Powered By Blogger

Monday, September 23, 2013

Hebrews 1 - A SUPERIOR SAVIOR



Hebrews 1 - A SUPERIOR SAVIOR

A. Introduction to the book of Hebrews.
1. This is an essay or a sermon or a letter to the Hebrews - and everyone.
a. The structure of Hebrews is a different from other New Testament books; it begins like an essay, continues as a sermon and ends like a letter.
b. Obviously, the writer was trying to reach Jewish Christians; but it is also written to a Greek frame of mind with its analysis of Jesus as the ultimate reality. That approach to the nature of Jesus spoke to the thinking found in Greek philosophy.
2. Who wrote Hebrews? The human author is unknown, but the inspiration of the Holy Spirit is evident.
a. The earliest statement on the authorship of Hebrews comes from Clement of Alexandria, who said that Paul wrote it in Hebrew and Luke translated into Greek (Eusebius, History 6.14.2). But many commentators agree that it is unlikely that Paul wrote this book.
i. Dods quotes Farrar: “The writer cites differently from St. Paul; he writes differently; he argues differently; he declaims differently; he constructs and connects his sentences differently; he builds up his paragraphs on a wholly different model . . . His style is the style of a man who thinks as well as writes in Greek; whereas St. Paul wrote in Greek but thought in Syriac.”
ii. Bruce quotes Calvin: “The manner of teaching and the style sufficiently show that Paul was not the author, and the writer himself confesses in the second chapter (Hebrews 2:3) that he was one of the disciples of the apostles, which is wholly different from the way in which Paul spoke of himself.”
b. The early commentator Tertullian (who wrote in the early 200s) said Barnabas wrote Hebrews, but no support is offered other than that Barnabas was a Levite (Acts 4:36) and an man of encouragement (Acts 4:36).
c. Martin Luther believed that Apollos wrote the book of Hebrews, because Acts said that Apollos was eloquent and had a strong command of the Old Testament (Acts 18:24).
d. Adolf Harnack thought Priscilla (with her husband Aquilla) wrote Hebrews, and it remained anonymous so it would hide its controversial female authorship. But when the writer to the Hebrews speaks of himself in Hebrews 11:32, the masculine grammar of the passage argues against the idea that a woman wrote the letter.
3. When was Hebrews written? Probably somewhere around 67 to 69 AD.
a. The reference to Timothy (Hebrews 13:23) places it fairly early.
b. The present lack of physical persecution (Hebrews 12:4) puts it fairly early.
c. The lack of any reference to the destruction of the temple probably puts it before 70 AD, when Jerusalem and the second temple were destroyed. Since the writer to the Hebrews is so concerned with the passing of the Old Covenant, it seems unlikely that he would have ignored the destruction of the temple if it had happened before he wrote.
4. Hebrews is a book deeply rooted in the Old Testament.
a. Hebrews has 29 quotations and 53 allusions to the Old Testament, for a total of 82 references. Significantly, Hebrews does not refer even once to the books of the Apocrypha.
5. Hebrews is basically a book that exhorts discouraged Christians to continue on strong with Jesus in light of the complete superiority of who He is and what He has done for us.
B. The superior Savior.
1. (Hebrews 1:1-2 a) Jesus brings a revelation superior to that of the prophets of old.
God, who at various times and in various ways spoke in time past to the fathers by the prophets, has in these last days spoken to us by His Son,
a. God: This is how the book begins. There is no attempt to prove God’s existence; it is simply a self-evident given. Hebrews begins with an idea basic to the Bible: God exists, and He speaks to man; or as the title of a Francis Schaeffer book put it: He Is There And He Is Not Silent.
b. Who at various times and in different ways spoke: The revelation given through the prophets was brought in various ways - sometimes through parables, historical narrative, prophetic confrontation, dramatic presentation, psalms, proverbs, and the like.
i. The idea is that the prophets spoke to the fathers in various ways; not that God spoke to the prophets in various ways (though that is true also).
ii. God spoke to Moses by a burning bush (Exodus 2), to Elijah by a still, small voice (1 Kings 19), to Isaiah by a heavenly vision (Isaiah 6), to Hosea by his family crisis (Hosea 1:2) and to Amos by a basket of fruit (Amos 8:1).
iii. God spoke in a spectrum in the Old Testament; Jesus is a prism that which collects all those bands of light and focuses them into one pure beam.
c. These last days refers to the age of Messiah. It may be a long period, but it is the last period.
d. Spoken to us by His Son: It isn’t so much that Jesus brought a message from the Father; He is a message from the Father.
i. The revelation from Jesus Himself was unique, because not only was it purely God’s message (as was the case with every other inspired writer) but it was also God’s personality through which the message came.
ii. “If men cannot learn about God from the Son, no amount of prophetic voices or actions would convince them.” (Guthrie)
e. The Son does not speak in Hebrews; the Father speaks concerning the Son. The book of Hebrews is the Father telling us what the Son is all about.
2. (Hebrews 1:2-3) A sevenfold description of the glorious Son.
Whom He has appointed heir of all things, through whom also He made the worlds; who being the brightness of His glory and the express image of His person, and upholding all things by the word of His power, when He had by Himself purged our sins, sat down at the right hand of the Majesty on high,
a. He is heir of all things - befitting His status as firstborn over all creation (Colossians 1:15).
b. He made the worlds (the very ages).
c. He is the brightness of His (the Father’s) glory. Brightness is apaugasma, which “denotes the radiance shining forth from the source of light”; Philo also used the term of the Logos.
i. Jesus is the “beam” of God’s glory; we have never seen the sun, only the rays of its light as they come to us. Even so, we have never seen the Father, but we have seen Him through the “rays” of the Son.
d. He is the express image of His person: The idea is of an exact likeness as made by a stamp.
e. He is the One upholding all things by the word of His power, but upholding is better thought of as “maintaining.” The word does not have the idea of passively holding something up (like the mythical Atlas held the earth), but of actively sustaining.
i. In His earthly ministry, Jesus constantly demonstrated the power of His word. He could heal, forgive, cast out demons, calm nature’s fury all at the expression of one word.
f. He Himself purged our sins: Here, the important idea of an external purification for sins is introduced. This is far apart from the idea that we can purify ourselves (as the Pharisees thought).
g. He sat down at the right hand of the Majesty on high: His position alone is enough to set Him above all angels.
3. (Hebrews 1:4) Therefore, Jesus is so much better than the angels.
Having become so much better than the angels, as He has by inheritance obtained a more excellent name than they.
a. Having become so much better than the angels: In what sense did Jesus become better than the angels? Isn’t He eternally better than the angels?
i. Jesus certainly is eternally better than the angels. But He became better in the sense that He was made perfect (complete as our redeemer) through sufferings (Hebrews 2:10) - something no angel has ever done.
b. A more excellent name than they: Jesus’ superior status is demonstrated by a superior name (which isn’t merely a title, but a description of nature and character).
4. The rest of Hebrews 1 will prove from the Scriptures that Jesus is better than the angels, but why is it important to understand that Jesus is better?
a. Because we often best understand things when they are set in contrast to other things.
b. Because the Old Covenant came by the hands of angels to Moses, but a better covenant came by a better being, Jesus. It might have been easy for first century Jews to dismiss the gospel thinking it came at the hands of mere men - the apostles. But here we see the Divine (superior to angelic) coming of the gospel.
c. Because there was a dangerous tendency to worship angels developing in the early Church (Colossians 2:18, Galatians 1:8), and Hebrews shows that Jesus is high above any angel.
d. Because there was the heretical idea that Jesus Himself was an angel, a concept which degrades His glory and majesty.
e. Because understanding how Jesus is better than the angels helps us to understand how He is better than any of the “competitors” to Him in our lives.
i. In this sense, the purpose of Hebrews is like the purpose of the Transfiguration. Each of them cry out and say, This is My beloved Son. Hear Him! (Mark 9:7)
C. The Scriptures prove Jesus is superior to the angels.
1. (Hebrews 1:5) Jesus is superior to the angels because He is the Son of God, as shown in Psalms 2:7 and 2 Samuel 7:14.
For to which of the angels did He ever say: “You are My Son, Today I have begotten You”? And again: “I will be to Him a Father, and He shall be to Me a Son”?
a. The more excellent name of Hebrews 1:4 is the name Son; though the angels may collectively be called “sons of God” (Job 1:6), but no angel is ever given that title individually.
b. Today I have begotten You: Begotten speaks of the equality of substance and essential nature between the Father and Son; it means that the Father and the Son share the same being.
c. We must avoid the tendency to promote Jesus’ deity at the expense of His humanity. The incarnation means that He is fully God and fully man; no single book stresses both themes more than the book of Hebrews.
2. (Hebrews 1:6-7) Jesus is superior to the angels because angels worship and serve Jesus, who is their God, as shown in Deuteronomy 32:43 (in the Septuagint and the Dead Sea Scrolls) and Psalms 104:4.
But when He again brings the firstborn into the world, He says: “Let all the angels of God worship Him.” And of the angels He says: “Who makes His angels spirits and His ministers a flame of fire.”
a. Firstborn was as much a concept as it was a designation for the one born first; since the firstborn son was “first in line” and received the position of favor and honor, the title “firstborn” could be given to indicate that someone was of the highest position and honor.
i. Many of those not born first in the Bible are given the title “firstborn.” David is an example of this (Psalms 89:27) and so is Ephraim (Jeremiah 31:9).
ii. According to Rabbi Bechai, quoted in Lightfoot, the ancient Rabbis called Yahweh Himself “Firstborn of the World.” It was a title, not a description of origin.
iii. Rabbis used firstborn as specifically a Messianic title. One ancient Rabbi wrote, “God said, As I made Jacob a first-born (Exodus 4:22), so also will I make king Messiah a first-born (Psalms 89:28).”
b. Let all the angels of God worship Him: Jesus is superior because He is the object of angelic worship, not an angelic worshipper. They worship Him; He does not worship among them.
i. Revelation 5 gives a glimpse of the angelic worship of Jesus.
c. Furthermore, Jesus is Lord of the angels. They are His angels and His ministers. The angels belong to Jesus, and He is not among them.
3. (8-12) Jesus is superior to the angels because the Father Himself calls Him (and not any angel) God and Lord (Yahweh), as shown in Psalms 45:6-7 and Psalms 102:25-27 from the Septuagint.
But to the Son He says: “Your throne, O God, is forever and ever; A scepter of righteousness is the scepter of Your Kingdom. You have loved righteousness and hated lawlessness; Therefore God, Your God, has anointed You With the oil of gladness more than Your companions.” And: “You, LORD, in the beginning laid the foundation of the earth, and the heavens are the work of Your hands. They will perish, but You remain; And they will all grow old like a garment; like a cloak You will fold them up, and they will be changed. But You are the same, and Your years will not fail.”
a. Your throne, O God: The mere address is enough; the Father calls the Son God.
i. Some argue that there are many beings called “gods” in the Bible, like Satan (2 Corinthians 4:4), and earthly judges (Psalms 82:1 and Psalms 82:6). So they say, “So what if Jesus is called a ‘god’?”
ii. But these others are supposed gods, pretenders to their throne. If Jesus is not the true God, He is a false god, like Satan and the wicked judges of Psalms 82.
iii. But Jesus is the True and Living God, called so here by God the Father; and also by John in John 1:1, by Thomas in John 20:28, and by Paul in Titus 2:13; Tit_3:4.
b. Therefore God, Your God, has anointed You: This passage shows striking interaction between the Persons of the Trinity. God, Your God speaks of the Father, and His position of authority over the Second Person of the Trinity; You speaks of the Son; anointed has in mind the ministry and presence of the Holy Spirit, the Third Person of the Trinity.
c. The Son is not only called God, but Lord (Yahweh) as well (Hebrews 1:10), and the Son is described with attributes that God alone has.
i. Jesus Christ, the Second Person of the Trinity, is the Creator (You, LORD, in the beginning laid the foundation of the earth).
ii. Jesus Christ, the Second Person of the Trinity is self-existent (They will perish, but You will remain).
iii. Jesus Christ, the Second Person of the Trinity is sovereign (Like a cloak You will fold them up, and they will be changed).
iv. Jesus Christ, the Second Person of the Trinity is immutable, unchanging (You are the same), and eternal (Your years will not fail).
4. (Hebrews 1:13-14) Jesus is superior to the angels because He has sat down, having completed His work, while the angels work on continually, as shown in Psalms 110:1.
But to which of the angels has He ever said: “Sit at My right hand, till I make Your enemies Your footstool”? Are they not all ministering spirits sent forth to minister for those who will inherit salvation?
a. Sit at My right hand: Anyone who sits in the divine presence shows that they have the perfect right to be there; there are no seats for the angels around the throne of God, because they are constantly busy praising God and serving Him.
b. It isn’t good to be too comfortable in the presence of majesty. There is a story about a man named Lear who was hired to give Queen Victoria art lessons. Things were going well, and Lear started to feel quite at home in the palace. He enjoyed standing in front of the fire, leaning on the hearth and warming himself in a relaxed manner, but every time he did, one of the Queen’s attendants would invite him to look at something on the other side of the room, making him move. No one explained it to him, but after a while, he got the idea: good manners said it was wrong for a subject to have such a relaxed attitude in the presence of their Queen.
c. But to which of the angels has He ever said: “Sit at My right hand.” In the same way, the angels don’t “relax” before God. They “stand” before the Father, but the Son sits down - because He isn’t a subject, He is the Sovereign.
i. The angels are ministering spirits, not governing spirits; service, not dominion is their calling.
ii. Angels, in that respect, are like a toy that won’t quit; they have to keep working, while the Son can take a posture of rest, because He is the Son.
iii. Jesus is also called a servant and a minister, but this is part of His voluntary humiliation, not his essential nature -- as is the case with the angels.
d. An interesting concept: angels work for us (those who will inherit salvation).

