Titus

Commentary on
Titus and Philemon

Bible Study Notes
and Comments
by David E. Pratte
Available in print at
gospelway.com/sales
Commentary on Titus and Philemon:
Bible Study Notes and Comments
© Copyright David E. Pratte, 2022

All rights reserved
ISBN: 9798359656719
Imprint: Independently published
Note carefully: No teaching in any of our materials is

intended or should ever be construed to justify or to in any
way incite or encourage personal vengeance or physical vio-
lence against any person.
Front page photo

A bay on the island of Crete where Titus was when Paul wrote to him.
“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…” - Titus 1:5
Photo credit: Olaf Tausch distributed under GNU FDL version 1.2 via
Wikimedia Commons
Other Acknowledgements
Unless otherwise indicated, Scripture quotations are generally from the New
King James Version (NKJV), copyright 1982, 1988 by Thomas Nelson, Inc. used by
permission. All rights reserved.
Scripture quotations marked (NASB) are from Holy Bible, New American
Standard La Habra, CA: The Lockman Foundation, 1995.
Scripture quotations marked (ESV) are from The Holy Bible, English Standard
Version, copyright ©2001 by Crossway Bibles, a publishing ministry of Good News
Publishers. Used by permission. All rights reserved.
Scripture quotations marked (LEB) are from The Lexham English Bible. Lex-
ham Press, 2012. Used by permission. All rights reserved.
Scripture quotations marked (MEV) from The Modern English Version. Mili-
tary Bible Assoc., 2014. Used by permission. All rights reserved.
Scripture quotations marked (MLV) are from Modern Literal Version of The
New Testament, Copyright 1999 by G. Allen Walker.
Scripture quotations marked (NRSV) are from the New Revised Standard Ver-
sion of the Bible, copyright 1989 by the Division of Christian Education, National
Council of the Churches of Christ in the USA.
Scripture quotations marked (HCSB) are from the Holman Christian Standard
Bible, copyright 2008 by Holman Bible publishers, Nashville, TN.
Scripture quotations marked (MLB) are from The Modern Language Bible:
Berkeley Version, copyright 1969 by Hendrickson Publishers.
Scripture quotations marked (NIV) are from the New International Version of
the Holy Bible, copyright 1978 by Zondervan Bible publishers, Grand Rapids, Mich-
igan.
Commentary on Titus and Philemon Page #2

Other Books by the Author
Topical Bible Studies
Why Believe in God, Jesus, and the Bible? (evidences)
True Words of God: Bible Inspiration and Preservation
“It Is Written”: The Authority of the Bible
Salvation through Jesus Christ: Basics of Forgiveness
Grace, Faith, and Obedience: The Gospel or Calvinism?
Growing a Godly Marriage & Raising Godly Children
The God of the Bible (study of the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit)
"In the Beginning God Created": Creation vs. Evolution
Kingdom of Christ: Future Millennium or Present Spiritual Reign?
Marx, Lenin, or Jesus: Communism or the Bible?
Do Not Sin Against the Child: Abortion, Unborn Life, & the Bible
Short Bible Talks: Invitations, Lord's Supper and Collection Talks
Commentaries on Bible Books
Genesis Daniel Ephesians
Joshua and Ruth Hosea – Obadiah Philippians &
Judges Jonah – Zephaniah Colossians
1 and 2 Samuel Gospel of Matthew 1 & 2 Thessalonians
1 and 2 Kings Gospel of Mark 1 & 2 Timothy
Ezra, Nehemiah, Esther Gospel of Luke Titus & Philemon
Job Gospel of John Hebrews
Proverbs Acts James and Jude
Ecclesiastes Romans 1 and 2 Peter
Isaiah Galatians 1,2,3 John
Bible Question Class Books
Genesis Daniel 2 Corinthians and
Joshua and Ruth Hosea-Obadiah Galatians
Judges Jonah-Zephaniah Ephesians and
1 and 2 Samuel Haggai-Malachi Philippians
1 and 2 Kings Gospel of Matthew Colossians, 1&2
Ezra/Nehemiah/Esther Gospel of Mark Thessalonians
Job Gospel of Luke 1 Timothy-Philemon
Proverbs Gospel of John Hebrews
Ecclesiastes Acts James–Jude
Isaiah Romans Revelation
Jeremiah/Lamentations 1 Corinthians
Workbooks with Study Notes
Jesus Is Lord: Workbook on the Fundamentals of the Gospel of Christ
Following Jesus: Workbook on Discipleship
God’s Eternal Purpose in Christ: Workbook on the Theme of the Bible
Family Reading Booklist
Visit our website at gospelway.com/sales to see a current list of
books in print.
Page #3 Commentary on Titus and Philemon

Other Resources from the Author
Printed books, booklets, and tracts available at
gospelway.com/sales
Free Bible study articles online at
gospelway.com/
Free Bible courses online at
biblestudylessons.com/
Free class books at
biblestudylessons.com/classbooks
Free commentaries on Bible books at
biblestudylessons.com/commentary
Contact the author at
gospelway.com/comments

Table of Contents
Introduction to Paul’s Letter to Titus ..................................... 9
Titus 1 ................................................................................... 12
Titus 2 ................................................................................... 79
Titus 3 ................................................... .............................. 129
Addenda Regarding Elders’ Family Qualifications .............. 151
Comments on the Book of Philemon ................ ...................172
Notes on Philemon .............................................................. 175
Applications ........................................................................ 185
(Due to printer reformatting, the above numbers may be off a few pages.)

Notes to the Reader
To save space and for other reasons, I have chosen not to include
the Bible text in these notes (please use your Bible to follow along). When
I do quote a Scripture, I generally quote the New King James Version,
unless otherwise indicated. Often – especially when I do not use quota-
tions marks – I am not quoting any translation but simply paraphrasing
the passage in my own words. Also, when I ask the reader to refer to a
map, please consult the maps at the back of your Bible or in a Bible dic-
tionary.
You can find study questions to accompany these notes at

gospelway.com/sales
To join our mailing list to be informed of new books or

special sales, contact the author at
I want to express thanks to the students in the adult Bible

class in Utica for suggestions and comments they offered
which have been incorporated in these notes.

Introductory Thoughts about
Commentaries
Only the Scriptures provide an infallible, authoritatively inspired

revelation of God’s will for man (2 Timothy 3:16,17). It follows that this
commentary, like all commentaries, was written by an uninspired, falli-
ble human. It is the author’s effort to share his insights about God’s word
for the purpose of instructing and edifying others in the knowledge and
wisdom found in Scripture. It is simply another form of teaching, like
public preaching, Bible class teaching, etc., except in written form (like
tracts, Bible class literature, etc.). Nehemiah 8:8; Ephesians 4:15,16; Ro-
mans 15:14; 1 Thessalonians 5:11; Hebrews 3:12-14; 5:12-14; 10:23-25;
Romans 10:17; Mark 16:15,16; Acts 8:4; 2 Timothy 2:2,24-26; 4:2-4; 1
Peter 3:15.
It follows that the student must read any commentary with discern-
ment, realizing that any fallible teacher may err, whether he is teaching
orally or in writing. So, the student must compare all spiritual teaching
to the truth of God’s word (Acts 17:11). It may be wise to read several
commentaries to consider alternative views on difficult points. But it is
especially important to consider the reasons or evidence each author
gives for his views, then compare them to the Bible.
For these reasons, the author urges the reader to always
consider my comments in light of Scripture. Accept what I
say only if you find that it harmonizes with God’s word. And
please do not cite my writings as authority, as though people
should accept anything I say as authoritative. Always let the
Bible be your authority.
“He who glories, let him glory in the Lord”

