The question this verse forces is not "is this topic true?" but "is this topic profitable?"
This verse is the negative half of a pair. One writer traces the whole problem back to a wrong use of the law of Moses.
Here the apostle condemns the misuse of the law. It puffs up the man who builds on it while he stays blind to his sin and helplessness. In the same way, it breeds foolish questions, genealogies, strifes and legal fights. Gospel truths are "good and profitable to men"; legal squabbles are "unprofitable and vain."
Each item in the list fails for its own reason. One commentator takes them one at a time and then points to a man who knew how to handle a loaded question.
Foolish questions need no answer: they should be avoided. Tracing genealogies is vain too, for it is only glorying in flesh, which profits nothing. Contentions are merely the resource of those trying to win an argument. The same is true of strivings about the law. Such striving makes mere law-keeping the object, and it ignores Christ, the Centre of all pure truth. All this is vain. How much better if the servant of the Lord would follow the example of John the Baptist. Others tried to draw him into questions meant to stir up contention, and he always turned attention back to the Lord Jesus.
Commentators differ on what the genealogies were. Some argue they cannot be the family records of the Old Testament, because those had a clear end point.
In 1 Timothy 1:4 and Titus 3:9 the reference is probably not to Jewish genealogies. Those records could not be called "endless," and they were not made-up tales. More likely the reference is to the ages the Gnostics taught, which reach back into eternity. Three of these ages they claimed to be Christ, the Holy Spirit, and Jesus.
Others take it as pride in family descent — a pride the church has no room for.
A believer in Christ might be able to prove he descended from David or Aaron. Even then, this gave him no right to claim a higher position in the church than another member of the body who descended from Ammon or Moab, or even the cursed Canaan. So the assembly was to keep no distinctions of this kind, since all were one in Christ.
The instruction is to avoid, not to answer. One writer explains why the skilled debater is in the most danger here.
Some men know they can take evil apart and oppose it. They are prone to meddle with these empty, profane things. It is not wholesome for themselves. It may also injure the saints. They value the workers, so they may soak their minds in these dreary efforts — efforts which as a rule puff up the guilty parties instead of convincing them... Time is too precious for anything except what builds up. The man who takes on every evil dreamer in argument may succeed in defeating them. But he is in serious danger of doing himself real harm.
Verse 8 and verse 9 are not two separate jobs. Doing the first is how Titus was to manage the second.
Titus was to keep maintaining and affirming the truth. That way he would be able to avoid all those foolish questions and contentions about the law, which were so common in those days. There is nothing like diligence in what is good to shut out evil.
The old arguments have died out. That does not mean the verse has expired.
We no longer discuss whether we ought to be subject to the law of Moses. We no longer ask whether the Jew is a better man than the Gentile, more favoured of God than his Gentile brothers. But the devil has seen to it that men draw up other laws. Other questions, just as unprofitable, have taken the place of the old ones. And we often like it that way. "The Jew" lives more or less in every one of us. He will fight for the religious position he favours and claims. He fights on even though the fellowship of God's Son, Jesus Christ our Lord, suffers as a result.
- Profitable. Paul's test is not truth but usefulness. Verse 8 points to teaching that profits people. Verse 9 names talk that leaves them empty.
- Rooted. These quarrels grow out of a misuse of the law. The law puffs up the man who builds on it, and it breeds questions instead of works.
- Debated. Commentators differ on the genealogies. Some see the endless ages taught by the Gnostics. Others see pride in family descent, which ranks one believer above another.
- Avoided. The command is to shun, not to refute. The skilled debater risks real harm to himself. He also dries out the people who admire him.
- Displaced. Steady affirming of the truth crowds the empty questions out. Those questions change clothes in every generation, but they do the same damage.
An heretical man after a first and second admonition have done with,
Paul's instruction to Titus is blunt: warn the man twice, then be done with him. Everything turns on who this "person who stirs up division" is, and on what it means to "have nothing more to do with him."
The Greek word here comes from a verb meaning "to choose." The same word is also used for a religious "sect."
The word hairesis comes from "to choose." The New Testament translates the same Greek word as "sect," and uses it of the Jewish sects, such as the Sadducees and the Pharisees... Since the root means "to choose," a heresy is something a person picks out as his own. The doctrine a man holds and pushes may be true in itself, but he may exaggerate it or take it out of its connection. The usual result is that a party or sect is formed. God has given in His word everything the church needs, so there is no room for man's choice or man's will: he must be a humble receiver.
The word points at party-making, not at wrong belief. So a man may believe nothing false and still fall under this verse.