Saturday, September 21, 2013

Tongues – To Speak or Not To Speak


Tongues – To Speak or Not To Speak
Speaking in Tongues
byLehman Strauss, Litt.D., F.R.G.S.
INTRODUCTION
This is not the final chapter to be written on the subject of speaking in tongues. Men (and women) will be having their say until our Lord returns to settle this matter once and for all time. It is difficult to say how, when and where the modern tongues movement began. In the many pamphlets and books I have examined opinions differ. We do know that the phenomenon of tongues‑speaking is widespread, and it is likely that no issue in Christendom has caused as wide a split in its ranks in modern times as has speaking in tongues.
All Bible‑believing Christians who study the Word of God are in agreement that the gift of tongues is present in the inspired Scriptures. In the New Testament two lists of gifts appear in which the gift of tongues is included. In I Corinthians 12:8‑11 “kinds of tongues” and “the interpretation of tongues” are said to be sovereignly bestowed gifts of the Holy Spirit. In I Corinth­ians 12:28‑30 “tongues” appears in the list of gifts. We call them “spiritual gifts” from the Greek word charisma, suggesting that the gift is a bestowment of God’s grace. It is not a natural ability that one might develop, but rather a special gift as those appear­ing in the above mentioned passages in First Corinthians.
The Holy Spirit is sovereign in the distribution of these gifts. Following the listing of the gifts, Paul adds, “But all these work­eth that one and the selfsame Spirit, dividing to every man severally as He will” (I Corinthians 12:11). No one person has all the gifts, nor are we to seek the gifts. We must be careful that we do not confuse the Spirit as a gift to the believer with the gifts the Spirit gives to believers. Every believer has received the gift of the Spirit, but not every believer has received the gifts which the Spirit bestows.
The Meaning of Speaking in Tongues
In my travels many persons have approached me with ques­tions about tongues. Some of them ask about its meaning. The term that is used to identify the tongues movement is “glosso­lalia,” made up of two Greek words, glossa (language or tongue) and lalia (speech). It therefore means speaking in languages or tongues. Glossology is that department of anthropology which has to do with the study and classification of languages and dia­lects.
The word glossa appears in the Greek New Testament not less than fifty times. It is used to refer to the physical organ of the tongue as in James 3:5; once in reference to the flames of fire shaped like tongues (Acts 2:3); at least once in a metaphorical sense when referring to speech as in the statement, “my tongue (speech) was glad (joyous)” (Acts 2:26). As far as I understand the remaining usages of the word it always means a language.
When our Lord predicted the gift of tongues (the only mention of tongues in the four Gospel records) He said, “And these signs shall follow them that believe; In my name they shall cast out devils; they shall speak with new tongues” (Mark 16:17). The adjective “new” (Gr. kainos) can only mean they were go­ing to speak in languages new to them, that is, languages they had not learned or used until that time. If I say the Russian language is “new” to me, I do not mean that I never knew there was such a language, but rather its use by me is new to me because I can neither speak it nor understand it when I hear others speak it. On the other hand the German language is not altogether “new” to me because I can both read and speak it with a small degree of understanding.
In Acts 2:4 Luke uses a different adjective when he says, “they began to speak with other tongues.” The word “other” (Gr. heteros) simply means that they spoke in languages different from the normal language they were used to. The context substantiates this. Notice the surprised reaction on the part of the hearers—“And they were all amazed and marveled, saying one to another, Behold, are not all these which speak Galileans? And how hear we every man in our own tongue, wherein we were born?” (Acts 2:7,8). Every man heard them speak in his own language (Acts 2:6). Here the word “language” is the translation of dialekto from which our word “dialect” comes. The two words glossa (tongue) and dialektos (language) are used synonymously, making it obvious that the disciples were speaking in known languages other than the language native to them. In verses 9‑11 the languages are then identified. It was a miraculous phenomenon which enabled the disciples to speak in languages which they had never learned. Here in this Acts passage we have tongues‑speaking in its pure and unperverted form as God gave it.
The following verses in the Book of the Revelation should be examined carefully (Revelation 5:9; 7:9; 10:11; 11:9; 13:7; 14:6; 17:15). In each passage where the word “tongue” is mentioned it means one of the languages associated with the various nation­alities and races. I see no reason why anyone should raise a ques­tion as to the tongues in those passages in Mark, Acts and Reve­lation meaning languages.
But the more serious problems arise in the interpretation of the twenty‑one references to tongues in First Corinthians chap­ters 12‑14. There are those who tell us that the tongues in First Corinthians are ecstatic utterances not known in any country on earth. They base their conclusion on the term “unknown” which appears in I Corinthians 14:2, 4, 13, 14, 19, and 27. But the reader of this chapter in God’s Word must not fail to observe that the word “unknown” in every place where it appears is in italicized letters, which means that it does not occur in any Greek manuscript but was inserted by translators. The Holy Spirit did not direct Paul to write that the tongue is unknown.
I find no warrant for changing the meaning of tongues in First Corinthians. In every other place where the word is used it means languages. Why then should the meaning be changed in First Cor­inthians? I know of no textual license that will warrant changing the meaning of the word. All the usages of tongues in Paul’s treatment of the subject refer to foreign languages. “So likewise ye, except ye utter by the tongue words easy to be understood, how shall it be known what is spoken? for ye shall speak into air” (I Corinthians 14:9).
There is no reason for anyone to speak except to converse in­telligibly. The Greek word laleo means “I speak.” The word is never used for mere sound or noise. Nor is it used for a mere mumbling or muttering of unintelligible gibberish. The tongues­-speaking in the New Testament was in the native languages of hearing people. The supernatural phenomenon which took place at Pentecost was the exercise of a gift whereby many people from many countries, gathered at Jerusalem, heard God’s mess­age in their own language. This was indeed a miracle of God.
It would be an arbitrary and strange interpretation of Scrip­ture that would make tongues‑speaking in the New Testament anything other than known languages. There is no trace of Scriptural evidence that tongues were ever heard by anyone as incoherent, incomprehensible babbling.
The Ministry of Spraking in Tongues
At this point in our study we shall pursue an examination of the reasons why God gave the gift of speaking in tongues.
First, to communicate the Gospel message. With unmistak­able clarity Paul says, “Wherefore tongues are for a sign, not to them that believe, but to them that believe not . . . ” (I Corinth­ians 14:22). The word “sign” (Gr. semeion) in the New Testa­ment is often associated with the conveying of a Divinely‑given message to unbelievers. This is the emphasis in John 20:30, 31 where we read, “And many other signs truly did Jesus in the pre­sence of His disciples, which are not written in this book: But these are written, that ye might believe that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of God; and that believing ye might have life through His name.” The signs (miracles) were never performed without purpose, but because of the message they communicated.
The true function of the gift of tongues is “for a sign . . . to them that believe not.” To exercise the gift when unbelievers were not present would be exercising the gift above the purpose for which it was given. The gifts were never given for the self-­satisfaction or self‑glory of the recipients. The one upon whom the gift was bestowed was merely an instrument through whom God wanted to communicate His message.
Because of the abuse and misuse of tongues in the Corinthian Assembly Paul states its purpose. The spiritual immaturity of the saints in Corinth called for instruction, so in the middle of his discourse on tongues he writes, “Brethren, be not children in understanding: howbeit in malice be ye children, but in under­standing be men” (I Corinthians 14:20). The Greek word for “men” (teleios) means mature. In their misuse of speaking in tongues they were showing their immaturity, a behaviour pattern which characterized the believers at Corinth. The Apostle re­minded them that they remained “babes in Christ” (3:1).
Their failure to grow up spiritually resulted from their neglected study of the Scriptures. The Epistle to the Hebrews stresses this point. “For when for the time ye ought to be teachers, ye have need that one teach you again which be the first principles of the oracles of God; and are become such as have need of milk, and not of strong meat. For every one that useth milk is unskillful in the word of righteousness; for he is a babe. But strong meat belongeth to them that are of full age, even those who by reason of use have their senses exercised to discern both good and evil” (Hebrews 5: 12‑14). Peter wrote, “As newborn babes, desire the sincere milk of the Word, that ye may grow thereby” (I Peter 2:2). One will find confusion and license where the study of God’s Word is neglected.
Now let us return to I Corinthians 14:20. Immediately upon rebuking them with the words, “Brethren, be not children in understanding,” Paul adds, “In the law it is written . . . ” (Vs. 21), thereby pointing out their weakness, namely, their failure to ac­quaint themselves with that which was written in the Old Testa­ment Scriptures. They had failed to study God’s Word, therefore they had become victims of arrested development.
Speaking in tongues was a gift bestowed by the Holy Spirit, but it, or any other gift, can be misused. Speaking in tongues was no mark of spirituality, because the Corinthian church was unspiritual, having manifested carnality (3:1‑3) and even gross sin (5:1). And so Paul points them to a Scripture they should have known, saying, “In the law it is written, With men of other tongues and other lips will I speak unto this people; and yet for all that will they not hear me, saith the Lord” (12:21).
Paul is here referring to a prophecy God had given through Isaiah. The nation of Israel had failed to heed God’s message which He gave through their own prophets, so the Lord told them that at a future time they will hear His message through tongues (languages) other than their own. “For with stammering lips and another tongue will He speak to this people “ (Isaiah 28: 12). Thus Paul sees in this Isaiah prophecy the gift of tongues as a sign to Israel. The words “this people” in Isaiah 28: 11, in its context, can refer only to Israel. The abuse of tongues‑speaking in Corinth did not arise from the belief in speaking in tongues, but rather in the neglect of the Scriptures which teach its proper use.
This purpose of the gift of tongues, namely to communicate God’s message to Israel, is verified in the three passages in Acts where speaking in tongues is mentioned. In Acts 2 tongues‑speak­ing was used as a missionary or evangelistic tool in fulfillment of Isaiah 28:11. There was no need for the disciples to learn other languages before they could communicate the Gospel. God over­came the language barrier through the miracle‑gift of tongues. On the day of Pentecost there were “Jews out of every nation under heaven” (Acts 2: 5). And when the disciples “began to speak with other tongues, as the Spirit gave them utterance” (Acts 2:4), the hearers responded with the question, “And how hear we every man in our own tongue, wherein we were born?” (Acts 2:8). Observe that they were “Jews” from other countries who spoke many languages and dialects, and yet each heard the Gospel in his own tongue. Isaiah’s prophecy was being fulfilled.
In Acts 10:46 the second mention of speaking in tongues occurs. The occasion again was to communicate the Gospel, this time for the purpose of effecting the conversion of Cornelius and his house. This event cannot be totally disassociated from Pentecost because Peter, when relating this experience, said, “And as I began to speak, the Holy Ghost fell on them, as on us at the beginning” (Acts 11: 15). At the house of Cornelius tongues‑speaking was a sign to Jews at a time when the Gospel was being communicated (Acts 10:44-46).
In Acts 19:6 there appears the third passage in Acts in which speaking in tongues is recorded. Again its purpose was missionary and evangelistic. When Paul came to Ephesus he encountered twelve disciples of John the Baptist. He asked them, “Did you receive the Holy Ghost when (not since) you believed?” (Acts 19:2, see the R.V.). These at Ephesus considered themselves to be Christians because they had heard through Apollos the message of John. You see, there is a belief unto salvation and a belief that does not result in salvation. The latter is a mere academic, intellectual belief that even Satan and the demons have (James 2:19. cf. Mark 5:7). Doubtless there are people today who have an historical faith in Jesus Christ as a man and even the Son of God, but who have not been saved. Paul suspected that such was the case with the disciples of John whom he met at Ephesus. When he learned they were not saved, he told them they must trust Christ for their salvation. We can understand the confusion they might have experienced, therefore some evidential sign was necessary. “And when Paul had laid his hands upon them, the Holy Ghost came upon them; and they spake with tongues, and prophesied” (Acts 19:6). Again the purpose for speaking in tongues is obvious, namely, to communicate the Gospel message.
These are the only instances of tongues‑speaking recorded in the Bible, except the passage in First Corinthians. None of the later Epistles mention speaking in tongues. The gift was used only in the transitional period between Law and Grace. The sign gifts continued through the period of the Apostles while the New Testament was in the process of being written.
Second, to confirm the Gospel message. It was not merely a communicating sign but a confirmatory sign as well. When the Apostles used the gift of tongues it was because they did not have what you and I have today, the completed Word of God, God’s full and final revelation to man. When they went about preaching the Gospel, their message was confirmed by the exer­cise of the sign gifts. Tongues‑speaking vindicated both the message and the messenger. “Truly the signs of an apostle were wrought among you in all patience, in signs, and wonders, and mighty deeds” (II Corinthians 12:12). If one could find an Apostle living today who saw the bodily‑resurrected Lord Jesus, he would not be exercising the sign gifts because he would have what you and I have, and what Peter, Paul and John did not have, the completed written Word of God. Now that we have the Scriptures we do not need miracles to confirm God’s message.
Signs were for the Jews rather than for Gentiles. “For the Jews require a sign . . . ” (I Corinthians 1:22). Repeatedly it was the Jews who asked for a sign. “Then certain of the Scribes and of the Pharisees answered, saying, Master, we would see a sign from Thee” (Matthew 12:38). Again, “The Pharisees also with the Sadducees came, and tempting desired Him that He would shew them a sign from heaven” (Matthew 16 :1). “Then answered the Jews and said unto Him, What sign shewest Thou unto us, seeing that Thou doest these things?” (John 2: 18). “They said therefore unto Him, What sign shewest Thou then, that we may see and believe Thee? What dost Thou work?” (John 6:30). All these who asked for a sign were Jews, and their insistence upon signs will at last be their sad undoing.
During the Tribulation the Antichrist will appear, “whose coming is after the working of Satan with all power and signs and lying wonders” (II Thessalonians 2:9), and at that time many Jews will be deceived into receiving the Antichrist as their Mes­siah.
Let us who are Christ’s not be seeking signs as did the un­believing Jews. We who are the Lord’s have the Holy Scriptures, so let us “walk by faith, not by sight” (II Corinthians 5:7). Whenever the gift of tongues was exercised Jews were present, tongues‑speaking being used either to communicate the Gospel or else to confirm to the Jews that the Gentiles were worthy of salvation and should therefore have the Gospel also. Such con­firmations are seen in Acts 10:45 and 19:6. “And they went forth, and preached everywhere, the Lord working with them, and confirming the word with signs following. Amen” (Mark 16:20).
If anyone denies the message of God’s written Word today, there is no other court of appeal. In the days of the Apostles, the New Testament being yet unwritten, the Holy Spirit sup­ported their message by accompanying it with signs. But after those holy and inspired men completed writing the New Testa­ment, such confirmations were no longer necessary. The rich man in Hell asked Abraham to send Lazarus from the dead that he might witness to his five unsaved brothers, hoping that such a sign (or miracle) would lead them to repent. But Abraham re­plied, “If they hear not Moses and the prophets, neither will they be persuaded, though one rose from the dead” (Luke 16: 27‑31). The Pentecostal sign ushered in a new age before the New Testament was written. But if men reject God’s inspired Word now, they need not look for any supernatural signs.
A significant New Testament passage which adds to the fact that the sign gifts were given to confirm the Gospel message is Hebrews 2:3,4: “How shall we escape, if we neglect so great sal­vation; which at the first began to be spoken by the Lord, and was confirmed unto us by them that heard Him; God also bearing them witness, both with signs, and with divers miracles, and gifts of the Holy Ghost according to His own will?” If the Epistle to the Hebrews was written between 65 and 70 A.D. it would be obvious that the people to whom the message was “confirmed” with signs and gifts were that generation immediately following our Lord’s death.
The Mistakes About Speaking in Tongues
As an introduction to this part of our study, I want you to see Paul’s introduction to the subject of spiritual gifts. And incidentally, this is the only place in the entire Bible where spiritual gifts are discussed. The Apostle writes, “Now concerning spiritual gifts, brethren, I would not have you ignorant” (I Cor­inthians 12: 1). In the Authorized Version the word “gifts” is in italicized letters, telling us that it did not appear in any of the Greek manuscripts but was inserted by translators. Paul actually said to the Corinthians, “I don’t want you to be ignorant about pneumatica” (the spirituals), meaning of course the spiritual gifts.
Now the Corinthians were not ignorant of the fact of the spiritual gifts, for the Apostle had already said to them, “Ye come behind in no gift” (l :7). When he said, “I would not have you ignorant”, he was not speaking about their ignorance of the existence of the gifts, but rather about their ignorance of the right exercise of the gifts. They were well informed as to what the spiritual gifts were, but they were ignorant about the proper use of the gifts, as is evidenced by the mistakes they made in their exercise of them.
Before Paul launches into a discussion of the spiritual gifts, he reminds them of how easily they were led astray. He says, “ye know that ye were gentiles, carried away unto these dumb idols, even as ye were led” (12:2). In substance he is saying, “Before you tell me about your experience let me remind you of your lack of spirituality (3:1), and therefore your inability to discern between the Holy Spirit and false spirits” (2:15). Because they were carnal, “babes in Christ” (3:1), their exercise of the gifts were self‑induced by fleshly energy, not by the Holy Spirit. All Christians do not use their gifts properly, so that a Christian’s use of a gift might not be in accord with the Word of God. Mistakes can be made by any of us in the exercise of a gift.