– 1 Corinthians 1:31

Abbreviations Used in These Notes
ASV – American Standard Version

b/c/v – book, chapter, and verse
ESV – English Standard Version
f – the following verse
ff – the following verses
HCSB – Holman Christian Standard Bible
KJV – King James Version
LEB – Lexham English Bible
MEV – Modern English Version
MLB – Modern Language Bible
MLV – Modern Literal Version
NASB – New American Standard Bible
NEB – New English Bible
NIV – New International Version
NKJV – New King James Version
NRSV – New Revised Standard Version
RSV – Revised Standard Version

Introduction to Paul’s
Letter to Titus
The author: Paul the apostle

The letter specifically states that its inspired author was the apostle
Paul. He identifies himself as an apostle (1:1).
Horne explains that “The genuineness and authenticity of the Epis-
tle to Titus were never questioned.”
Consider a few facts we know about Paul:
* He was born in Tarsus in Cilicia in Asia Minor (Acts 22:3).
* He was a Jew of the tribe of Benjamin (Philippians 3:5).
* He was a Pharisee educated at the feet of Gamaliel (Philippians
3:5; Acts 22:3).
* He learned the trade of making tents (Acts 18:3).
* He was present at Stephen’s death (Acts 7).
* He persecuted the church (compare 1 Timothy 1:12-16; Acts 8,9).
* He was converted as a result of Jesus’ appearance to him on the
road to Damascus. Ananias was sent to baptize him (Acts 9,22,26).
* He preached in Damascus, then in Jerusalem, and later went on
three preaching trips, preaching even in Rome (Acts 9-26).
* He especially preached to Gentiles and worked to prove that they
need not be circumcised and obey the Old Testament to be saved (Acts
15; Galatians, Romans)
* He wrote more New Testament books than any other man.
Time and place of writing
Scripture nowhere exactly states Paul’s location or circumstances
when he wrote this letter. History suggests that Paul was released from
his first imprisonment in Rome (recorded in Acts) and wrote the first
letter to Timothy and the letter to Titus shortly before his second impris-
onment and death, maybe about AD 64 or 65.
Horne states:
“No date is so controverted as that of Saint Paul's Epistle to
Titus. … it is most probable that this Epistle was written after his
liberation from his first imprisonment, a. d. 64. And this opinion
is strengthened by the verbal harmony subsisting between Saint
Paul's first Epistle to Timothy and the letter to Titus; which cannot
be naturally accounted for, but by supposing that they were both

written about the same time, and while the same ideas and
phrases were present to the writer's mind.”
Facts about Titus
Paul addressed the letter to Titus, whom he called his true child af-
ter a common faith (1:4).
Consider some facts we know about Titus:
* Paul described him as his child after a common faith indicating
that Paul’s teaching led to Titus’ conversion.
* He was a trusted fellow-worker of Paul (2 Corinthians 2:13;
7:6,7,13-15; 8:6,16-18,23; 12:18; 2 Timothy 4:10).
* Since he was a Gentile, he served as a test case regarding circum-
cision in Galatians 2:1-4 (compare Acts 15).
* Paul left him on Crete to appoint elders, to strengthen the
churches in moral and doctrinal purity, and to encourage good works
(see 1:5).
It follows that Titus was on the island of Crete when Paul wrote this
letter to him.
Theme
The letter instructs Titus to ordain elders and to teach the need for
sound doctrine, moral purity, and good works.
Horne states:
“Titus having been left in Crete to settle the churches in the
several cities of that island according to the apostolical plan, Saint
Paul wrote this Epistle to him, that he might discharge his minis-
try among the Cretans with the greater success, and to give him
particular instructions concerning his behaviour towards the ju-
daising teachers, who endeavoured to pervert the faith and disturb
the peace.”
“Pastoral epistles”?
As discussed in our notes on 1 Timothy, many commentators refer
to 1 and 2 Timothy and Titus as “pastoral epistles.” They assume Timo-
thy and Titus were “pastors” (shepherds) responsible to supervise local
churches as well as preach the gospel.
Denominations commonly confuse evangelists with pastors. As we
discuss in our notes on chapter 1, “pastor” is just a different term for the
same work or office as elder or bishop. And since Timothy and Titus were
both young men, they could not qualify as “elders” or pastors.
Timothy and Titus were preachers or evangelists, not pastors (2
Timothy 4:1-5). Ephesians 4:11 shows that the work of an evangelist dif-
fers from that of a pastor. Evangelists were responsible to preach and
teach, but they had no leadership responsibility as pastors or bishops.
Misunderstanding this fact leads to many mistaken comments in com-
mentaries and many mistaken practices in denominations.

Summary of contents by section
Chapter 1 – Qualifications and work of elders
1:1-9 – Qualifications of Elders
1:10-16 – The danger of false teachers
Chapter 2 – Sound instruction for various groups in the church
2:2 – Older men
2:3 – Older women
2:4,5 – Younger women
2:6-8 – Younger men
2:9,10 – Servants
2:11-15 – The effect of grace in our lives
Chapter 3 – Reminder that salvation should lead to good works
3:1-3 – Reminder of proper conduct
3:4-7 – Salvation by grace through the washing of regeneration
3:8-11 – Avoiding foolish strifes and divisive men
3:12-15 – Concluding thoughts

Titus 1
Chapter 1 – Qualifications and

Work of Elders
Qualifications and work of elders

1:10-16 – Dealing with false teachers

1:1,2 – Paul, a servant of God and an apostle of Christ,
according to the faith of God’s elect and the knowledge of
truth that is according to godliness, in hope of eternal life
that God, who cannot lie, promised before times eternal.
As in most of his letters, Paul began by identifying himself as the
inspired author. He affirmed his authority as an apostle but also viewed
himself as simply a servant of God. Paul was a servant because Jesus
Christ had purchased him with His blood (1 Corinthians 6:19,20). He
dedicated his life to serving God even we should do (Galatians 2:20; Ro-
mans 6:18; 1 Peter 2:16).
Paul’s authority as an apostle
“Apostle” means one who is sent with a special mission or respon-
sibility. The context determines who is sent, who sends them, and the
nature of the mission. As with many Bible words, “apostle” has a special
significance in the gospel referring to men specially chosen by Jesus to
preach the gospel by direct revelation and testify to His resurrection.
Paul was a true apostle as a result of the command of God and
Christ. Paul’s apostleship is important because it proves the authority of
his teaching. Paul often affirmed this authority in his epistles. Since he
became an apostle later than others, some denied his apostleship.