By "heretical man" the apostle means anyone active in originating or adopting a sect, even if he were orthodox.
Another writer defines the heretic not by what he denies, but by what his will produces.
A heretical man, then, need not be one who denies any article of the Christian faith. He is a heretic who allows his mind or will to work in connection with doctrine, and so produces or supports a sect.
Wrong teaching and party spirit are two different evils, and they move in opposite directions.
The apostle uses "heresy" for a party of self-will, a faction that cuts itself off from the assembly... But wrong doctrine (the later church sense of "heresy") does not always lead the man who holds it to form a party outside. A divisive spirit heads straight there. A split inside soon becomes a split outside, while wrong teaching hides inside, so as to spread through the whole group like yeast if it can.
The command is not the formal removal of someone from fellowship. Paul uses the same verb elsewhere for turning away from silly stories and pointless arguments.
This also explains, at least in part, why there is not a word here about putting the evildoer away. Titus was to "shun" or "avoid" him. Scripture uses paraitou of avoiding old wives' fables (1 Tim. 4:7), younger widows (v. 11), foolish and ignorant questions (2 Tim. 2:23), as well as the heretic in the passage before us. In no case does it mean excommunication. It simply means avoiding things or people. Only the heretic was outside.
The two warnings are not a formality. They are corrective instruction, given in the hope that he will learn.
He is not to be rejected at once... To admonish him does not mean to rebuke him exactly. Admonishment is corrective instruction, and that is what you must give such a person. If after that instruction he seems slow to learn or stubborn, and still wants to go back to his own gathering, then give him this corrective instruction a second time. And if he still stays hardened, then he must be rejected.
The second turning back is what settles the matter. It shows what is driving him.
If the evil is present in an honest mind, get the thing clearly before him and he will be set free. If a second time the mind turns back to it, there is reason to fear a lack of straightforwardness... His will had been at work.
No one else needs to pass sentence on this man. His own act has already done it.
He is not satisfied with the assembly of God, with the truth of God: he wants to make a truth of his own. Why is he a Christian, if Christianity, as God has given it, does not satisfy him? By making a party for his own opinions he condemns himself.
One writer refuses to treat this as a small matter:
If any Christians who claim spiritual insight count this a light sin, they are themselves to be pitied, warned, and prayed for. What is self-will but sin against God? And in someone who claims to love Christ, what self-will is worse than despising the church of God? He tries to form a church of his own, on views of his own.
- Choice — the word behind "divisive" means choosing. The man picks his own line, and what he teaches may even be true in itself.
- Will — the sin is not error but self-will at work with doctrine, until a party forms around one man's preference.
- Warning — patience comes first. Give corrective instruction once, then a second time.
- Withdrawal — "have nothing more to do with him" means avoidance, not excommunication. The sect-maker has already left on his own.
- Verdict — no one needs to pass sentence. By preferring his own church to God's assembly, he has already condemned himself.
knowing that such a one is perverted, and sins, being self-condemned.
Paul has just told Titus what to do with a divisive person; this verse tells him why he can act with such confidence. The man's own course has already passed sentence on him, so Titus needs no long inquiry. But who is meant, and how far does the instruction go?
False teaching is not what the word points to. It describes a man who picks his own creed and gathers others around it:
A heretical man does not have to be someone who denies the faith. The word means one who chooses his creed. So Paul, speaking of the Pharisees, the party he once belonged to, called it "the strictest party of our religion" (Acts 26:5) — and the word he used there is hairesis, "heresy." The Pharisees counted as orthodox in their creed, yet Paul uses that word of them... A man is a heretic when he lets his own mind or will work on doctrine, and so produces or supports a sect.
Because of this, the man's opinions may even be correct. What condemns him is the use he makes of them.
The whole root of it is self. He first takes up his own opinion and, against the word of God, presses it on others. It need not be wrong in itself; the opinion may be sound enough, but the use made of it is sectarian. The man who prefers his own opinions and line to the church is self-condemned... The question is not whether one's view is mistaken: to go out because of it is purely selfish, and contrary to Christ. The party-maker presses his will or view for ends of his own. Whoever does so sins — and, as it says here, is self-condemned.
Darby traces the twist in such a man to his discontent with what God has already given.
A man might try to set up his own opinions, and by that means form parties in the assembly. After a first and a second warning, Titus was to reject him. His faith had been overturned. He sins, and he stands judged by himself. He is not satisfied with the assembly of God, with the truth of God: he wants to make a truth of his own. Why is he a Christian, if Christianity, as God has given it, does not satisfy him? By making a party for his own opinions he condemns himself.