(1) It is a mistake to assume that speaking in tongues is synonymous with the baptism of the Holy Spirit. It is unscriptural teaching which says that all who are baptized by the Holy Spirit will speak in tongues. The Scriptures state emphatically that all saved persons have received the baptism of the Holy Spirit. “For by one Spirit are we all baptized into one body . . . ” (I Corinthians 12:13). All the believers at Corinth received the baptism of the Holy Spirit, however all did not speak in tongues. The ques­tion asked in verse 30, “Do all speak with tongues?” is so phrased so as to convey the expected answer, “No.”
The baptizing work of the Spirit is not an experience in the believer subsequent to salvation. Rather it is that act of the Holy Spirit which joins the believing sinner to the Body of Christ. More emphatically, there is no other means whereby one can be­come a member of the Church which is Christ’s Body. All saved persons have been baptized by the Holy Spirit, but not all saved persons speak in tongues. The baptizing work of the Spirit places the believer in the Body positionally.
Be careful that you do not confuse the baptism of the Spirit with the command to be “filled with the Spirit” (Ephesians 5:18). All believers share equally in this position in Christ and thus share equally in union with Him. There is only one experience of baptism by the Holy Spirit but there can be many experiences of being filled with Spirit. Paul said that not all of the Corinthian Christians spoke in tongues (I Corinthians 14: 5), and yet he stated clearly that all had been baptized with the Holy Spirit (I Corinthians 12:13).
(2) It is a mistake to assume that speaking in tongues is an evidence of being filled with the Spirit. All believers are commanded to “be filled with (controlled by) the Spirit” (Ephesians 5:18), but nowhere in Scripture are believers commanded to speak in tongues. A Christian can be under the influence and control of the Holy Spirit and not speak in tongues. There are numerous instances when the disciples were filled with the Spirit but did not speak in tongues. See Acts 4:31 and 13:9‑11. To be Spirit‑filled is to be Spirit‑controlled. Are we to believe that the thousands of mightily used men and women of God who were among the world’s best missionaries of Christ’s Gospel and Bible teachers were never filled with the Holy Spirit because they never spoke in tongues? Perish the thought!
Can one know if he is filled with the Spirit? Look at one verse in the Bible where the command to be filled with the Spirit is recorded. “And be not drunk with wine, wherein is ex­cess; but be filled with the Spirit; Speaking to yourselves in psalms and hymns and spiritual songs, singing and making melody in your heart to the Lord; Giving thanks always for all things unto God and the Father in the name of our Lord Jesus Christ; Submitting yourselves one to another in the fear of God” (Ephesians 5:18‑21). Three things are mentioned as evidence of being Spirit‑filled; a joyful heart, a thankful heart and a submissive heart. Nothing is said about speaking in tongues. To sum it up in one word, Christlikeness is the manifestation of being filled with the Spirit, and the Scriptures do not tell us that our Lord ever spoke in tongues.
(3) It is a mistake to assume that speaking in tongues is the fruit of the Spirit. The fruit of the Spirit results from being filled with the Spirit. The fruit of the Spirit is mentioned in Galatians 5:22, 23 and includes nine characteristics. “But the fruit of the Spirit is love, joy, peace, longsuffering, gentleness, goodness, faith, meekness, temperance.” None of the sign‑gifts are included in this nine‑fold cluster of fruit. The Christian who is filled with the Spirit will manifest the fruit of the Spirit apart from ever having spoken in tongues. As a matter of fact, in Ephesians and Galatians, where the fullness and fruit of the Spirit are discussed tongues‑speaking is not mentioned once. Moreover, in the list of gifts mentioned by Paul, gifts that the ascended Lord bestowed upon His Church, the sign gifts are omitted. “And He gave some, apostles; and some, prophets; and some, evangelists; and some, pastors and teachers” (Ephesians 4:11).
All Christians should be filled with the Spirit and all are to exhibit the fruit of the Spirit, but not every Christian has all the gifts. Spirituality does not depend on speaking in tongues. God’s goal for every child of His is to be Spirit‑controlled, but that goal does not include speaking in tongues. No Christian need ever feel that he is lacking in spirituality because he has not spoken in tongues. Quality of life is the best evidence of the full­ness and fruit of the Holy Spirit. John the Baptizer was filled with the Spirit from his mother’s womb (Luke 1:15), yet this Spirit‑filled man did no miracles and never spoke in tongues (John 10:41). But he was so Christ‑like that people who were looking for the Messiah were led to ask of him, “Art thou the Christ?”
(4) It is a mistake to assume that speaking in tongues is an evidence of one’s faith. To the contrary, the persons who seek signs and sign‑gifts show their lack of faith. It is a sin for any Christian to seek for signs before he will believe God’s Word. As was pointed out earlier in this study, “tongues are for a sign, not to them that believe, but to them that believe not” (I Corinthians 14: 22). So you see, the Christians at Corinth were showing that they were weak in faith, and possibly some who identified themselves with the believer had never been saved. The person who seeks any sign, whether it be speaking in tongues or any other sign‑gift, is either a babe in Christ or an unbeliever.
Thomas is an illustration of a disciple weak in faith who would not believe without seeing. After our Lord arose from death, He appeared to the disciples. “But Thomas, one of the twelve, called Didymus, was not with them when Jesus came. The other disciples therefore said unto him, We have seen the Lord. But he said unto them, Except I shall see in His hands the print of the nails, and put my finger into the print of the nails, and thrust my hand into His side, I will not believe” (John 20:24, 25). Thomas was like the Corinthians, weak in faith, demanding to see the sign (miracle) before he would believe.
Eight days later the Lord appeared again. “Then saith He to Thomas, Reach hither thy finger, and behold my hands; and reach hither thy hand, and thrust it into my side: and be not faithless but believing.” (John 20:27). The doubting Thomas needed a sign, so the Lord appeared to him so that he would not continue without faith. And then He said to Thomas, “Thomas, because thou hast seen me, thou hast believed; blessed are they that have not seen, and yet have believed” (John 20: 29). The Christian who will study the Bible and believe what it says will walk by faith, not by sight or sound.
(5) It is a mistake to seek the gift of speaking in tongues. It is clear that not all in the church at Corinth spoke in tongues. Why didn’t they? The Apostle says, “Now there are diversities of gifts, but the same Spirit . . . for to one is given by the Spirit the word of wisdom; to another the word of knowledge by the same Spirit; To another faith by the same Spirit; to another the gifts of healing by the same Spirit; To another the working of miracles; to another prophecy, to another discerning of spirits; to another divers kinds of tongues, to another the interpretation of tongues: But all these worketh that one and the selfsame Spirit, dividing to every man severally as He will” (I Corinthians 12:4‑11). Please note that the gifts were given “as He (the Holy Spirit) will,” not as we will, “as it hath pleased Him” (vs. 18), not us. The reason why all the Christians did not have the gift of tongues is because all of the gifts are divinely bestowed. The Spirit divides and distributes to each believer his own gift. Not one of us is capable of choosing his own gift. The Spirit will not give a gift according to our desire and the way we pray. Don’t try to tell God which gift He should give to you. We are but mem­bers of the Body, and no one member has any right to tell the Head what to do.
It would have been a mistake for the Corinthians to seek the gift of tongues because it is the least of all the gifts. Where the gifts are listed twice in I Corinthians 12, in each instance tongues and their interpretation are placed last (verses 8‑11 and 28‑30). Note the careful wording in the latter passage: “First . . . secondarily . . . thirdly . . . after that . . . ” The least to be desired comes at the bottom of the list, the scale being according to importance and usefulness. The minor place of tongues is further stressed in I Corinthians 14:1, 5, 6, 19. The modern cult of tongues would have you believe that this gift is the only one that really counts and that every Christian ought to have it. The Corinthians erred in overemphasizing the gift of tongues as the most coveted gift of all. To them tongues was the prestige gift, hence its misuse and abuse at Corinth.
Paul charges them with such misuse of the gifts in 12:31. When he writes, “But covet earnestly the best gifts . . .” he is not exhorting or commanding them, as the imperative mood might indicate. Rather he is issuing a statement of fact, as is suggested in the indicative. In substance he is saying, “You are selfishly desiring the more spectacular or demonstrative gifts.” The word “covet” is not used in a good sense, but in a bad sense, that of self‑seeking. “You are not satisfied to be a foot, concealed in a stocking and shoe; you want to be an eye. You want to be seen and heard.” And then the Apostle adds, “Yet shew I unto you a more excellent way. Though I speak with the tongues of men and of angels, and have not charity (love), I am become as sounding brass, or a tinkling cymbal “ (I Corinthians 12:31,13:1).
A young man who claimed to have the gift of speaking in tongues told me that the biblical basis for his doing so was I Corinthians 14:4, namely, self-edification. But this is both selfish and wrong. Paul did say, “He that speaketh in an unknown tongue edifieth himself” (14:4), but then he added, “Even so ye, forasmuch as ye are zealous of spiritual gifts, seek that ye may excel to the edifying of the Church” (14:12). The gifts were given for the edification and profit of the entire Body of Christ, not merely one member. “The members should have the same care one for another” (12:25). Self‑edification is contrary to the principle of love as taught in Chapter 13, for “love seeketh not her own” (13:5). The gifts were given for the common good of all (12:7).
(6) It is a mistake for a woman to speak in tongues. “Let your women keep silence in the churches: for it is not permitted unto them to speak . . .” (14:34). The prohibition here has a direct relation to the problem with which the Apostle is dealing, namely, speaking in tongues. Earlier in the same Epistle he told the women how to dress when they prayed or prophesied in the church (11 :3‑10), therefore he would not forbid them here in Chapter 14 that privilege which is countenanced in Chapter 11. The setting of I Corinthians 14:34 has reference primarily to women speaking in tongues. It is clear and unmistakable that speaking in tongues was a gift limited to men and is never to be exercised by women. Now he is not saying that women may not teach or testify or pray, but that they may not speak in tongues. Elsewhere Paul writes, “But I suffer not a woman to teach, nor to usurp authority over the man, but to be in silence” (I Timothy 2: 12). The point of this passage is that a woman’s ministry must not usurp authority over the man. She may teach women or children, but not men.
If this admonition were heeded today much of the present tongues movement would be eliminated. Women are the worst offenders in the modern confusion of tongues. The word “speak” in 14:34 is the same word used in verse 28, therefore it cannot mean mere “chatter” that would disturb a service in the church. The purpose of this entire section on speaking in tongues is to curb the wrong use of the gift. Verses 27‑33 give instruction for men in the matter of speaking in tongues. “If any man speak in an unknown tongue . . .” (14:27); verses 34‑36 are directed to “women” exercising the gift of tongues. And if any women wanted to take issue with Paul, he would ask them one question, “Which book in all the inspired Scriptures was written as the result of the Holy Spirit revealing the woman?” (Verse 36). It is a mistake for a woman to speak in tongues.
(7) It is a mistake to assume that the sign‑gifts are given to believers today. Now I am not arbitrarily closing the door on miracles. God does intervene in supernatural ways performing miracles when and wherever He pleases to do so. The matter be­fore us now is whether or not the Bible teaches that certain gifts were temporarily given. The evidence of God’s Word must be the final source of authority. I am stressing this because there are many persons who are not students of the Bible, therefore their only source of knowledge and understanding is subjective, name­ly, reason or experience. Whatever appeals to their reason, or whatever experiences they have had, settle a matter for them once and for all time.
It is not uncommon to hear someone say something like this: “I cannot believe in Hell because I cannot conceive a loving God sending anyone to such a place of torment.” Such persons might listen to clear and sound expositions on the biblical doc­trine of Hell, and yet they will reject what the Bible teaches because of their inner feelings and rationale. And so their rationalization becomes their final authority.
Now I am not suggesting that there is no validity in experience or reason. I am quite sure that there are times when one’s reason and experience are correct and therefore reliable. But neither reason nor experience can be accepted as final authority. Someone will argue: “I have had the experience of speaking in tongues; I find this experience in the New Testament; therefore my experience is true.” Any trained Christian philosopher will tell you that such an argument is not valid because it makes experience the basis of truth, so if one does not experience all of the experiences he does not have all of the truth. True Christian philosophy moves from truth to experience, therefore any valid Christian experience must be determined by the right interpretation of Holy Scripture. Experience, which is related to our emotions, can be deceptive, but a correct interpretation of God’s Word can never deceive.
We come now to the question, Is the gift of tongues a part of God’s program for the Church today? If it is, then we would be wrong if we closed our minds to it. If it is not, then we are wrong if we insist upon the exercise of tongues-speaking.
Let us turn to I Corinthians 13. Now keep in mind the fact that the subject in Chapters 12-14 is spiritual gifts with the main emphasis on tongues, because tongues was the one gift that the Corinthians were abusing. Chapter 12 concludes with “tongues” (12:30) and Chapter 13 begins with “tongues” (13:1). Obviously from the behavior of the Corinthians they were lacking in the fruit of the Spirit, namely, love. And so in Chapter 13 the Apostle dwells upon the essential ingredient of love which supercedes the gifts, and without which the Christian is nothing at all.
Among the Corinthians there were quarreling and division, but the needed fruit of the Spirit, love, was missing, so Paul writes, “Though I speak with the tongues of men and of angels, and have not charity (or love), I am become as sounding brass, or a tinkling cymbal” (13 :1). In Corinth the tongues‑speaking amounted to so much noise because carnality had invaded their exercise of the gift. Even today there is a kind of spiritual prestige associated with tongues-speaking. For a Christian to show off any gift that God has given manifests pride that is lacking in love. Where love is lacking, the exercise of any gift is worthless.
If Christians would take seriously, within context, all of the teaching about tongues in I Corinthians, they could not fail to see that tongues‑speaking would cease. Paul writes, “Charity (love) never faileth: but whether there be prophecies, they shall fail; whether there be tongues, they shall cease; whether there be knowledge, it shall vanish away” (13:8). There will always be the need for love, therefore love will never drop off. But when the canon of Scripture is made “perfect” (or complete), there will be no further revelation from God, neither in predictive prophecy nor in divinely revealed knowledge other than prophecy. The gifts of “prophecy” and “knowledge” will be entirely unnecessary with the completion of the Scriptures. And “if any man shall add unto these things, God shall add unto him the plagues that are written in this book” (Revelation 22:18).
Paul acknowledged the incomplete nature of the Scriptures in his day when he said, “For we know in part, and we prophecy in part” (13:9), or more literally from the Greek, “For in part we are knowing, and in part we are prophesying.” Then he adds, “But when that which is perfect is come, then that which is in part shall be done away” (13:10). The word perfect is in the neuter gender, and therefore refers to the perfect (finished or completed) Word of God. If the word perfect referred to Christ it would be in the masculine gender. The sign gifts were “done away” (rendered inoperative) with the completion of the New Testament.
Now what about tongues? “Whether there be tongues, they shall cease” (13:8). Tongues shall cease (Gr. patio), that is, they shall come to a complete halt. Who needs tongues? Only the untaught, carnal babes in Christ, for Paul added, “When I was a child, I spake as a child . . . but when I became a man, I put away childish things” (13:11). The word “spake” in context can only refer to speaking in tongues. So that Paul himself came to the place of Christian maturity, through God’s revelation to him, where tongues were no longer necessary. And so in the same tongues context he admonishes the Corinthians, “Brethren, be not children in understanding . . . but in understanding be men” (14:20). Experientially, tongues cease when the Christian matures on a diet of the meat of God’s Word. Actually tongues is baby talk.
For the past two years I have made it my practice to ask many of the leading Bible teachers and scholars, some of whom having a rich working knowledge of Hebrew and Greek, if they have ever spoken in tongues. Among them are college and seminary presidents and professors. To date I have not had one of about sixty men tell me that he ever spoke in tongues!
I have been asked if I ever spoke in tongues. No, I have not. God and I have gotten along nicely for the past forty-five years in English. I speak to Him in English and He hears and understands me. He speaks to me in English through His Word, and I understand Him.
How then can we account for the wide-spread practice of speaking in tongues? I do not have all of the answers to this question, but I will make three suggestions for your prayer consideration.
First, speaking in tongues can be self-induced. Second, speaking in tongues can be group-induced. Third, speaking in tongues can be satanically-induced.
Since the creation of man Satan’s insidious master-plan has been to put a veil between God’s children and God’s inerrant Word. It began in the Garden of Eden when the Devil asked Mother Eve, “Yea, hath God said . . . ?” (Genesis 3: 1), thereby raising doubt as to the authority and authenticity of what God has said. We know that this enemy has stepped up the pace of his strategy.
Our present generation is witnessing the growing menace of satanic activity in the realm of the miraculous. Where the Devil does not succeed in taking the Bible from us, he works hard at taking us from the Bible. And he succeeds in getting Christians to focus their attention on the claims of men and women to some supernatural experience, and in so doing those seekers after the experiences of others have neither time nor interest in searching the Scriptures for God’s truth.
God does have a plan in His dealings with the human race, and that plan does not necessarily include the continuing repetition of the same miracles in every succeeding century. The miracles of God are rare occurrences in history. Enoch’s bodily translation from earth to heaven was the only recorded miracle performed by God in over 1700 years between Adam and the flood.
The Church of Christ does not need a new Bible, nor new apostles, nor new faith‑healers, nor new charismatic movements, nor self-styled miracle workers. What the Church needs is to return to the Word of God and proclaim the whole counsel of God in the power and love of the Holy Spirit.
And if my reader has never had a personal experience of salvation through faith in Jesus Christ, I urge you to receive Him at once, “For whosoever shall call upon the name of the Lord shall be saved” (Romans 10:13).