“Apostle” () – “1. a delegate, messenger, one sent
forth with orders … 2. Specially applied to the twelve disciples
whom Christ selected, out of the multitude of his adherents, to be
his constant companions and the heralds to proclaim to men the
kingdom of God … With these apostles Paul claimed equality … 3.
In a broader sense the name is transferred to other eminent Chris-
tian teachers …” – Grimm-Wilke-Thayer.
According to the faith of God’s elect
Paul was a servant and apostle in accord with the faith that God
expects His elect to hold. That faith is what we must believe and obey in
order to please God and be saved (Mark 16:15,16; Romans 16:26). It is
the one faith on which we must unite (Ephesians 4:2-6) and for which
we must contend (Jude 3).
The elect are those whom God chooses to save. However, contrary
to the teaching of Calvinism, this choice is conditional. God chooses peo-
ple according to the terms of the gospel (the “faith of God’s elect”).
That message states that salvation is conditioned on people’s faith
and obedience. So God invites all people through the gospel and then
chooses as His people those who choose to respond with obedient faith.
Regarding election, see 1 Peter 1:2; 2 Thessalonians 2:13-15; Ro-
mans 8:28-30,33; 2 Timothy 1:9,10; Ephesians 1:4-11; 1 Thessalonians
1:4; Colossians 3:12.
The knowledge of truth which accords with godliness
Paul’s service and apostleship were also in accord with the truth
which itself accords with godliness and which all men must know
(acknowledge) to be saved. Truth is that which agrees with reality or
fact. God’s word is always true, and in spiritual matters it constitutes the

whole truth which we know or can know – John 17:17; 16:13; 2 Timothy
3:16,17. It is that which we must know and obey to be made free from sin
(John 8:32).
This truth is the standard that reveals and harmonizes with godli-
ness. Much that is called truth does not harmonize with godliness at all.
But that which is really truth leads to godliness and encourages it. God-
liness is an attitude of respect for God: a genuine concern for pleasing
God and being right with Him.
For other passages about the importance of truth, see Psalm 19:7-
11; 25:4,5; 119:47,48,97,140-143,151; Proverbs 23:23; John 1:14,17; 14:6;
16:13; Romans 2:6-11; Ephesians 1:13; 4:14-16; 2 Thessalonians 2:10-12;
1 Timothy 3:15; 4:1-3; 2 Timothy 2:15,25,26; 4:2-4; 1 Peter 1:22,23
“Godliness” () – “reverence, respect; in the Bible every-
where piety towards God, godliness…” – Grimm-Wilke-Thayer.
In hope of eternal life which God, who cannot lie, prom-
ised before time began
Paul was also an apostle and servant of God in hope of eternal life.
Eternal life is the ultimate reward of God’s faithful people. We seek to
dwell in heaven with God forever. It is the reward that God promised
before time began. This is the goal that Paul sought for himself and
which he sought to help others achieve through his service as an apostle.
Note that eternal life is our hope. Hope refers to that which we seek
to receive: desire plus expectation. This is the one hope of our one faith
(Ephesians 4:2-6). It is that which sustains us through trials and diffi-
culties, motivating us to continue in God’s service. We do not hope for
things we presently possess (Romans 8:24,25).
Furthermore, eternal life is a promise. Some claim that we have
eternal life as a “present possession” so we cannot possibly lose it: once
saved, always saved. Some passages say we have eternal life, but pas-
sages like this one show the sense in which we have it. We have it as a
hope or a promise, not as a present reality. As with any hope or promise,
it may not come to pass. Especially is this true with hopes or promises
that are conditional like this one. See also Titus 3:7; Mark 10:29,30; 1
John 2:25.
Finally, note that God cannot lie. People may lie and may fail to
keep their promises. But God keeps every promise. If we fail to receive
eternal life, it will not be because God fails to keep His word.
Although God is all-powerful, there are things He cannot do. This is
not because He lacks the power to do them but because they are so con-
trary to His character or will that He absolutely would never allow Him-
self to do them. God is the source of truth, and there is no lie in Him. See
1 Corinthians 10:13; 1:9; 2 Thessalonians 3:3; Deuteronomy 7:9; Isaiah
49:7; 2 Corinthians 1:18; 1 John 1:9; Hebrews 6:18.

For other passages about our hope see Acts 24:15; Ephesians 2:12;
4:4; Romans 5:1-5; 8:24,25; 12:12; 15:4,13; 1 Corinthians 15:19; Colos-
sians 1:5; 1 Thessalonians 1:3; 4:13; 5:8; 2 Thessalonians 2:16; 1 Timothy
1:1; Titus 2:11-14; 3:7; Hebrews 6:11,18,19; 10:23; 11:1; 1 Peter
1:3,4,13,21; 1 John 3:3; Proverbs 10:28; Psalm 112:1-9.
For other passages about the reward of the righteous see Matthew
5:10-12; 25:46; 2 Corinthians 4:16-5:8; 1 Thessalonians 4:17; 5:9,10; 1
Peter 1:3,4; Philippians 3:20; Revelation 21:3-5; 22:3,4; Romans 2:5-11;
Luke 16:19-31; 1 John 5:11,12; 2 Timothy 2:11.
1:3,4 – In His own seasons God manifested His word in the
message that was entrusted to Paul according to God’s
commandment. Paul wrote to Titus, his true child after a
common faith, and wished grace, mercy, and peace to
him from God the Father and Christ Jesus.
Our hope is made known in God’s word by preaching.
This refers back to God’s word regarding the hope of verse 2. Paul
said God had promised that hope before time eternal, but mankind did
not know it until God made it known or manifest. That happened “in due
time” through the preaching of the gospel (the word). This work of
preaching was entrusted to Paul (and, of course, to others) by God’s com-
mandment.
This shows the need for preaching and the reason Paul considered
it a great privilege to preach. Preaching the gospel gives people hope for
eternal life. Titus and all Christians should appreciate gospel preaching
for the same reasons. People today often fail to value gospel preaching
yet it is the means God chose to show people the way to faith, truth, god-
liness, and eternal life.
To Titus
Paul then states to whom this letter was addressed: to Titus. See our
introductory notes about Titus.
Titus is here said to be Paul’s true son in the common faith. This
almost surely means that Titus was converted as a result of Paul’s
preaching, as had Timothy (see 1 Timothy 1:2; 2 Timothy 1:2; 1 Corinthi-
ans 4:14,15). Paul does not state where or when this occurred.
“Natural generation does not operate by the assent of the one who
is born, whereas the birth that comes from faith requires such assent.” –
Theodoret of Cyr (Ancient Christian Commentary).
Note that Christians should share one faith in common. It is not
proper for one church to have one faith and another church to have a
different faith as denominations practice and sometimes defend. We
have one faith, just as we have one God and Father (Ephesians 4:3-6).
That faith is our common faith (Jude 3).