Commentators differ on whether "warped" reaches the man's faith. Kelly limits it, and reads "self-condemned" as a verdict in the act, not an inward pang.
Some add to the verse the words "perverted from the true faith." That goes beyond Scripture. Other passages teach it, but not this one, which marks the evil of faction apart from false doctrine, though the two often go together. The word here does not mean "condemned by his own conscience." It means self-condemned — condemned by the fact itself. Nothing is said of conscience, which may have been quite dull or darkened instead of passing sentence on the man. He was self-condemned because he liked his own will, and perhaps his own ideas too. So he could no longer bear the atmosphere of God's assembly. He preferred to be outside God's dwelling in the Spirit, to have a church of his choosing, or to be his own church.
The double warning is not a formality. It allows for different degrees of hardness.
Titus was to warn him once or twice. Self-will that had gone outside came in different measures. One man was so determined that a first warning would prove enough. Another was not so far gone, and might encourage the Lord's servant to keep on and warn a second time.
Translations render the word in different ways. Grant weighs them, and finds the sense personal rather than official.
For "reject," other translations have "refuse," "avoid," or "have done with." Literally the word means "ask off," or in everyday speech, "ask him to excuse you"... The discipline of the assembly is not implied here, and the assembly is not in question. This verse deals with a man determined to have and keep his own opinion. When this is clear, the instruction is to leave him to himself — refuse to listen to him.
Kelly points to the plain situation: the man has already walked out.
Now how could you properly put away someone who had already gone away?
Some count party-making a small fault.
If any Christians, claiming spiritual understanding, count this a light sin, they are to be pitied, warned, and prayed for. What is self-will but sin against God? And what self-will in someone professing to love Christ is worse than despising the Church of God by trying to form a church of his own on views of his own?
- Choice — "Heretic" means a chooser. He picks his own creed and builds a following on it, sound doctrine or not.
- Self — The root is self-will, not error. The man who prefers his own opinion to the church is the man the verse calls warped.
- Sentence — He sins, and the act itself condemns him. His conscience may be dull and say nothing.
- Patience — Two warnings come first. Self-will comes in degrees, and one man may still listen.
- Distance — "Reject" means to have done with him and stop listening. It is a personal step, not the assembly's discipline.
When I shall send Artemas to thee, or Tychicus, use diligence to come to me to Nicopolis; for I have decided to winter there.
Paul ends his letter to Titus with travel plans, not doctrine: a worker for Crete, a journey, a winter together. Those plans do more than fix a schedule — they show how Paul cared for a flock when its servant moved on.
These closing sentences look like nothing more than practical arrangements. One writer warns against reading them that way.
It is a common mistake to suppose that words as simple and ordinary as these have little value. Someone like Paul shows us the goodness of the Lord. We see it not only under great strain and difficulty, but in the most ordinary matters of daily spiritual life. Grace shapes conduct and words alike, in the least things as in the greatest.
The instruction to leave Crete tells us what Titus was — and was not — on that island.
These closing words ought to have cleared up many a controversy and corrected false tradition. Titus was in no way the fixed church ruler of Crete. He had served the Lord there in most important ways, and his work on that island was coming to a close.
Paul wanted Titus with him. But he first weighed what the Cretans still needed.
At the end of the letter we get a small glimpse of the Christian activity that the love of God produces, the pains taken so that the flock should enjoy all the help God supplies to the assembly. Paul wished Titus to come to him, but the Cretans needed his services; so the apostle makes the arrival of Artemas or Tychicus the condition of Titus leaving the field where he was working.
The wording is "Artemas or Tychicus" — an either/or, and that detail is deliberate.
But we can also see that the apostle did not think of sending both: it is "Artemas or Tychicus," not Artemas and Tychicus. Workers suitable to help the church in a large way are not many. Other places had claims no less than Crete; but it is plain that both of these workers held a personal relation to the apostle.
Artemas comes first here, though he barely appears in Scripture. That order carries no promotion.
We learn that there were men whom the Lord honoured highly who only appear in passing, like Artemas; and yet he is even placed before Tychicus. It would be wrong to conclude that he had a higher standing. The Holy Spirit does not run God's affairs the way a royal court ranks its officers. We may be sure of one thing. Paul would not have named either man unless he believed each was just as spiritually qualified as the other.
Some fear that arranging who goes where takes the work out of the Lord's hands.
It is a great mistake to suppose that there cannot be such a thing as arrangement in ministry... Paul does speak of sending to Crete one or other of his fellow-workers in whom he had confidence; and it was quite right. It is a matter that needs wisdom from above, because one might send the wrong person. But the principle is care for the work of the Lord. Taking an interest in a place where you cannot be present is not against the truth or against the Lord. Scripture allows care of this kind.