Dr. Strauss taught Old Testament history for eight years at Philadelphia Bible Institute, and served as pastor of the Calvary Baptist Church, Bristol, Pennsylvania, from 1939 to 1957. He was pastor of Highland Park Baptist Church (Highland Park, Michigan) until the end of 1963 when he resigned to devote full time to an itinerant Bible conference and evangelistic ministry both in the States and abroad. Dr. Strauss was writing his 19th book at age 86 when he went home to be with the Lord in June 1997. His written materials are used by permission.

Philemon 1:1-25 QUESTIONS FOR MODERN DAY PHILEMON’S


Philemon 1:1-25 QUESTIONS FOR MODERN DAY PHILEMON’S
From Alan Carr

Intro: Ill. The context of the book. This little letter is called the greatest piece of writing ever put on paper. Even unbelievers have seen the greatness of this little story. There are several ways to preach from this book. In fact, one of the greatest examples of redemption and reconciliation in the entire Bible is right here, Ill. The Story. Tonight, I want to take a little different approach to this book and instead of trying to identify with Onesimus, I want us to try and identify with Philemon. Here is a Christian man who has been greatly wronged and is called upon to put it all behind him and forgive. I believe that there are some lessons here for every believer tonight. Please give me you attention as I preach on the subject, Questions For Modern Philemon’s.

I. V.11, 18 HAVE YOU EVER BEEN WRONGED?

A. Ill. The Context. Apparently, Onesimus had stolen property from Philemon and had run away, costing Philemon much money. (Ill. The average price of a slave was 500 denarii)

B. Being wronged by our fellow man is an unfortunate fact of life! Luke 17:1; Matt. 18:7.

C. When we are wronged, we must know how to react. If we react as the world teaches, then we jeopardize our testimony. If we react as the Bible teaches, we glorify God and point men to a Savior who can make a difference in the lives of men. Notice the next three questions that Paul asks:


II. V.12 DO YOU HAVE THE CAPACITY TO FORGIVE?

A. Ill. The Context. Receive = “To take to oneself, To take by the hand, To grant access to one’s heart.” Literally to totally forgive and be reconciled to another.

(Ill. The difficult position Philemon was forced into - If he was lenient, other slaves would do the same, is he was harsh, he would hurt his ministry.)(Ill. Paul’s solution - 1:18-19)

B. When we are wronged, do we have the capacity within us to forgive the offender? We are commanded to! (Matt. 18:20-35; Luke 17:1-5)We have a good example to follow - Ill. Jesus - Eph. 4:31-33; Col. 3:12-13.

C. When we forgive, as Jesus did, then we are walking in love toward man and God - 1 Cor. 13:4-7; Matt. 22:39. (Now is the time to bury the hatchet!)

III. V.15-16 DO YOU HAVE THE CAPACITY TO ACCEPT OTHERS?

A. Ill. Context. When Onesimus left, he was a sinner and a slave, when he came back, he was a saint and a brother to Philemon. Paul’s request was for Philemon to receive Onesimus as a brother in Christ.