Grace, mercy, and peace
Paul then greeted Titus with his typical greeting: He sought for Ti-
tus grace, mercy, and peace from God the Father and the Lord Jesus
Christ our Savior.
Grace is God’s favor which none of us deserve. It is by His unmer-
ited favor that He offers us the hope of eternal life though we do not de-
serve it since we are guilty of sin (Romans 3:23; 6:23; 5:6-9; Ephesians
2:8,9; Romans 5:1,2).
Mercy is closely related to grace but emphasizes God’s compassion
or pity for us because of our condition due to sin, which compassion led
Him to act for our salvation.
Peace is the harmonious relationship we share with God when our
sins have been forgiven by God’s grace (Romans 5:1,2). This results in
the inward calm we experience knowing our sins have been forgiven, in
contrast to the guilt and fear that comes from knowing we have sinned
and stand condemned before God (Philippians 4:6,7).
Grace was a common Greek greeting. Peace was a common Jewish
greeting. Paul here combines them into one greeting.
The verse says that grace, mercy, and peace all come from both
God the Father and the Lord Jesus Christ our Savior. It neces-
sarily follows that Jesus must possess Deity equally with the Father. How
could grace and mercy and peace, such as come from God the Father,
also come from Jesus Christ if Jesus were not Deity? What mere human
or even an angel could be listed beside the Father as the source of grace,
mercy, and peace?
1:5,6 – Paul left Titus in Crete to set in order the things that
were wanting and appoint elders in every church, if any
man is blameless, the husband of one wife, having
children that believe, who are not accused of riot or
unruly.
Paul stated that he left Titus in Crete so he could set in order what
was lacking and appoint elders in every city. This was God’s command
through Paul to Titus.
Crete
Crete was an island in the Mediterranean, south and a little east of
the southern coast of Greece (see a map). It spanned the southern end
of the Aegean Sea, its western end being below Greece and its eastern
end below Asia Minor.

- via BibleMapper
The gospel says little about Crete. Paul’s ship passed it as he traveled
to Rome for trial (Acts 27:7,12,13,21). Paul describes some of the charac-
ter of Cretans in Titus 1:12.
Men from Crete were present and heard the apostles speak on the
day of Pentecost (Acts 2:11). Perhaps these were the people who took the
gospel to Crete and established churches there. Otherwise, we have no
written record of apostles or other Christians establishing these
churches.
However, the fact that Paul says he “left” Titus there implies that
Paul had been there, presumably sometime recently. So churches existed
there and were mature enough that Paul believed elders could be ap-
pointed there.

Introductory Material Regarding
Elders
(Note that much of this material is discussed also in our comments

on 1 Timothy 3.)
Terms for Elders
God often teaches us the nature of something – especially some-

thing spiritual – by using various terms to express different aspects of it.
This is true for the church, Christians, Jesus, salvation, sin, Satan, the
gospel, etc. It is also true for the office of elder. By studying the words
God uses for elders, we can learn useful lessons about their work and
value.
“Bishop” or “overseer”
This word is translated “bishop” or “overseer.” It emphasizes that
the work involves the responsibility to supervise and oversee the work of
others, to guide them and watch for their wellbeing. Examples of its use
include:
Philippians 1:1 – Paul wrote to the church with its bishops and dea-
cons.
1 Timothy 3:1,2 – A man who desires the position of a bishop desires
a good work.
Acts 20:28 – Here the word is translated “overseer.” (1 Peter 5:2)
“Bishop” () – “…an overseer, a man charged with
the duty of seeing that things to be done by others are done rightly,
any curator, guardian, or superintendent … spec. the superinten-
dent, head or overseer of any Christian church…” – Grimm-Wilke-
Thayer.
“…1 one who has the responsibility of safeguarding or seeing
to it that someth. is done in the correct way, guardian … 2 In the

Gr-Romans world ἐ. freq. refers to one who has a definite function
or fixed office of guardianship and related activity within a group
… The term was taken over in Christian communities in ref. to one
who served as overseer or supervisor, with special interest in
guarding the apostolic tradition…” – Bauer-Danker-Arndt-Gin-
grich.
“Elder” or “presbyter”
This term is translated “elder” or “presbyter.” It emphasizes ma-
turity including wisdom, experience, and dignity that these men need in
leading the congregation. Examples of its use include:
Acts 14:23 – Paul and Barnabas led churches to ordain elders in
every church.
Acts 20:17 – Paul called to him the elders of the church in Ephesus.
(1 Peter 5:1)
1 Timothy 4:14 - “Presbytery” refers to the body of elders or “elder-
ship.”
“Elder” () – “…elder; used 1. of age … advanced
in life, an elder, a senior: … 2. a term of rank or office; … a. among
the Jews … b. among Christians, those who presided over the as-
semblies (churches) … they did not differ at all from the … bishops
or overseers …” – Grimm-Wilke-Thayer.
“…an old man, an elder, is used (a) of age … (b) of rank or
positions of responsibility … (3) in the Christian churches, those
who, being raised up and qualified by the work of the Holy Spirit,
were appointed to have the spiritual care of, and to exercise over-
sight over, the churches. To these the term ‘bishops’ … or ‘overse-
ers,’ is applied … the latter term indicating the nature of their
work, presbuteroi their maturity of spiritual experience. The Di-
vine arrangement seen throughout the N.T. was for a plurality of
these to be appointed in each church … They were appointed ac-
cording as they had given evidence of fulfilling the Divine qualifi-
cations…” – Vine.
“Pastor” or “shepherd”
This word is translated “shepherd” or “pastor.” It emphasizes guid-
ance, protection, and nourishment. Examples of its use include:
Ephesians 4:11 – Pastors are among the works God placed in the
church.
Acts 20:28 – Elders should shepherd (verb form) the church of God.
(1 Peter 5:2)
“Pastor” () – “…a herdsman, esp. a shepherd; … b. metaph,
the presiding officer, manager, director, of any assembly; … of the over-
seers of the Christian assemblies…” – Grimm-Wilke-Thayer.
“…1 one who herds sheep, shepherd, sheep-herder … 2 one
who serves as guardian or leader, shepherd … b of those who lead

Christian communities/congregations/ churches…” – Bauer-
Danker-Arndt-Gingrich.
“a shepherd, one who tends herds or flocks (not merely one
who feeds them), is used metaphorically of Christian “pastors,”
Ephesians 4:11. Pastors guide as well as feed the flock; cp. Acts
20:28, which, with ver. 17, indicates that this was the service com-
mitted to the elders (overseers or bishops); so also in 1 Peter 5:1,2
…; this involves tender care and vigilant superintendence.” – Vine
These terms all refer to the same work or office.
Some religious groups claim that the terms “bishop,” “elder,” and
“pastor” refer to different offices or responsibilities (usually claiming
bishops are over elders and pastors). But as often occurs with other Bible
terms, the different terms just emphasize different aspects of the same
thing.
The dictionaries we have cited claim that the terms “elder,”
“bishop,” and “pastor” all refer to the same office or function. But con-
sider now the proof from Bible contexts.
Acts 20:17,28-30
Verse 17 – Paul addresses the elders of the Ephesian church.
Verse 28 – The Holy Spirit made them bishops (ASV; “overseers”
– KJV). Their job was to shepherd (NKJV; “feed” – KJV; “tend” – ASV)
the flock. This uses the verb form of “pastor.”
Verses 29,30 further describe their duty as shepherds (pastors).
All three terms here describe the same men doing the same job in
the local church.
Titus 1:5-9
Verse 5 – Titus should appoint elders in every city.