"Do your best" translates a single word, which older translations render "be diligent." One writer shows where else it appears.
In the original the word is not the usual one for "labour." Elsewhere the same word appears as "be diligent" (Titus 3:12) and "endeavouring" (Ephesians 4:3)... No moral quality is a greater asset than diligence.
Paul plans to spend a winter where he chooses. That says something about his freedom, and about where Nicopolis lay.
The apostle was not a prisoner at this time. It seems to have been after his first imprisonment at Rome, and before the second, which ended in his death. Had he not been free, how could he speak of his decision to spend a winter there? This also proves that the note tradition added to the end of the letter is wrong. Paul did not write from Nicopolis, any more than Titus was made bishop of Crete... Of the towns with that name, the most important one then standing was, beyond doubt, in Epirus, looking down on the promontory of Actium.
The winter meeting was not a holiday. What followed it points the other way.
We may be sure of this. The zeal that consumed the apostle did not call Titus there for rest, either his own or the younger worker's. The last letter the apostle ever wrote tells us that Titus went to Dalmatia, which lay near Epirus... The work of the Lord was to go forward in the West as well as in the East.
- Temporary — Titus held no permanent office in Crete; his work there was ending, and Paul called him away.
- Covered — Titus leaves only when Artemas or Tychicus arrives. The flock keeps its help.
- Unranked — Paul names Artemas first, though he barely appears in Scripture. Neither man ranks above the other.
- Diligent — Paul's word for the journey appears elsewhere as "be diligent" and "endeavouring."
- Westward — The winter at Nicopolis was no rest. From that region Titus went on to Dalmatia.
Zenas the lawyer and Apollos set forward diligently on their way, that nothing may be lacking to them;
Paul ends his letter to Titus with a travel note that carries a duty: Zenas and Apollos are on the move, and Titus must see them off with everything they need. So who provides for the Lord's workers, and whose job is it?
The word "lawyer" tells us something about the man Titus must help. One writer weighs the options and notes which name comes first.
Here again Zenas the lawyer is named before Apollos: this is the order not of the world, but of grace. It is not quite certain what sort of lawyer he was. Calvin remarks that he could not have been a lawyer in the courts, or else he would not have lacked means. A weightier but simple reason points the same way, though it is not conclusive. Everywhere else in the New Testament "lawyer" is connected with Jewish learning rather than Roman or Greek law. What is certain is that Paul assumes there might be need of the help he commands. He had accepted help of this kind himself, as his letters show, and before this he had asked for it on behalf of others.
To send someone on his way means more than a farewell wave. The same wording marks a settled practice among believers elsewhere in the New Testament.
It is right that those who have gone out "for His name's sake" should receive support and help on their way. Paul told the believers at Rome he was confident they would send him on his way to Spain (Rom. 15:24. See also 1 Cor. 16:6; 2 Cor. 1:16 and Titus 3:13). The phrase "bring forward on their journey" suggests that believers would meet the financial needs of the Lord's servants… The Hebrews had already been told: "Do not neglect to do good and to share what you have, for such sacrifices are pleasing to God" (Heb. 13:16).
Neither Zenas nor Apollos belonged to the circle that travelled with the apostle.
This is all the more worth noticing. Neither of these two men entrusted to his care was as close to the apostle personally as many others were. We never hear of them in the group that travelled with the apostle. What is said, and what is not said, points to another set of workers. We read of them in the Acts of the Apostles and in the letters, and Apollos is the outstanding example. Yet the heart of the apostle goes out, and urges Titus in love, no less for such men than for his own well-known companions.
Another writer shows why Paul could ask this without a trace of jealousy.
Notice too that there were two kinds of workers. Some were personally connected with the apostle as fellow-workers. They travelled with him, and he sent them elsewhere to continue the work he had begun, when he could no longer carry it on himself. Others worked freely and on their own, apart from him. But there was no jealousy over this double activity. He did not neglect the flock that were dear to him. He was glad that anyone sound in the faith should water the plants he himself had planted. He encourages Titus to show them every affection, and to provide whatever they needed on their journey.
The command lands on people known for the opposite.
The last words show that Titus was a delegate, acting under the apostle's orders, and the care shown here is very blessed. The converted Cretans, once so false and lazy, were now to be the very first to help and provide what was needed. Zenas and Apollos deserved the care of true devotedness, and the habit of serving such men had to be learned.
Paul does not stop at this one journey. What he asks here shapes how believers think about their daily work and their pay.