B. Are we able to receive all men? Can we receive them regardless of what they have done, what color their skin is, where they come from, etc?

C. As Christians, we are to practice the same type of acceptance that Jesus practiced, regardless of what they have done to us - Eph. 1:6; Gal. 3:28! (Ill. The Prodigal Brother Luke 15:25-32!)

D. Others should not have to meet our standards to be accepted by us - James 2:1-9


IV. V.17 DO YOU HAVE THE CAPACITY TO LOVE LIKE JESUS?

A. Ill. The Context. Philemon had no problem loving the saints, v.5 The true test of His faith would come when he was required to love Onesimus with the same degree of love. Philemon had some big shoes to fill!

B. The test of our faith is our ability to love others as Jesus loves them. Unconditionally, unreservedly, wholeheartedly!

1. Applied to the saints - 1 John 2:10; 3:11; 14; 17-18; 4:7-8; 11; 20-21

2. Applied to all men - Matt. 22:39

C. When we are able to love others, in spite of what they have done to us, then, and only then are we living out the Gospel.

Conc: As you sit here tonight, are you aware of someone who as hurt you? Perhaps you have entertained thoughts of revenge. Maybe you’ve held a grudge against that person for some time. Let me tell you this, when you hold a grudge you are not hurting the person you are angry with, you are hurting yourself. You can never experience the fulness of God’s forgiveness until you practice it in your life. There is no better time to begin than right now. How did you answer these questions?

Friday, September 20, 2013

Titus 3 - REMEMBER THIS


Titus 3 - REMEMBER THIS

A. Remember good works.
1. (Titus 3:1-2) Remember to live obedient and kind lives.
Remind them to be subject to rulers and authorities, to obey, to be ready for every good work, to speak evil of no one, to be peaceable, gentle, showing all humility to all men.
a. Remind them: In the grammar of the ancient Greek text, remind is in the present tense: “Go on reminding.” Titus was to constantly remind the Christians under his care to show proper respect and humility towards all people, particularly those in a position of authority.
i. Knowing the sometimes difficult character of the people of Crete (as mentioned before in Titus 1:12), this command to be subject to rulers and authorities had special meaning.
ii. “It is perhaps significant of the difference between Crete and the province of Asia, as regards respect for law, that in 1 Timothy 2:1-3, reasons are given why we should pray for rulers, while here the more elementary duty of obedience is enjoined.” (White)
b. Ready for every good work: If we simply focus on being subject to rulers and authorities, it is easy to make the Christian life passive. Titus should not allow this, and also remind them to be ready for every good work.
c. Speak evil of no one . . . peaceable . . . gentle, showing all humility to all men: This is a distinctively Christian kindness, coming not from simple good manners but from knowing who we are and who others are in the heart of Jesus.
2. (Titus 3:3) Remember what you used to be.
For we ourselves were also once foolish, disobedient, deceived, serving various lusts and pleasures, living in malice and envy, hateful and hating one another.
a. For we ourselves were also once: This shows why Titus should remind them of the things mentioned in Titus 3:1-2. Remembering where we once were shows us that the fallen nature is not so far from us, and we need constant reminding to stay where we should be in the Lord.
i. For we ourselves: “You need not suppose that it is hopeless to imagine that these wild Cretan folk can be reclaimed. We ourselves are a living proof of the power of God’s grace.” (White)
b. Were also once foolish, disobedient, deceived: Remembering this work of God builds four things in us.
· First, gratitude for how God changed us.
· Second, humility as we see that it was His work that changed us.
· Third, kindness to others in the same place.
· Finally, faith that God can change those who are still in that place.
3. (Titus 3:4-8) Remember the great salvation of God.
But when the kindness and the love of God our Savior toward man appeared, not by works of righteousness which we have done, but according to His mercy He saved us, through the washing of regeneration and renewing of the Holy Spirit, whom He poured out on us abundantly through Jesus Christ our Savior, that having been justified by His grace we should become heirs according to the hope of eternal life. This is a faithful saying, and these things I want you to affirm constantly, that those who have believed in God should be careful to maintain good works. These things are good and profitable to men.
a. But when the kindness and the love of God our Savior toward man appeared: When we were in the place described by Titus 3:3, we didn’t rescue ourselves. We were rescued by the kindness and the love of God. He reached out to us long before we reached out to Him.
b. Not by works of righteousness which we have done: Our salvation isn’t based on any works of righteousness which we have done. In and of itself, response to an altar call does not save. Saying the sinner’s prayer does not save. Baptism does not save. Church attendance does not save. Giving does not save. Reading the Bible does not save. Each of these may be wonderful works of righteousness, but they do not save us. Instead, according to His mercy He saved us.
c. He saved us: This is the essence and distinctive of the gospel. We can notice the emphasis: of God . . . not by works . . . His mercy . . . He saved us . . . of the Holy Spirit . . . He poured . . . through Jesus . . . by His grace . . . heirs. God is always the initiator, and we receive from Him before we give anything back.
d. Through the washing of regeneration: These words are commonly taken as a reference to baptism, and this passage is sometimes quoted in support of the idea of baptismal regeneration. Yet we cannot say that Paul specifically mentions baptism here, and the only other use of the ancient Greek word translated washing here is connected with the spiritual cleansing of the believer by the Word of God through faith (Ephesians 5:26).
i. “In the LXX the word, which occurs three times only, on each occasion seems to represent not the receptacle but the washing itself. This is also the sense in the only other New Testament occurrence, Ephesians 5:26, ‘the washing of water by the word.’“ (Guthrie)
ii. “Most commentators take the washing as a reference to water baptism. But if water baptism is the means that produces the spiritual rebirth, we then have the questionable teaching of a material agency as the indispensable means for producing a spiritual result (but cf. Matthew 15:1-20; Romans 2:25-29; Galatians 5:6). We accept the washing as a divine inner act, although the experience is viewed as openly confessed before men in baptism.” (Hiebert)
e. Those who have believed in God should be careful to maintain good works: This reminds us what we are saved for - to maintain good works. Faith alone saves, but the faith that saves is not alone. We must never put the cart of works before the horse of grace!
i. “The theology of Christianity is based on grace; the ethics of Christianity are based on gratitude.” (Briscoe)
4. (Titus 3:9-11) Remember to keep on course.
But avoid foolish disputes, genealogies, contentions, and strivings about the law; for they are unprofitable and useless. Reject a divisive man after the first and second admonition, knowing that such a person is warped and sinning, being self-condemned.
a. Avoid foolish disputes: These are some of the things which ought not to be taught warned against in Titus 1:11. These foolish disputes are simply unprofitable and useless. Instead, Titus should focus on the simple word of God.
i. Avoid: “The word peristemi literally meaning to turn oneself about so as to face the other way (cf. 2 Timothy 2:16 where it is used in a similar manner).” (Guthrie)
ii. “The Jewish Rabbis spent their time building up imaginary genealogies for the characters of the Old Testament. . . . It is much easier to discuss theological questions than to be kind and considerate and helpful at home, or efficient and diligent and honest at work.” (Barclay)
b. Reject a divisive man: Titus must take measures against those who insist on going their own way. Their self-will makes them self-condemned.
i. “Labour to convince him of his error; but if he will not receive instruction, if he has shut his heart against conviction, then - burn him alive? No, even if demonstrably a heretic in any one sense of that word, and a disturber of the peace of the church, God gives no man any other authority over him but to shun him. Do him no harm in body, soul, character, or substance; hold no communion with him; but leave him to God.” (Clarke)
B. Concluding thoughts.
1. (Titus 3:12-13) Remember people.
When I send Artemas to you, or Tychicus, be diligent to come to me at Nicopolis, for I have decided to spend the winter there. Send Zenas the lawyer and Apollos on their journey with haste, that they may lack nothing.
a. Artemas . . . Tychicus . . . Zenas . . . Apollos: These personal words of Paul - common at the end of his letters - may seem insignificant, but are really very important. They communicate that Paul was a real man in a real world with real friends that he had regular contact with and care for.
i. “It is natural to suppose to Artemas or Tychicus would take the place of Titus as apostolic legate in Crete. This temporary exercise of apostolic superintendence marks a stage in the development of monarchial local episcopacy in the later sense.” (White)
ii. “The epistle closes with reference to Tychicus, Apollos, Artemas, and Zenas. The very mention of these names indicates the growth of the Christian movement.” (Morgan)
b. That they may lack nothing: “The final word concerning occupation shows clearly the duty of members of the Christian Church to contribute to the support of those devoted to the work of the ministry.” (Morgan)
2. (Titus 3:14-15) Remember to do good deeds.
And let our people also learn to maintain good works, to meet urgent needs, that they may not be unfruitful. All who are with me greet you. Greet those who love us in the faith. Grace be with you all. Amen.
a. That they may not be unfruitful: This is a recurring theme through Paul’s letter to Titus. Paul was concerned that Christians might be barren and unfruitful, yet still have a “wonderfully” confident assurance of their standing in the Lord. Instead of being unfruitful, God’s people must learn to maintain good works and to meet urgent needs.
b. Grace be with you all: “The closing benediction harmonizes with the opening salutation. It is a benediction of grace, the only difference being that whereas at the beginning it was addressed to Titus, at the close all those to whom he ministered were included.” (Morgan)