Verses 6-9 – Qualifications for elders immediately follow. Men
must have these qualities “for” bishops must be the kind of men de-
scribed by the qualifications.
The context gives qualifications for just one office but describes that
office interchangeably using the terms “elder” and “bishop.” Further, the
work these men do, according to verses 9-14, is the same work that Acts
20 said elders or bishops do: they act as shepherds (pastors) to protect
the flock from false teachers.
1 Peter 5:1-3
Verse 1 – Peter addresses elders.
Verse 2 – Their work is to shepherd (NKJV; “tend” – ASV; “feed”
– KJV) the flock (this uses the verb form of “pastor” or shepherd). And
they serve as overseers (NKJV; exercise or take the “oversight” – ASV,
KJV), which is the verb form of “bishop.”
So the terms “elder,” “pastor,” and “bishop” in these passages are
used interchangeably. All three terms refer to the same office in the local
congregation: the same men having identical qualifications, work, and
extent of jurisdiction.
Although the Catholic church today distinguishes bishops from el-
ders, consider the following footnote from the New Catholic Bible on 1
Timothy 3:1. “‘Bishop’ represents a Greek word meaning ‘overseer,’ and
‘presbyter’ another Greek word meaning ‘elder.’ In St. Paul ‘bishop’ and
‘presbyter’ seem to be used convertibly...”
“Originally the churches were governed by a common council
of the presbyters. But after one of their number began to think that
those whom he had baptized were his and not Christ’s, it was uni-
versally decreed that one of the presbyters should be elected to
preside over the others, to whom the care of the whole church
should pertain…” – Jerome (Ancient Christian Commentary).
So, although groups today distinguish elders from bishops, the New
Testament makes no such distinction. Men assigned the terms with
meanings not found in the Scriptures and thereby contributed signifi-
cantly to the development of the Catholic church. Faithfulness to New
Testament teaching should lead us to use the terms the way God used
them, not making distinctions that God did not make.
And since the term “pastor” refers to the office of elder or bishop, it
follows that the work of a “pastor” is different from that of a preacher or
evangelist. Many men may do the work of preaching without being qual-
ified to serve as an elder or bishop. So, it is incorrect to call a man a “pas-
tor” just because he is a preacher. Pastors are the same as elders or bish-
ops, but different from preachers.
Ephesians 4:11 says Jesus gave some to be apostles, some prophets,
some evangelists, and some pastors and teachers. So pastors are differ-
ent from evangelists just as evangelists differ from apostles.

So, these three terms all refer to older men who oversee or lead a
local church in serving God, acting as shepherds to guide and instruct
the members. This is a leadership role, which means it is important and
valuable work.
(Note also 1 Timothy 5:17 shows that elders “rule,” which is also in-
herent in the word “overseer” or bishop.)
The Work of Elders
Consider the following works God has assigned to the men who
serve in this capacity.
Elders should set good examples.

Scripture instructs elders to set good examples and other members
to imitate their example.
1 Peter 5:2,3
Elders should make themselves examples to the flock. All Christians
should be good examples, but because of their position, this is especially
important for elders. This is illustrated by shepherds leading a flock so
the sheep can follow (John 10:3,4; compare 1 Peter 2:21).
Imagine a shepherd telling the flock: “I think I’ll just stay home to-
day. You go over the hill, across the valley, around the bend to the pas-
ture by the river. Eat and drink there, then meet me back here at 5:00.”
If elders expect members to serve actively, they must set the example,
not just tell others what to do.
Acts 20:28-30
Elders must take heed to themselves first, then they can tend and
oversee the flock. They must be aware of the danger that they might go
astray and lead others into error (verses 29,30).

The qualifications of elders also demand that men lead lives that
every member could imitate (1 Timothy 3:1ff; Titus 1:5ff).
Elders must set the proper example in their family life, in serving
others, in moral purity, in respect for authority, and in zeal and dedica-
tion to every area of God’s work.
Hebrews 13:7
Members should follow or imitate the faith of those who rule over
them and speak God’s word to them.
I read about a man who said he was not willing to serve as an elder
and gave the following reason: “I drink quite a bit, and love to dance. I
am also inclined to gamble, and my attendance is not what it should be.
My Bible teaches that the elders should not do these things. I’d rather be
just a faithful, humble consecrated member of the church and let some-
one else serve as an elder.”
This seems so extreme that I wonder if it ever really happened. Nev-
ertheless, it illustrates an important point. Could it be that some mem-
bers have a double standard? Do you believe elders and their families
should attend every service and be actively involved in the work? Do you
think they and their family should not smoke, drink alcoholic beverages,
dress immodestly, dance, etc.? If so, then you should live as you would
expect them to live!
And elders should realize that God expects them to live lives worthy
of imitation. They should ask: “If all the members do as I do, will they be
assured of eternal life?” Remember, too, that even in matters of liberty,
if there is reason to believe our practice will lead others to sin, then we
must change our practice (Romans 14; 1 Corinthians 8 and 10).
It follows that elders and their families should be among the most
active families in the work of the church. Otherwise, if they were to imi-
tate the elders, some members would become less active for the Lord
than they are now!
What a blessing it must be for a congregation to have men and their
wives who actively set an excellent example of what it means to be true
Christians! Surely a congregation without elders is missing a serious
source of help and assistance.
Elders watch on behalf of members’ souls.
Hebrews 13:17
Those who rule (elders) also watch on behalf of souls. One of their
main jobs is to protect the spiritual wellbeing of each member.
Too many elders think their job consists primarily of supervising
the care of the grounds and building, spending the money, and other
material matters. While elders should oversee this work, much of these
specifics should be delegated to deacons or other members. Elders
should be involved in the lives of the members, especially their spiritual
needs.

Luke 15:3-6; John 10:11-14 – Many Scriptures describe the care and
personal concern shepherds should have for each sheep. They should
seek anyone who wanders away and should sacrifice for the good of the
flock.
Ezekiel 34:1-6 – God rebuked Old Testament shepherds who did
not strengthen the weak, bring back what was driven away, or seek what
was lost. Today in many congregations, members wander into sin, miss
services, or even quit serving God altogether, yet no one bothers to try to
bring them back.
Some have criticized elders as “watchdogs” who “hide in the bushes”
watching for members to sin. Occasionally members resent the efforts of
elders to discuss with them about their lives. But elders must realize that
God requires them to guard against error, and faithful Christians should
appreciate men who do this work diligently.
When elders personally care about each member, they will make
sure that new and weak members are taught, they will help people at the
first sign of problems, and they will lead in the discipline of sinners who
will not repent. The result will be congregations that are active and
strong.
Acts 20:28-31; Titus 1:9-14
Shepherds especially “watch” for wolves or false teachers (Acts
20:29-31; compare Matthew 7:15-21). This does not mean the elders just
say certain men should keep quiet or members should not listen to them.
It means elders must “convict the gainsayer”: prove by God’s word that
a man is wrong and rebuke him for his sins.
John 10:11-13 – Some shepherds avoid fighting wolves (rebuking
sin) because it is unpleasant or even dangerous. But shepherds that love
the sheep will fight the wolves, even to the point of giving their own lives.
The principle taught here applies to all shepherds, not just to Jesus (note
1 Peter 5:4). Like Jesus, elders should endure great hardship for the good
of the sheep.
Elders will “give an account” for how they handle problems in the
church, whether it be false teaching or members who stray into sin (He-
brews 13:17; Ezekiel 33:1-9). What an awesome responsibility! But a
great reward awaits those who serve faithfully: a crown of glory that does
not fade away (1 Peter 5:4).
What a blessing to know that wise, mature men are responsible to
serve as watchmen guarding the souls of each member.
Elders teach the truth and rebuke error.
1 Peter 5:2; Acts 20:28
Elders “feed” the flock like shepherds. This involves all aspects of
tending the flock, but it surely includes providing nourishment. The
shepherd leads the flock to green pastures and still waters (Psalm
23:1,2).