The letter closes with a glimpse of the godly care that should exist among believers about the Lord's servants, and those who give themselves to the ministry… The apostle also wants believers to keep on with their ordinary work. This is not only to meet their own needs, but to enable them to help meet the needs of the Lord's servants, and so bear fruit that would abound to their account (Phil. 4:17-18).
- Named. Zenas is listed before Apollos: the order of grace, not of reputation. His title "lawyer" points to Jewish legal learning rather than the courts.
- Sent. To send workers on their way lacking nothing means supplying them. Paul uses the same phrase in Romans and in 1 and 2 Corinthians.
- Shared. These two were not part of Paul's travelling circle. Paul was still glad for anyone sound in the faith to water what he had planted. There was no rivalry between workers.
- Trained. The Cretans, once known as lazy and untruthful, are the very ones told to provide. Serving the Lord's servants was a habit they had to learn.
- Fruitful. So daily work is not just for your own needs. It gives you something to share, and that giving abounds to your account.
and let ours also learn to apply themselves to good works for necessary wants, that they may not be unfruitful.
Paul ends his letter to Titus with travel plans and one last instruction: the believers on Crete must learn something. The word "learn" implies they did not yet know it — so what are these "good works," and who are "our people"?
Paul has just asked Titus to help Zenas and Apollos on their journey. One writer takes "our people" to mean the believers in Crete. They must catch up with what Titus already practised.
The apostle does not stop with Titus. If Titus was not to forget fellow-labourers, how binding was it on the saints generally? That is the force of "ours also." Here "ours" seems to mean the saints in Crete. The apostle urges them to learn what Titus had long learned: to be eager in good works. Among all other calls, that includes encouraging the Lord's devoted ministers in His work.
Commentators differ here. Another takes "ours" to mean the travelling workers themselves. Then the instruction falls on those who serve, not on those who support them.
"Ours also" no doubt refers to Zenas and Apollos, or indeed any servant identified with Paul. They were not just to depend on the kindness of others. They were to be diligent in maintaining good works, whatever the needs. Diligence in practical things fits well with a gift in spiritual things. This is faithfulness in daily, practical living.
The same phrase appears earlier in the chapter, and one writer insists the two are not saying the same thing.
We should object here to lowering this expression ("to maintain good works"), as if it only echoed verse 14. It is not so. The expression may be similar, but the context is clear: God's object differs in the two verses. Verse 14 certainly has an important bearing, but it is of a narrower and lower character. In verse 8 good works have nothing to do with "necessary uses." They must be taken in all their extent.
Older Bibles printed a note in the margin with another reading: honest trades. Where the ESV has "help cases of urgent need," these writers read "for necessary uses." That makes the verse a matter of ordinary work — and of what parents pass on to their children.
It is also our duty to teach our children, in due time, some useful occupation for "necessary uses." "And let ours also learn to maintain good works — or, in the margin, profess honest trades — for necessary uses." Compare Ephesians 6:4. These are the points that severely test our practical Christianity.
A job that only covers your own bills stops short of what the verse asks.
It was not just a question of a man supplying his own wants. We ought to have a heart for others. It is a great joy that God uses one person for the good of another. He does this spiritually, and He would have the saints also see the value of an honest job — not just to provide for necessary uses, but also so that they are not unfruitful.
Paul had already quoted a Cretan poet calling his own people liars, wild animals and lazy gluttons. The closing instruction turns that description inside out.
The care shown here is very blessed. The converted Cretans had been dishonest and lazy before. Now they were to be the very first to help and provide what was needed. Zenas and Apollos deserved the care of true devotedness, and the saints had to learn the habit of serving such men.
The verse ends by naming what is at stake — fruit. Daily work becomes the channel for it.
The letter closes with a glimpse of the godly care the saints should show to the Lord's servants and to those who give themselves to the ministry... The apostle also wants believers to keep on with their ordinary work. That way they can meet their own necessary wants, and also help to meet the needs of the Lord's servants. So they bring forth fruit that will abound to their account (Phil. 4:17-18).
- Learn. The Cretans must learn what Titus already practised. Care for the Lord's workers is a habit, not an instinct.
- Labour. These "good works" are narrower than those of verse 8. They mean honest trades and useful work — something parents pass on to their children.
- Supply. That work first meets "necessary uses." It starts with the real needs of servants like Zenas and Apollos.
- Give. Earning only for yourself falls short. The aim is a heart for others, so God uses one believer for the good of another.
- Fruit. The chain ends in fruit. What you give to the Lord's servants abounds to your own account, and the lazy Cretan becomes the first to help.