Thursday, September 19, 2013

Titus 2 - TEACH THEM HOW TO LIVE


Titus 2 - TEACH THEM HOW TO LIVE

“FEW portions of the New Testament excel this chapter. It may well form the creed, system of ethics, and text book of every Christian preacher. Does any man inquire what is the duty of a Gospel minister? Send him to the second chapter of the Epistle to Titus for a complete answer.” (Adam Clarke)
A. How Titus must teach different groups of people in the church.
1. (Titus 2:1) The command to teach.
But as for you, speak the things which are proper for sound doctrine:
a. But as for you: This sets Titus apart from the people described at the end of Titus 1. They may teach legalism and fables, but Titus was to teach the things which are proper for sound doctrine.
b. Things which are proper for sound doctrine: The idea behind this phrase has to do with right living, not just right thinking. The Living Bible translates this “Speak up for the right living that goes along with true Christianity.” The New Living Translation has “Promote the kind of living that reflects right teaching.”
i. We can’t escape it. The Bible is a book that tells us how to live. It is the height of hypocrisy to say that we believe its truth if we ignore how it tells us to live our lives. We don’t always like it, but we always need to hear how God expects us to live.
ii. Paul simply wants Titus to fulfill the command of Jesus in Matthew 28:19-20 : Teaching them to observe all things that I have commanded you.
2. (Titus 2:2) What to teach the older men.
That the older men be sober, reverent, temperate, sound in faith, in love, in patience;
a. The older men: Titus had some older men among the Christians in Crete. They had to be approached with love and wisdom, or they might easily be offended when taught by a younger man like Titus.
b. Older men must live with the maturity and wisdom that their years should give them. This means sober, reverent, and temperate lives. The command to teach these things means that they do not come automatically with age.
c. Older men must also have stability, being stable in the right things: sound in faith, in love, in patience. As we get older, we tend to “harden” in our ways. This is a good thing if we “harden” in the ways of faith, love, and patience.
i. Patience is the great ancient Greek word hupomone. It means a steadfast and active endurance, not a passive waiting. Older men are not to just patiently wait around until they pass on to the next world. They are to actively endure the challenges of life; even the challenges of old age.
4. (Titus 2:3-4 a) How to teach the older women.
The older women likewise, that they be reverent in behavior, not slanderers, not given to much wine, teachers of good things; that they admonish the young women
a. The older women likewise: Just as Titus had to give special consideration to the older men, also must he keep in mind how to approach the older women. They have their own set of temptations and opportunities.
b. Reverent in behavior, not slanderers: The idea behind behavior includes a suggestion of dress and how a woman carries herself. The word for slanderers is the same word used for “devils.” When the older women - or anyone else, for that matter - slander and gossip, then they do the devils’ work
i. “The adjective ‘reverent’ basically means ‘suitable to a sacred office’ and conveys the image of a good priestess carrying out the duties of her office. The conduct of the older women must reveal that they regard life as sacred in all of its aspects.” (Hiebert)
c. Not given to much wine: This was a common failing of older women in Roman and Greek culture. Paul recognizes that this special challenge needs special instruction.
i. “The two prohibitions which follow, not false accusers and not given to much wine, again vividly portray the contemporary Cretan environment. The first has already been met in 1 Timothy 3:11 and the second in 1 Timothy 3:8. Evidently in Crete the liability to these excesses was more severe than in Ephesus, especially among the women, for the verb (doulo) used here signifies ‘bondage’ (RSV ‘slaves to drink’), a much stronger expression than the corresponding phrase in 1 Timothy.” (Guthrie)
d. Teachers of good things: If the older women have special challenges, they also have special opportunities. God can use their wisdom and experience as they admonish the young women. This gives the older women something positive to live towards, instead of the negative things of slander and alcohol abuse.
i. “To bring out the required Christian characteristics the apostle uses a unique compound expression, kalodidaskaloi, teachers of good things.” (Guthrie)
4. (Titus 2:4-5) How to teach the younger women.
The young women to love their husbands, to love their children, to be discreet, chaste, homemakers, good, obedient to their own husbands, that the word of God may not be blasphemed.
a. The young women: According to Paul’s instruction, Titus was not to make it his ministry to teach the young women directly. Instead, he was to equip and encourage the older women to teach the young women.
i. Of course, this doesn’t mean that the young women were barred from listening to Titus teach. It simply means that it was wrong - and dangerous - for Titus to make the young women a focus of his ministry. If there was a young women Bible Study group, Titus shouldn’t teach it. The older women should.
b. To love their husbands, to love their children: Instruction for the young women begins with home matters. God has given them a strategic position of influence and assistance to their husbands and their children, and they must let love dominate their influence and assistance.
i. Paul says that love for husbands and children must be taught. Certainly, aspects of this love are inborn. But other aspects - especially aspects that reflect the self-giving sacrifice of Jesus - must be taught.
c. To be discreet, chaste, homemakers: The young women must be taught these attitudes (discreet, chaste) and skills (homemakers).
d. Good, obedient to their own husbands: Goodness isn’t always easy in a world that blurs the line between good and evil, so the older women need to teach the younger to be good. Obedient to their own husbands is another way of expressing the wife’s duty of submission in the marriage relationship (Ephesians 5:22, Colossians 3:18).
e. That the word of God may not be blasphemed: This shows how important it is for the older women to teach these things, and for the younger women to learn them. When Christians don’t live in a Biblical, godly manner it means that the word of God may be blasphemed among the ungodly.
i. “The practical worth of a religion is not unfairly estimated by its effects on the lives of those who profess it. If the observed effect of the Gospel were to make women worse wives, it would not commend it to the heathen.” (White)
5. (Titus 2:6) How to teach the younger men.
Likewise exhort the young men to be sober-minded,
a. Likewise: This is a linking word. It shows that what the young men need to learn isn’t all that different from what the younger women, the older women, and the older men need to learn. We may need a slightly different emphasis depending on our station in life, but the essential message of godly living is the same.
b. To be sober-minded: The Living Bible translates the thought well: Urge the young men to behave carefully, taking life seriously. This is the only command Titus is told to emphasize to young men, but sometimes a difficult one for younger men.
i. Sober-minded: “The word is sophron, and it describes the man with the mind which has everything under control. . . . strength of mind which has learned to govern every instinct and passion until each has its proper place and no more.”
6. (Titus 2:7-8) Titus and his practical example to the young men.
In all things showing yourself to be a pattern of good works; in doctrine showing integrity, reverence, incorruptibility, sound speech that cannot be condemned, that one who is an opponent may be ashamed, having nothing evil to say of you.
a. In all things showing yourself to be a pattern of good works: Titus had to be more than a teacher, he also had to be an example. His guidance to others could not be taken seriously if he himself was not walking after the Lord.
b. In doctrine showing integrity: Titus had to be an example in doctrinal stability and integrity. If he wasn’t comfortably settled in his understanding of the Scriptures, he wasn’t ready to lead.
c. That one who is an opponent may be ashamed: So that your accusers will be embarrassed, having nothing to hold against you. Jesus could say to an angry mob, “Which of you convicts Me of sin?” (John 8:46)
i. White on having nothing evil to say: “The clause means having nothing evil to report concerning us: not, as the English versions, having no evil thing to say.”
7. (Titus 2:9-10) How to teach servants.
Exhort bondservants to be obedient to their own masters, to be well pleasing in all things, not answering back, not pilfering, but showing all good fidelity, that they may adorn the doctrine of God our Savior in all things.
a. Exhort bondservants: Titus was to teach bondservants about their specific duties as Christians. In the ancient world, Christians shocked the larger culture by mixing slaves and masters in the social setting of the church service. This meant that a slave might go to church and be an elder over his own master.
i. “I do not think for a moment Paul believed that the practice of slavery ought to exist. He believed to the fullest extent that the great principles of Christianity would overthrow slavery anywhere, and the sooner they did so the better pleased would he be; but, for the time being, as it was the custom to have slaves, they must adorn the doctrine of God their Savior in the position in which they were.” (Spurgeon)
b. Obedient to their own masters: Paul doesn’t say that bondservants should be obedient to every free man, only to their own masters. This means that Paul recognized that bondservants had obligations, but only to their own masters.
i. Obedient: “The word ‘obedient’ was used to describe a company of sliders as they stand at attention and salute their commander. They are declaring as they stand at attention in front of him that they are ready to take his orders.” (Draper)
ii. At the same time, as in every arena of human submission, our obedience and submission is limited by our higher responsibility to obey God. As Peter said in Acts 5:29, We ought to obey God rather than men when there is a conflict between the two.
c. Not pilfering: This type of offence was so common in the ancient world that sometimes the words servant and thief were used interchangeably. It was assumed that servants would steal from their masters in these small ways.
i. Pilfering: “The word signifies, not only stealing but embezzling another’s property; keeping back a part of the price of any commodity sold on the master’s account. In Acts 5:2, we translate it, to keep back part of the price; the crime of which Ananias and Saphira were guilty.” (Clarke)
d. Well pleasing in all things: Simply, Titus must direct servants to be good workers in all ways. By their hard work and humble submission, they will adorn the doctrine of God our Savior.
i. Adorn: “It literally means to take precious jewels and arrange them so as to show their true beauty.” (Draper)
ii. In one sense the gospel doesn’t need adornment. At the same time, we can show the beauty of the gospel by the way we live. We often think we need better words to adorn the gospel. Better words are fine, but what we really need are better lives.
iii. Wonderfully, those who (in this context) have the ability to adorn the doctrine of God our Savior are bondservants - slaves under a master. Even one in a low or disadvantaged station in life has the potential to beautify God’s truth by they way they live.
iv. “Thus we see how ‘the doctrine of God our Savior’ may ‘be adorned.’ It is adorned when its effects on life and character are expressed in conduct. . . . While it is still only a theory doctrine lacks the manifestation of beauty. When, however, it is realized and manifested in human life its beauty at once appears. The value of a theory is always supremely apparent in the results it produces.” (Morgan)
B. The place of grace in the Christian life.
1. (Titus 2:11) Saving grace.
For the grace of God that brings salvation has appeared to all men,
a. The grace of God that brings salvation: Grace brings salvation. You don’t go out and “get” salvation; it comes to you and you have the opportunity to receive it.
b. Has appeared to all men: There is one gospel of grace for all men. God doesn’t have a gospel of grace for some and a gospel of law or self-justification for others. All men find salvation by the grace of God.
i. “No rank or class or type of mankind is outside the saving influence of God’s grace.” (White)
ii. “There is a beauty and energy in the word epiphaino, hath shined out, that is rarely noted; it seems to be a metaphor taken from the sun. As by his rising in the east and shining out, he enlightens, successively, the whole world; so the Lord Jesus, who is called the Sun of righteousness, Malachi 4:2, arises on the whole human race with healing in his wings.” (Clarke)
iii. The light and warmth of the sun is for the whole earth; but it does not shine upon the earth all at the same time, nor in the same intensity from place to place.
2. (Titus 2:12-13) What grace teaches us.
Teaching us that, denying ungodliness and worldly lusts, we should live soberly, righteously, and godly in the present age, looking for the blessed hope and glorious appearing of our great God and Savior Jesus Christ,
a. Teaching us that: The ancient Greek word for teaching has in mind what a parent does for a child. It speaks of the entire training process: teaching, encouragement, correction, and discipline. Grace is a teacher in this sense.
i. “ ‘It teaches us’ declares that grace also operates in the lives of the saved. Grounded in God’s nature, grace makes ethical demands of Christians consistent with his nature. ‘Teaches’ pictures grace, practically personified, as instructing the believer in the things ‘in accord with sound doctrine.’“ (Hiebert)
ii. “He means that God’s grace, should instruct us to order our lives aright. Some are quick to turn the preaching of God’s mercy into an excuse for licentiousness, while carelessness keeps others from thinking about the renewal of their life. But the revelation of God’s grace necessarily brings with it exhortations to a godly life.” (Calvin)
iii. “Thus you see that grace has its own disciples. Are you a disciple of the grace of God? Did you ever come and submit yourself to it?” (Spurgeon)
b. Denying ungodliness and worldly lusts: Grace puts ungodliness and worldly lusts in our past. Now grace teaches us to renounce those things, not only to avoid them.
i. Denying: “This indicates the renunciation of the Devil, of the vanity of this world, and of all the sinful lusts of the flesh.” (White)
ii. One may say that in a world where we are tempted to say “Yes” to every desire and feelings, that the reality of our faith can be demonstrated by what we say no to, by what we are willing to deny.
iii. “The most difficult part of the training of young men is not to put the right thing into them, but to get the wrong thing out of them.” (Spurgeon)
c. We should live soberly, righteously, and godly in the present age: Grace teaches us how to live in the present age. We must live soberly (self-controlled) in regard to ourselves. We must live righteously in regard to the people around us. And we must live godly (“to take God seriously”) in regard to our God.
i. “We are taught by that gentle school-mistress, the Grace of God, to live - soberly, as regards our personal life; righteously, in relation to others; godly, in our attitude towards God.” (Meyer)
ii. Taken together, we see that the fear of the legalist - that preaching grace produces Christians indifferent to obedience - is unfounded. Grace teaches us obedience. “Wherever the grace of God comes effectually, it makes the loose liver deny the desires of the flesh; it causes the man who lusted after gold to conquer his greediness; it brings the proud man away from his ambitions; it trains the idler to diligence, and it sobers the wanton mind which cared only for the frivolities of life. Not only do we leave these lusts, but we deny them.” (Spurgeon)
iii. The phrase godly in the present age is also a subtle proof against the idea of purgatory or some place of cleansing in the life to come. “Not supposing that any thing will be purified in the world to come that is not cleansed in this.” (Clarke)
d. Looking for the blessed hope: Grace teaches us to expect and prepare for our blessed hope. That hope is not heaven or glory, but Jesus Himself, face to face, closer than ever.
i. Looking for indicates that Christians should live in active expectation of the return of Jesus. It should be precious for Christians to consider:
· He came the first time to save the soul of man; He will come a second time to resurrect the body.
· He came the first time to save the individual; He will come a second time to save society.
· He came the first time to a crucifixion; He will come a second time to a coronation.
· He came the first time to a tree; He will come a second time to a throne.
· He came the first time in humility; He will come a second time in glory.
· He came the first time and was judged by men; He will come a second time to judge all men.
· He came the first time and stood before Pilate; He will come a second time and Pilate will stand before Him.
ii. Our great God: “This is the only place in the N.T. in which megas is applied to the true God, although it is a constant predicate of heathen gods and goddesses, e.g., Acts 19:28.” (White)
iii. “The discipline of grace, according to the apostle, has three results - denying, living, looking. You see the three words before you.” (Spurgeon)
3. (Titus 2:14) The heart of the God of grace.
Who gave Himself for us, that He might redeem us from every lawless deed and purify for Himself His own special people, zealous for good works.
a. Who gave Himself for us: Every word of this description of Jesus’ work is important. Jesus gave, which means it was voluntary. He gave Himself, which means Jesus gave all He could give. And He gave Himself for us, which means Jesus was given as a substitute for sinful man.
b. That He might redeem us: Redemption means “to be bought out of slavery by the paying of a ransom.” We are bought out of our slavery to sin, and purchased for His service.
i. From every lawless deed: “And we are, therefore, taught that the death of Jesus was intended, not for our forgiveness and justification merely, but for our sanctification, and our deliverance from the power of all our besetting sins.” (Meyer)
ii. His own special people: “The word we have translated special (periousios) is interesting. It means reserved for; and it was specially used for that part of the spoils of a battle or a campaign which the king who had conquered set apart especially for himself.” (Barclay)
c. Zealous for good works: We are redeemed purchased to live with zeal. This is zeal with knowledge, and zeal for righteousness in our own life before zeal for righteousness in the lives of others.
i. “As you know, Titus was a teacher of teachers. He had to set in order the things that were wanting, and to show other preachers how they were to preach. . . . You see how much of the Epistle is taken up with the affairs of ordinary life, matters of holy practice; so let our preaching be, and let Christian people learn to receive joyfully such instruction.” (Spurgeon)
4. (Titus 2:15) The messengers of grace.
Speak these things, exhort, and rebuke with all authority. Let no one despise you.
a. Speak these things: Titus, and every one of God’s messengers of grace are directed to speak, exhort, and rebuke - and to do it with all authority. God’s messengers are to remember that they are messengers from a King, holding the word that brings life and turns back hell.
b. Let no one despise you: If Titus spoke with all authority, he had to back it up with his life. Titus had to live so that no one would despise him or his message.
i. “Since this letter would be read in the churches, the remark was apparently intended as much for the Cretans as for Titus himself.” (Hiebert)