Hebrews 13:7; 1 Thessalonians 5:12
Members should imitate the faith of those who rule over them and
speak God’s word to them. Some people seem to think that elders do
enough teaching if they simply set a good example. But more than that
is required. Elders must also “speak” the word.
No passage says that elders are the only ones in a congregation to
teach. Other Scriptures show that all Christians should teach to the ex-
tent of their abilities. But elders should especially emphasize the work of
teaching and should be among the more active teachers in a congrega-
tion. They should not simply sit back and leave the teaching to others.
1 Timothy 3:2; Titus 1:9ff
Elders must have sufficient teaching ability that they can both build
up members and rebuke false teachers. This may often involve private
teaching with individuals, but at times it would necessarily involve
speaking to the whole congregation.
1 Timothy 5:20 – In particular, error at times must be refuted pub-
licly. Some people think there is no need for elders to address the whole
congregation or teach classes as long as they teach privately. But the du-
ties of elders involve feeding the whole flock and protecting against
wolves who teach error (Acts 20:28-30; Titus 1:9-14).
Other people think elders should teach publicly but there is little
need for them to teach individual members who are troubled. But we
have seen that shepherds must seek the individual sheep that stray (Luke
15:3-6; Hebrews 13:17).
It is hard to see how any man can serve as a proper shepherd unless
he is willing and able to teach both publicly and privately (compare Acts
20:20). As with any teachers, the ability of elders will vary. But each el-
der needs a good degree of ability to privately teach each member as
needed and to publicly admonish and encourage the congregation.
Once again, consider what a blessing such men would be to a con-
gregation. Every congregation needs men who are qualified to teach and
who can set a good example for others.

Elders oversee and supervise the local church.
Some people deny that elders have the authority to make decisions
that the congregation is required to follow. They say elders only teach
God’s word and set examples for the congregation. Surely there are lim-
its on elders’ authority. But note the Bible teaching that shows they do
have authority to make decisions in harmony with what God’s word au-
thorizes.
Bible words that show elders have authority
Shepherd (pastor) – Acts 20:28; 1 Peter 5:2; Ephesians. 4:11.
“Feed” (KJV) is translated “shepherd” (NKJV, NASB) or “tend” (ASV).
Dictionaries say this means (among other things): “activity that
protects, rules, governs … ‘lead,’ ‘guide,’ ‘rule’” (Arndt and Gingrich); “to
rule, govern … the presiding officer, manager, director” (Thayer); “ten-
der care and vigilant superintendence” (Vine).
Overseer (bishop) – Acts 20:28; 1 Peter 5:2. Elders oversee or take
the oversight of the work of the local church. They “exercise oversight”
(see ASV, NASB, ESB, NRSV; compare KJV).
This means: “a man charged with the duty of seeing that things to
be done by others are done rightly … superintendent” (Thayer). (Com-
pare Philippians 1:1; 1 Timothy 3:1; Titus 1:7.)
Rule; one who is to be obeyed; submit to them
1 Timothy 5:17 – Elders should “rule” well. “Rule” here means: “to
be over, to superintend, preside over” (Thayer); “to be at the head (of),
rule, direct … manage, conduct …” (Arndt and Gingrich).
Hebrews 13:7 – Remember those who have the rule over you (lead-
ers). The word for “rule” in Hebrews 13:7,17 means: “to be a leader; to
rule, command; to have authority over…” (Thayer).

Hebrews 13:17 – Obey those who have the rule over you and submit
to them. “Obey” in Hebrews 13:17 means: “… to listen to, obey, yield to,
comply with” (Thayer).
(Compare 1 Timothy 3:4,5; 1 Corinthians 12:28; 1 Thessalonians
5:12; Hebrews 13:24; Romans 12:8; 1 Peter 5:5.)
Steward – Titus 1:7. Elders are stewards of God.
This word means:
“the manager of a household or of household affairs; esp. a
steward, manager, superintendent … to whom the head of the
house or proprietor has intrusted the management of his affairs,
the care of receipts and expenditures, and the duty of dealing out
the proper portion to every servant …” (Thayer).
This word shows the proper level of elders’ authority. Jesus has en-
trusted elders with the duty to lead the members, so the members
should submit to them. But the elders’ authority is subject to that of
Jesus, so they can only lead the church to do what Jesus authorized the
church to do.
(For other uses of the word see Luke 12:42; 1 Corinthians 4:2; Ga-
latians 4:2; Luke 16:1,3,8; etc. See also 1 Peter 5:3 – not lords of those
entrusted to them.)
Conclusions regarding elders’ authority
Elders must not lead the church to practice things Jesus never au-
thorized. This is required by the term “steward” and harmonizes with
Matthew 15:1-9; Galatians 1:8,9; 2 John 9; etc. Elders are not lords; they
follow the rules made by the Chief Shepherd (1 Peter 5:3).

But in carrying out authorized activities, many decisions need to
be made. As God’s appointed overseers or stewards, the elders are re-
sponsible to see that these decisions are rightly made.
These decisions may include such matters as what preachers to sup-
port, what needy members to care for, when and where and how often
the church should meet, etc. As long as these decisions are within the
realm of authorized activities, the members are required to cooperate
and submit to the decisions made.
Each eldership oversees just the one local church where they are
members and were appointed. See 1 Peter 5:1-3; Acts 20:17,28; 14:23;
etc. No eldership is ever authorized to oversee the affairs of more than
one congregation. Violation of this critical point has repeatedly led God’s
people into apostasy.
Elders have the authority to oversee only the affairs that pertain
to church activities or to the spiritual wellbeing of the members. Note
Hebrews 13:17 (watch on behalf of souls) and other Scriptures listed
earlier. Elders have no authority to try to tell members how to live their
lives in personal affairs which do not involve the church or the destiny
of members’ souls.
Elders must make decisions for the good of the whole congregation
rather than satisfying their own desires or interests. This is the stew-
ardship God gave them (Hebrews 13:17). This is also required by the
principle of love (Matthew 22:36-39; 7:12; 1 Corinthians 13:4-7). Elders
care for the flock rather than lording it over the flock (1 Peter 5:3). (Note
also “not self-willed” – Titus 1:7.)
Truly, elders who do their work properly are a great blessing to the
church and will receive a great reward from the master whom they serve
(1 Peter 5:4; Hebrews 13:17).
Plurality of Elders in Each Congregation
Scriptures
Every Scripture that mentions elders in connection with local
churches shows that each church appointed a plurality of elders.
Philippians 1:1 – The church in Philippi had bishops (plural) and
deacons.
Acts 15:4,22 – There were elders (plural) in the church at Jerusalem
(compare verses 2,6,23; 16:4; 21:17,18).
Acts 20:17,28 – Paul sent to Ephesus and called to him the elders
(plural) of the church (singular) – verse 17. He addressed them in the
plural throughout the discussion. They should take heed to themselves
(plural) and to the flock (singular) where they had been made overseers
(plural) – verse 28.
1 Peter 5:1-3 – Peter speaks to the elders (plural) and tells them to
tend the flock (singular) which is among them.