Wednesday, September 18, 2013

Titus 1 - A MISSION FOR TITUS



Titus 1 - A MISSION FOR TITUS

A. Introduction and greeting.
1. (Titus 1:1) The Apostle Paul, author of this letter to Titus.
Paul, a bondservant of God and an apostle of Jesus Christ, according to the faith of God’s elect and the acknowledgment of the truth which accords with godliness,
a. Paul: In writing his own name first, Paul followed the letter-writing customs of his day. First the writer was mentioned, and then the reader, and then a greeting was given.
i. From Titus 1:5 we learn that Paul and Titus worked together in Crete, spreading the gospel and establishing churches - but Paul had to leave. Titus stayed and worked among the congregations there. Since Titus was left behind to do a difficult work, Paul wanted to instruct and encourage him - and he did so with this letter.
ii. “That St. Paul had been in Crete, though nowhere else intimated, is clear from this passage. That he could not have made such an important visit, and evangelized an island of the first consequence, without it being mentioned by his historian, Like, had it happened during the period embraced in the Acts of the Apostles, must be evident. That the journey, therefore, must have been performed after the time in which St. Luke ends his history, that is, after St. Paul’s first imprisonment at Rome, seems almost certain.” (Clarke)
iii. Paul wrote this as two other Christian workers (Zenas and Apollos, mentioned in Titus 3:13) were about to go to Crete, so Paul sent this letter with them.
iv. This letter was written to Titus, but it was also written to the Christians on the island of Crete. Paul knew this letter would be publicly read among the churches on the island. So, in the structure of opening the letter, Paul took great care to tell the Christians of Crete what his credentials were, and where he stood on important issues. Paul didn’t think like a politician who often responds to what the crowd wants and to what pleases the crowd.
b. Paul, a bondservant of God: Of all the titles Paul could use, he first chose “bondservant of God.” If Paul had a modern day business card, that would be his title on the card.
i. Significantly, when Paul used the term bondservant, he chose the ancient Greek word doulos. This word not only designated a low slave (one Greek scholar called it “the most abject, servile term in use among the Greeks for a slave”), it was also the word for a slave by choice.
ii. Paul was only a bondservant - yet he had a high place, because He was a bondservant of God. It is never a low thing to be a servant of a great God.
c. And an apostle of Jesus Christ: God gave Paul a special role to play among His servants. Paul’s particular call and function was as a special messenger of God - an apostle. Paul knew his call and purpose among the body of Christ, and so should each Christian today also know for themselves.
d. According to the faith: Paul wasn’t an apostle because of the faith of God’s elect, but in harmony with the faith (in the sense of a specific, common body of doctrine) shared among God’s elect.
i. God’s elect are those whom He chose from before the foundation of the world to receive His salvation. We can identify God’s elect because they respond to the gospel of Jesus Christ and live their lives after that gospel.
e. The acknowledgement of the truth: For Paul it wasn’t enough to just know the faith, he also had to acknowledge it for what it really was.
f. Which accords with godliness: Paul stood in accord with godly living. All truth is God’s truth; but not all truth is really relevant to godliness, which promotes “God-likeness”. Much of science or psychology may be true and admirable - but it won’t save a soul from Hell. It is not the truth which accords with godliness.
2. (Titus 1:2) Paul was an apostle in the hope of eternal life.
In hope of eternal life which God, who cannot lie, promised before time began,
a. Eternal life: This is the life of the Eternal God living within us. It is present now, but will be completed later.
i. “The Christian gospel does not in the first place offer men an intellectual creed or a moral code; it offers them life, the very life of God.” (Barclay)
b. Which God, who cannot lie, promised: This eternal life is not a wish, but a hope. In this sense, hope is an anticipation founded not on wishful thinking, but on a promise from the God who cannot lie.
3. (Titus 1:3) Paul was an apostle who believed in preaching the word.
But has in due time manifested His word through preaching, which was committed to me according to the commandment of God our Savior;
a. But in due time manifested His word through preaching: Paul knew that preaching is the way that God’s eternal work meets people today. Preaching is the way God’s word is made evident (manifested).
i. But has in due time manifested His word: Christianity came into the world at a time when it was uniquely possible for its message to spread rapidly.
· There was a common language (Greek), which was the language of trade, business, and literature.
· There were virtually no frontiers because of the vast nature of the Roman Empire.
· Travel was comparatively easy. It was slow, but relatively safe because of the security that the Roman Empire brought to roads and sea routes.
· The world was largely at peace under the pax Romana.
· The world was uniquely conscious of its need for a messiah and savior. “There was never a time when the hearts of men were more open to receive the message of salvation which the Christian missionaries brought.” (Barclay)
b. Which was committed to me: Paul knew the work of preaching was entrusted to him, but not to him only. Preaching is a work committed to all believers.
4. (Titus 1:4) The reader: Titus, Paul’s convert and his true (faithful) son.
To Titus, a true son in our common faith: Grace, mercy, and peace from God the Father and the Lord Jesus Christ our Savior.
a. To Titus: Significantly, we don’t know anything about Titus from Acts. He is strangely absent from that record, though he must have been an associate of Paul during the time covered by Acts. Yet we do read about him in 2 Corinthians 2:13; 2Co_8:23; 2Co_12:18.
i. 2 Corinthians 8:18 and 2 Corinthians 12:18 both say that when Titus was sent to Corinth another brother was sent with him, described in the former passage as ‘the brother who is famous among all the churches,’ and commonly identified with Luke. It has been suggested that Titus was Luke’s brother.” (Titus)
ii. Though we read nothing about Titus in Acts, we still know something of his character and personality.
· Titus was a true son in our common faith (Titus 1:4).
· Titus was a genuine brother to the Apostle Paul (2 Corinthians 2:13).
· Titus was a partner and a fellow worker with Paul (2 Corinthians 8:23).
· Titus walked in the same spirit as Paul (2 Corinthians 12:18).
· Titus walked in the same steps as Paul, in the same manner of life (2 Corinthians 12:18).
· Therefore, Titus could be a pattern to other believers (Titus 2:7).
iii. “He seems to have been a man of great common sense; so that, when Paul had anything difficult to be done, he sent Titus. When the collection was to be made at Corinth on behalf of the poor saints at Jerusalem, Paul sent Titus to stir the members up, and with him another brother to take charge of the contributions.” (Spurgeon)
b. A true son in our common faith: Paul stood in support of a common faith. It is a common faith, not an isolated one. Paul was for the church and the community of all believers.
i. “It must not be restricted to a faith shared only by St. Paul and Titus; but, like [Judges 1:3], it is common to all Christians.” (White)
c. Grace, mercy, and peace: In his greeting Paul used words typical for a greeting in the ancient world. But when Paul used these words, they were not used just as a formality because Paul knew the source of all grace, mercy, and peace. They come from God the Father and the Lord Jesus Christ our Savior.
i. God the Father and God the Son share in the gift of salvation. “The Son has brought to us salvation from the Father, and the Father has bestowed it through the Son.” (Calvin)
B. Paul’s mission for Titus.
1. (Titus 1:5) The challenge given to Titus.
For this reason I left you in Crete, that you should set in order the things that are lacking, and appoint elders in every city as I commanded you;
a. For this reason I left you in Crete: After a successful evangelistic campaign on the island of Crete, there were a lot of young Christians to take care of. Paul left Titus behind to build stable churches with mature, qualified pastors for the people. This was especially needed in Crete, because the people of Crete were a wild bunch, well known as liars and lazy people. Titus had to find and train capable leaders for the Christians of the island of Crete.
i. When a job is hard, there are basically two kinds of people. With one you say, “The job is really hard, so we can’t send him.” With the other you say, “The job is really hard, so we must send him.” Titus seemed to be of the second kind.
ii. I left you in Crete uses the same wording as Paul used in 2 Timothy 4:13; 2Ti_4:20 where he spoke of a cloak and an associate temporarily left behind. The idea is that he left Titus in Crete on a limited basis to solve these problems, establish godly leadership, and then move on (probably to catch up again with Paul).
b. Set in order the things that are lacking: This was the job Titus was given. The church needed order and leadership. Titus was commanded to set in order the churches, and to do it by appointing godly leaders.
i. “That phrase is a medical term; it was applied to the setting of a crooked limb.” (Wiersbe) There were crooked things that had to be set straight among the congregations of Crete.
ii. If we compare the work of Titus in Crete to the work of Timothy in Ephesus (as shown by 1 and 2 Timothy), it shows there was much more lacking among the congregations of Crete. Paul specifically told Titus to set in order the things that are lacking, and gave no such command to Timothy.
Apparently the Ephesian congregations were ready for both elders and deacons, but only elders are mentioned in Titus.
c. And appoint elders in every city: Paul told Titus to appoint elders, who are also called bishops in Titus 1:7. The word elder is used broadly in the New Testament, mainly describing the maturity necessary in leaders. Elders and bishops describe pastors over congregations in different cities on Crete.
i. “The number of presbyters is not specified; the meaning is that the order of presbyters should be established all over the island.” (White)
ii. As I commanded you: “In the phrase as I had appointed thee (RSV better ‘as I directed you’) the I is emphatic, bringing out not Paul’s egotism, but his authoritative endorsement of the elder-system.” (Guthrie)
d. In every city: This was a big job, because Crete was famous for having many cities.
i. “It should be carefully noted that churches cannot safely remain without the ministry of pastors, so that, wherever there is a considerable body of people, a pastor should be appointed over them. In saying that each town should have a pastor he does not mean that none should have more than one, but only that no town should be without pastors.” (Calvin)
e. Appoint elders: This means Paul delegated a lot of authority to Titus. These elders were not chosen by popular vote, and they were not chosen through their own self-promotion. It was Titus’ job to look for men of the kind of character Paul would describe in the following passage and to appoint them as elders in congregations.
i. Calvin notes that this means Paul gave Titus a tremendous amount of authority, and that under Paul’s direction (and the direction of the Holy Spirit), this authority was in Titus and not in a group or a committee. “But he may seem to give Titus too much authority when he tells him to appoint ministers for all the churches. This would be almost royal power and would deprive individual churches of their right to elect and the college of pastors of their right to judge, and that would be to profane the whole administration of the Church.” (Calvin)
ii. Calvin goes on to suggest that the answer is easy - that Titus actually just approved or ratified the leaders that the congregations themselves selected. There is not a hint of this in the text of Titus or anywhere else. Plainly, God intended Titus as one man to have this authority and for him to use it in a godly manner.
iii. The list in the following passage means that God has specific qualifications for leaders in the church. Leaders should not to be chosen at random, or just because they volunteer, or because they aspire to the position, or even because they are “natural leaders.” Leaders should be chosen because they match the qualifications listed here. It is fine if a man thinks he is “called.” Yet he must also be qualified.
iv. The qualifications for leadership in the following passage have nothing to do with giftedness. Paul didn’t say to Titus “Find the most gifted guys.” We might say that it is easy for the Lord to grant gifts by the Holy Spirit as He wills (1 Corinthians 12:11), but developing character takes time and a real relationship with Jesus Christ.
· Going to seminary doesn’t make one qualified for spiritual leadership.
· Being a good talker doesn’t make one qualified for spiritual leadership.
· Natural or spiritual gifts in themselves do not qualify one for spiritual leadership.
· What one gives in money or volunteer time does not qualify them for spiritual leadership.
· What qualifies a man for spiritual leadership is godly character - and godly character established according to the clear criteria Paul will list.
v. However, this is not a rigid list which demands perfection in all areas. It provides both goals to reach for and general criteria for selection. We should take this list and ask “Does the man in question desire all these things with his whole heart? Does that desire show itself in his life?” Titus was to take the following list, find the men who best fit the description, and then use the list as a training guide to disciple these men.
vi. As well, these qualifications are valuable for every person - not only those who aspire to leadership. They are clear indicators of godly character and spiritual maturity; they can give a true measure of a man.
3. (Titus 1:6-8) What Titus must look for in the appointment of leaders.
If a man is blameless, the husband of one wife, having faithful children not accused of dissipation or insubordination. For a bishop must be blameless, as a steward of God, not self-willed, not quick-tempered, not given to wine, not violent, not greedy for money, but hospitable, a lover of what is good, sober-minded, just, holy, self-controlled,
a. If a man is blameless: This word literally means “nothing to take hold upon.” There must be nothing in the life of the leader that others can take hold of and attack his life or the church.
i. This is a broad term for a man who lives a righteous life that can be seen as righteous. No one could stand up and rightfully accuse the man of grievous sin.
ii. This is important, because he was a steward of God’s house. The greater the master is, the greater the servants are expected to be.
b. Husband of one wife: The idea is of “a one-woman man.” It does not mean that a leader must be married. If that were the case, then both Jesus and Paul would be disqualified from leadership. Nor is it the idea that a leader could never remarry if his wife had passed away or if he were Biblically divorced. The idea is that the leader has his focus upon one woman - that being his wife.
c. Having faithful children: The leader must have raised his children well. His ability to lead the family of God must be first demonstrated by his ability to lead his own children. Here the emphasis is on the idea that his children are believers also.
i. “If they remained pagans, it would throw into question the father’s ability to lead others to the faith.” (Hiebert) “A wise father first wins his own family to Christ and then gives them a chance to grow before he pulls up stakes and moves to bible school. We would have fewer casualties in the ministry if this policy were followed more often.” (Wiersbe)
ii. “It is significant that the moral requirements of the pastor’s children are more mildly expressed in 1 Timothy 3:4-5; 1Ti_3:12. There it is the father’s power to keep order in his own house that is emphasised; here the submission of the children to discipline and restraint.” (White)
iii. “The family of the elder must be such that they cannot be accused of [dissipation]. The Greek word is asotia. It is the word used in Luke 15:13 for the riotous living of the prodigal son. The man who is asotos is incapable of saving; he is wasteful and extravagant and pours out his substance on personal pleasure; he destroys his substance and in the end ruins himself.” (Barclay)
d. Not self-willed: Basically selfish people are disqualified from leadership. They show their self-willed nature in arrogance, stubbornness, and a proud self-focus.
i. “Not one who is determined to have his own way in every thing; setting up his own judgment to that of all others; expecting all to pay homage to his understanding.” (Clarke)
e. Not quick-tempered: The quick-tempered are also disqualified from leadership, as are those who drink more than is proper (not given to wine), the violent, and those greedy for money.
i. Not quick-tempered: The ancient Greek word used here (orgilos) actually refers more to a settled state of anger than the flash of an occasional bad temper. It speaks of a man who has a constant simmering anger and who nourishes his anger against others - close to the idea of a bitter man.
ii. Violent: “The Greeks themselves widened the meaning of this word to include, not only violence in action, but also violence in speech. The word came to mean one who browbeats his fellow-men, and it may well be that it should be so translated here.” (Barclay)
iii. Not greedy for money: “There are no regulations here laid down for deacons; so we are entitled to conclude that in Crete, at this time, presbyters performed the duties of every church office. Hence they should have the appropriate deaconal virtue [as in 1 Timothy 3:8].” (White)
f. But hospitable: A leader among God’s people must be a hospitable man, and one who loves what is good. Men who love the base and the sordid things of this world are not yet qualified to be leaders among God’s people.
g. Soberminded: This describes the person who is able to think clearly and with clarity. They are not constant joke-makers, but know how to deal with serious subjects in a serious way.
i. Wiersbe on soberminded: “This does not man he has no sense of humor, or that he is always solemn and somber. Rather it suggests that he knows the value of things and does not cheapen the ministry or the Gospel message by foolish behavior.” (From Wiersbe’s commentary on 1 Timothy)
ii. In the mind of the Apostle Paul, this was an important quality in a leader. He used this word ten times in his short letters to Timothy and Titus.
h. Just, holy, self-controlled: A pastor or leader in the church must be just (right toward men), holy (right towards God), self-controlled (right towards himself).
i. “How unfit are those to govern a church who cannot govern themselves!” (Matthew Henry)
C. What leaders in the church are supposed to do.
1. (Titus 1:9 a) Titus must appoint elders who will hold fast to the word of God.
Holding fast the faithful word as he has been taught,
a. Holding fast the faithful word: This means first that the leader must be sure of the faithful word for himself. When he brings the word of God to people he must bring it with confidence and authority, not mixed with theological speculation and academic doubts.
i. “There is not need of fancy words, but of strong minds, of skill in the scriptures, and of powerful thoughts.” (Chrysostom)
b. Holding fast the faithful word: This means also that the leader will stick to God’s word, instead of a focus on fads and programs for the church. If a man will not first stick to the word, and will not then stick with the word of God, he is not qualified for leadership in God’s church.
c. As he has been taught: This means that the leader has been under the teaching of someone else. A qualified leader doesn’t necessarily need to go to Bible College or Seminary, but they do need to be taught and discipled by someone, not just themselves.
2. (Titus 1:9 b) Titus must appoint leaders who will also use the word properly.
That he may be able, by sound doctrine, both to exhort and convict those who contradict.
a. That he may be able . . . both to exhort and convict those who contradict: A godly leader will use his solid foundation in God’s word to exhort (encourage) those who are on the right track. He will also use it to convict (discourage) those who are on the wrong track, those who contradict.
i. “A preacher must be both soldier and shepherd. He must nourish, defend, and teach; he must have teeth in his mouth and be able to bite and fight.” (Luther)
b. By sound doctrine: A godly leader deals with those who contradict, and he does it with sound doctrine. He doesn’t do it with pompous authority and political back-stabbing. He brings correction with sound doctrine.
i. If a leader does not have a basis in sound doctrine to either exhort or convict an individual, he probably shouldn’t do it. Leaders need to stand on the foundation of the word.
D. Why it was important for Titus to appoint these qualified leaders.
1. (Titus 1:10-11) Those who must be confronted and how to stop them.
For there are many insubordinate, both idle talkers and deceivers, especially those of the circumcision, whose mouths must be stopped, who subvert whole households, teaching things which they ought not, for the sake of dishonest gain.
a. For there are many insubordinate: The word insubordinate indicates someone who will not submit to God’s order of authority. The ancient Greek word translated insubordinate is the negative form of the word submit - an insubordinate man will not submit.
i. God has established an order of authority in several different areas of life. There is an order of authority in the home, in the church, in the workplace, and in the community. God wants us to recognize the places where He has place an order of authority in our lives, and He wants us to submit to that authority.
ii. If there were many contentious and “problem people” among God’s people in Paul’s day, so soon after the apostle himself had been among them, then we should also expect that there would be such people today. There are still many insubordinate.
b. Idle talkers and deceivers: These problem people will make themselves known by their unwise speech and by their deception.
i. Idle talkers: “The main idea was of a worship which produced no goodness of life. These people in Crete could talk glibly but all their talk was ineffective in bringing anyone one step nearer goodness.” (Barclay)
c. Especially those of the circumcision: Paul was particularly concerned with the effect of some Christians from a Jewish background, who thought the key to acceptance before God was keeping the Law of Moses.
i. The words insubordinate and of the circumcision taken together show that these were Christians from a Jewish background, or at least they were Christians in name. “We cannot call those persons unruly on whose obedience we have no claim.” (White)
ii. “They tried to persuade them that the simple story of Jesus and the Cross was not sufficient, but that, to be really wise, they needed all the subtle stories and the long genealogies and the elaborate allegories of the Rabbis. Further, they tried to teach them that grace was not enough, but that, to be really good, they needed to take upon themselves all the rules and regulations about foods and washings which were so characteristic of Judaism.” (Barclay)
iii. We can understand why it might be more difficult for Christians who came from Judaism and why they might tend to be more of a source of trouble in the early churches. Christians from pagan backgrounds immediately knew that they had to reject everything about their prior understanding about the gods. Yet Christians from Judaism had to take some things and leave others, and this is often more difficult.
d. Whose mouths must be stopped: Titus had to train the elders he chose to simply “shut up” these problem people. They should not to be allowed to gain a hearing, because if allowed, they would subvert whole households.
i. Whose mouths must be stopped: “That does not imply that they are to be silence by violence or persecution . . . it became the normal word for to silence a person by reason.” (Barclay)
e. Teaching things which they ought not: There are at least three things which should not be taught among Christians. First, false doctrine ought not to be taught. Second, insubordinate things ought not to be taught. Third, unprofitable things ought not to be taught.
i. In 1 Timothy 1:4, Paul warned Timothy to not give heed to fables and endless genealogies, which cause disputes rather than godly edification which is in faith. There are certain spiritual subjects that are not edifying, and are not profitable. All they do is cause speculations and arguments. When Titus found men teaching things which they ought not, he was supposed to stop it.
f. For the sake of dishonest gain: These problem people were motivated by gain. Paul’s main idea was of dishonest financial gain, and there are many who fit that description today. However, the dishonest gain some seek from the gospel is emotional instead of financial. They serve for the sake of the gain that comes when others recognize or admire them as a spiritual leader.
2. (Titus 1:12-14) Why the problem is difficult, and what to do about it.
One of them, a prophet of their own, said, “Cretans are always liars, evil beasts, lazy gluttons.” This testimony is true. Therefore rebuke them sharply, that they may be sound in the faith, not giving heed to Jewish fables and commandments of men who turn from the truth.
a. Cretans are always liars, evil beasts, lazy gluttons: The problem was difficult because of the general character of the Cretans. Even prophets among the Cretans described the island people as liars, evil beasts, and lazy gluttons, it indicates that there is a character problem.
i. If the Cretans had this basic character, it shows why it was so important for Titus to appoint elders to lead the church. If these congregations were left to themselves, chaos and error would dominate the churches.
ii. A prophet of their own: Paul did not mean that the Cretan writer he quotes here was an inspired prophet of God. But that writer did have it correct when he described the character of the people of Crete. As Paul wrote, this testimony - not the entire testimony of this writer - is true.
iii. “There was a Cretan prophet once who told plain truths to his countrymen. The whole line occurs, according to Jerome, in the [works] of Epimenides, a native of Cnossus in Crete.” (White)
iv. “So notorious were the Cretans that the Greeks actually formed a verb kretizein, to cretize, which means to lie and to cheat; and they had a proverbial phrase, kreitzein pros Kreta, to cretize against a Cretan, which meant to match lies with lies, as diamond cuts diamond.” (Barclay)
v. Paul didn’t say to Titus, “Cretans are liars and cheats and gluttons, with one of the worst reputations of any group in the Roman Empire. You should look for an easier group to work with.” Instead he said, “I know how bad they are. Go out and change them with the power of Jesus and for His glory.”
b. Therefore rebuke them sharply: Because of the generally hardened character of the people of the island of Crete, they must be dealt with directly. Titus himself must rebuke them sharply, that they may be sound in the faith, and he must also appoint leaders who will do the same.
c. Not giving heed to Jewish fables and commandments of men who turn from the truth: As mentioned before (especially those of the circumcision, Titus 1:10) the particular point of contention in the churches of Crete had to do with a Jewish legalism. It was not centered not on God’s word, but on Jewish fables and the commandments of men who turn from the truth.
3. (Titus 1:15-16) The character of these difficult people.
To the pure all things are pure, but to those who are defiled and unbelieving nothing is pure; but even their mind and conscience are defiled. They profess to know God, but in works they deny Him, being abominable, disobedient, and disqualified for every good work.
a. To the pure, all things are pure: With their attraction to Jewish legalism, the difficult people Titus had to confront seemed to believe that nothing is pure. They denied Christians basic and godly pleasures that were not sin.
i. Timothy had to deal with the same kind of people. Paul warned Timothy about those forbidding to marry, and commanding to abstain from foods which God created to be received with thanksgiving by those who believe and know the truth (1 Timothy 4:3). Paul knew that if a Christian walked in the purity of the Lord, these things were pure to him. But to those of a legalistic mind (those who are defiled and unbelieving), they seemed to believe nothing is pure. The problem was with their defiled and unbelieving minds and consciences, not with the things themselves.
ii. All things are pure: Of course, Paul does not mean that obviously sinful things (pornography, illicit drugs, and the like) are pure. Paul has in mind those things which are permitted by Scripture, but forbidden by legalists in a mistaken attempt to earn favor with God.
iii. “Paul was refuting the false teaching of these legalists with reference to foods. They were teaching that Jewish dietary laws still applied to Christian believers.” (Wiersbe)
iv. “The ‘all things’ refers to everything which is non-moral; such as appetite and food, desire and marriage, exchange and commerce, weariness and recreation, and so on through all the varied realm of life. To the pure all these things are pure, and they will be maintained in purity. To the impure, every one of them may be made the vehicle and occasion of impurity.” (Morgan)
b. They profess to know God, but in works they deny Him: These difficult people Titus had to deal with were all the more difficult because they talked like Christians. Their profession was all in order, but in works they deny Him. We can’t just go by what a person says. We have to also look at how they live.
i. “They acted as if this Supreme Being was a mere metaphysical abstraction, out of all moral relation to human life, as if He were neither Saviour nor Judge.” (J.H. Bernard, cited in White)
c. Being abominable, disobedient, and disqualified for every good work: These are strong words, but Paul means it. These difficult people probably pretended to have a higher spirituality than Titus or other godly leaders. But Paul saw right through their spiritual façade and wanted Titus - and all the Christians on Crete - to see through it also.
i. The word abominable has the idea of polluted by idolatry.
ii. Disqualified: The ancient Greek word is adokimos, and was used in many different ways:
· It was used to describe a counterfeit coin.
· It was used to describe a cowardly soldier who failed in battle.
· It was used of a candidate rejected for elected office.
· It was used of stone rejected by builders. If a stone had a bad enough flaw, it was marked with a capital A (for adokimos) and set aside as unfit.