Acts 14:23 – Elders (plural) were ordained in every church (singu-
lar).
Scriptures always use the terms “elder,” “bishop,” etc., in the plural
except when discussing the qualifications each elder must possess or
sins that an elder may commit. Each elder must possess the qualities
listed and must be responsible for his own errors (1 Timothy 3; 5:19; Ti-
tus 1). But in their work as elders they act together as a group.
Conclusions
All these passages imply a plurality of elders appointed in
each church.
To appreciate the force of this, consider more closely the wording of
the verses.
Suppose a corporation decides, “We will appoint directors over our
departments.” Since “departments” is plural and “directors” is plural,
the statement would fit grammatically whether each department had
one director or each had more than one.
But suppose they said, “We will appoint directors over each depart-
ment.” Then grammatically each department would receive more than
one director: directors (plural) for each department (singular).
The latter case fits the Bible description of elders. 1 Peter 5:1-3 ad-
dresses the elders (plural) and then connects them to a single congrega-
tion. Acts 14:23 goes further and says this was the case in every church.
And all specific examples confirm this conclusion.
Each congregation, then, should appoint a plurality of elders. No
one man alone ever had oversight of a congregation. This shows the error
of considering one man as “the pastor” of a congregation, as denomina-
tions often do.
The wisdom of this should be obvious.
A church should have plural elders because this is what God said.
However, it is easy to understand the advantages of this arrangement.
Elders face serious responsibilities. They need someone to discuss
decisions and problems with, someone to share the burden and to con-
fide in, and someone to be a source of strength and encouragement.
Further, the Bible warns about the dangers and temptations elders
face (Acts 20:28-30; 1 Timothy 3:6; 1 Peter 5:3). A plurality of elders can
help one another avoid these dangers, but one man alone would be more
vulnerable.
The same principle has value in other areas. Doubtless, this is why
Jesus sent the apostles out by twos, and Paul often had other people with
him on his preaching trips.
Furthermore, evidence of events is established on the testimony of
two or three witnesses (Matthew 18:16; John 8:17; 2 Corinthians 13:1; 1
Timothy 5:19; Hebrews 10:28; Deuteronomy 19:15). Elders often need
to support one another as witnesses regarding the situations they face.

People need not take the word of just one man, but the elders could sup-
port one another.
Indeed, two are better than one (Ecclesiastes 4:9-12).
The Importance of Elders
New Testament churches had elders. Elders existed in the churches
of Judea (Acts 11:30), the church at Jerusalem (Acts 15:4,22), the church
at Ephesus (Acts 20:17), and the church at Philippi (Philippians 1:1).
Acts 14:23 – Having established churches on their first preaching
journey, Paul and Barnabas returned through those cities and ordained
elders in every church. Approved apostolic example shows it is God’s
plan for every church to have elders.
Titus 1:5 – Paul charged Titus to set in order the things that are
lacking and appoint elders in every city. God wants elders everywhere,
and this is a command (charge). Until elders are appointed in a congre-
gation, something is lacking (wanting). “Lack” does not necessarily
mean “sin.” “Lack” refers to immaturity in growth.
Churches without elders should be working to train qualified men.
We need to teach on the subject and encourage men to work to develop
the qualifications. Men should make it their goal to develop the qualifi-
cations, and those who have the qualifications should be willing to serve.
A man should desire the office, but not for money (1 Peter 5:3),
though it is right for elders to be paid (1 Timothy 5:17). He should not
seek the praises and glory of men, though elders should be respected for
their work (1 Thessalonians 5:12,13). He should not simply seek power
or authority over others, though elders do have authority. None of these
motivations in themselves are acceptable reasons to serve.
1 Timothy 3:1 says men should desire the office because it is a good
work. And Christians are commanded to be zealous of good works. Read
Colossians 1:10 Ephesians 2:10; 2 Thessalonians 2:17; 2 Timothy 2:21;
Titus 2:14; 3:1; Hebrews 13:21; and especially James 4:17.
Christians should want to study, teach, pray, give, etc., not for
money, glory, or praises of men, but because they are good things to do.
Likewise, Christian men should desire to serve as elders because it is a
good thing to do.
An elder fills a much-needed role in service to God and the church
(1 Thessalonians 5:12,13). People who want to please God will seek to
serve in any way they can. And that is why men should desire the office
of elder.
Many translations use the word “office” in 1 Timothy 3:1, but there
is no separate word for “office” in the original. It simply says the over-
sight or overseership (MLV). So, by implication, it refers to the position
or work of one who oversees. However, this position involves the follow-
ing:
1) A specific work, which we have described

2) Specific qualifications one must meet in order to be appointed to
the work
3) A specific appointment or ordination to the position – Acts 14:23;
Titus 1:5
4) Supervision or oversight over a local congregation
Surely this fits the definition of an office in the sense, not primarily
of honor and exaltation, but as a responsibility to work in this specified
appointed role. Doubtless this is why the great majority of our primary
translations use the word “office” (KJV, ASV, NASB, ESV, NRSV), NKJV
says “position.”
Definitions in Titus 1:5
“Set in order”
Most of our major translations say to set or put in order (though the
HCSB says “set right,” MLV says “amend,” and the LSV says “arrange”).
The clear implication of the expression is that there is a proper “or-
der” for local churches. There is an arrangement or system that God has
commanded. Until a church has ordained elders, they lack that order.
“Set in order” () – “…set right or correct in addition (to
what has already been corrected) …” Bauer-Danker-Arndt-Gingrich.
“…to set in order besides or further (what still remains to be set in
order…)” – Grimm-Wilke-Thayer.
“…used in Titus 1:5, in the sense of setting right again what was de-
fective, a commission to Titus, not to add to what the Apostle himself
had done, but to restore what had fallen into disorder since the Apostle
had labored in Crete…” – Vine
“Lacking”
This is translated “lacking” (NKJV), “wanting” (ASV, KJV), “what
remains” (NASB, compare ESV, LEB, NRSV), “left undone” (HCSB),
“deficient” (MLV), “left unfinished” (NIV).
As already mentioned, this does not necessarily mean there is sin.
Rather, until elders have been appointed, something that would be very
useful to the work is missing. I would compare it to a state of immaturity.
A congregation without elders should not be satisfied to continue in
that condition. However, if they have no qualified men to serve, then
they have no choice but to continue without elders. Note that the
churches in Acts 14:23 and Titus 1:5 existed before they had elders.
Here are other passages that use the word here translated “lacking”:
James 1:4 – But let patience have its perfect work, that you may be
perfect and complete, lacking nothing.
James 1:5 – If any of you lacks wisdom, let him ask of God…
James 2:15 – If a brother or sister is naked and destitute of daily
food…
Luke 18:22 – Jesus said, “You still lack one thing. Sell all that you
have …”

Titus 3:13 – Send Zenas the lawyer and Apollos on their journey
with haste, that they may lack nothing.
We may compare seeking and adding elders in a congregation to
seeking and adding members. In both cases, if the church is not trying
to find people to add, that would be sin. But in both cases people must
meet qualifications, and if we cannot find qualified people, we cannot
add them. But this would not prove the church has sinned.
“Lacking” () – “…1 to leave behind … a fall short, be inferior,
lack … b be/do without, lack, be in need or want (of) … 2 to be deficient
in someth. that ought to be present for whatever reason, lack…” –
Bauer-Danker-Arndt-Gingrich.
“1. transitive, to leave, leave behind, forsake; passive to be left be-
hind … a. to lag, be inferior … b. to be destitute of, to lack … 2. intransi-
tive, to be lacking or absent, to fail…” – Grimm-Wilke-Thayer.
“Appoint”
All major translations say “appoint,” except the KJV which says “or-
dain” and MLV says “designate.” (Note that a different Greek word is
used in Acts 14:23.)
The word is often used for setting one into an office or appointing
one to do a job (see examples below). No men may properly be put in the
position unless they possess the qualifications. If they possess them,
then the Holy Spirit wants them in the position so they should be desig-
nated to serve.
Some people claim that elders in the church are simply older men
having no official position so other members are not required to follow
their leadership. This view is contradicted, first, by the fact that elders
must have specific qualifications which are not required of all older men
and, second, by the fact that elders are specifically appointed to serve in
a position. Furthermore, we have already established by Scripture that
elders do rule in a local congregation.
Examples of the word for “appoint”:
Matthew 24:45 – "Who then is a faithful and wise servant, whom
his master made ruler over his household, to give them food in due sea-
son? (see verse 47)
Matthew 25:21 – His lord said to him, “Well done, good and faithful
servant; you were faithful over a few things, I will make you ruler over
many things. Enter into the joy of your lord.”
Luke 12:44 – Truly, I say to you that he will make him ruler over all
that he has.
Acts 6:3 – Therefore, brethren, seek out from among you seven men
of good reputation, full of the Holy Spirit and wisdom, whom we may
appoint over this business
Acts 6 is not discussing elders, nor is it clear it is even discussing
deacons. Yet it gives the most detail we have regarding appointing men

to a special position in the church. This passage distinguishes the ap-
pointment from the choosing of who is qualified.
Note the following things we can learn from this passage about ap-
pointing men to serve in a specific position in the local church.
The apostles presented the plan for the men who would serve,
including defining their responsibilities and qualifications (verses 2-4).
The congregation determined (chose from among them) which
men met the qualifications (verses 3,5,6). Note that the choosing and the
appointing are two separate things.
The men were then appointed (verse 3,6). This implies that a spe-
cific event occurred at a specific time in which the men were designated
as beginning at that point to serve in that role. Appointment was not
some vague undefined concept.
Paul’s instruction did not tell Titus to choose the men but only that
he had a role in appointing or putting them into the position. Some mis-
takenly conclude that the passage means a preacher may by himself
choose men to install.
Evangelists like Titus should give instruction regarding the im-
portance, work, and qualifications of elders. The congregation should
then determine who possesses the qualifications. An evangelist may then
have a role in appointing or putting men into the position. But if even
the apostles did not choose the seven servants in Acts 6 but left that up
to the congregation, how could one evangelist alone justifiably decide
who is qualified?
“Appoint” () – “…1 to take someone somewhere,
bring, conduct, take … 2 to assign someone a position of authority,
appoint, put in charge … a someone over (of) someth. or someone
… Mt 24:45; cp. 25:21, 23; Lk 12:42; Ac 6:3. … Mt 24:47; Lk 12:44.
… Hb 2:7 … b w. acc. authorize, appoint … Tit 1:5. … is appointed
to offer gifts Hb 8:3. … 3 cause someone to experience someth.,
make, cause...” – Bauer-Danker-Arndt-Gingrich.
“1) to set, place, put, 1a) to set one over a thing (in charge of
it), 1b) to appoint one to administer an office … Titus 1:5 …, 1c) to
set down as, constitute, to declare, show to be, 1d) to constitute, to
render, make, cause to be, 1e) to conduct or bring to a certain
place, 1f) to show or exhibit one's self, 1f1) come forward as…” –
Grimm-Wilke-Thayer.
“In every city”
The work of each eldership pertains to a local church (see Acts 14:23
and notes above). In those early days, a city on Crete would be unlikely
to have more than one local church. So, elders would be appointed in
every city. As time passed, more than one congregation may develop in
a city and each congregation would have its own elders. So, combining

Acts 14:23 with Titus 1:5, we conclude that elders should be appointed
in every church in every city.
The expression cannot mean every city must have elders, regardless
of how many congregations are in it, for what about cities that have no
congregation? How can they appoint elders in that city?
Elders’ Qualifications
1 Timothy 3:1-13 and Titus 1:5-9 describe what kind of person one
must be to serve as an elder or deacon. Before we study the qualities
listed, let us notice some principles for understanding and applying
them.
The qualifications are necessary

The Scriptures command us to appoint only men who qualify.
“If”
Titus 1:6 – Elders should be appointed if they have the qualities
listed. God’s conditions must be met. Compare this to other verses that
use “if” phrases such as 2 Corinthians 5:17; 2 Timothy 2:12; Acts 8:37.
Would it be right to consider these statements true even in cases in which
the “if” condition is not met?
Likewise, a church should appoint elders if any man is the kind de-
scribed. What if men do not have those qualities? Then it would be
wrong to appoint them.
“Must”
Titus 1:7; 1 Timothy 3:2 – A bishop must be the kind of man de-
scribed. The LEB says “it is necessary”; MLV says “it is essential.”
When God says a thing “must” be, then God’s people are required
to practice it that way. Consider other passages that use the word “must”:
John 3:5; 4:24; Acts 9:6; Hebrews 11:6. Now when God says bishops

must be the kind of man described, what is our condition if we appoint
men who do not have those qualities?
Serious responsibility requires high qualifications. Do we want just
anyone serving as President of the United States? We want the man who
serves to be well qualified to do a good job because the consequences are
so great if he fails. Likewise, elders possess the highest position of au-
thority and responsibility any men today can possess in Jesus’ church.
Acts 20:28-30 – Paul expressly warned elders of the danger that
some of them would lead members astray. In fact nearly every major
apostasy in the church has involved perversions in the eldership of
churches, and every major apostasy has proceeded with the cooperation
of elders.
There is something worse than not having elders, and that is having
unqualified elders.
“Must” () – “…1 to be under necessity of happening, it is
necessary, one must, one has to, denoting compulsion of any kind
… 2 to be someth. that should happen because of being fitting…”
– Bauer-Danker-Arndt-Gingrich.
“…it is necessary, there is need of, it behooves, is right and
proper … a. necessity lying in the nature of the case … b. necessity
brought on by circumstances or by the conduct of others toward
us … c. necessity in reference to what is required to attain some
end … d. a necessity of law and command, of duty, equity … e. ne-
cessity established by the counsel and decree of God, especially by
that purpose of his which relates to the salvation of men…” –
Grimm-Wilke-Thayer.
All the qualifications are necessary.
Some people think that, if we do not have men who possess all the
qualifications, we should just “appoint the best we have”: men who have
most of the qualifications, even if they do not have them all.
But which qualifications may a man be without? If we may overlook
any one qualification, why not overlook any or even all of the others?
Where do you draw the line? What if “the best we have” includes a
woman? Who decides which qualifications we may overlook and which
we should not?
The qualifications of elders are God-given conditions, just like the
conditions for becoming a Christian. Should we accept people as Chris-
tians who are “the best we have,” even if that includes people who lack
faith or repentance or baptism?
The Bible says to obey all God says. See Matthew 28:20; Acts
3:22,23; James 2:10. The passages listing qualifications of elders are Di-
vine requirements. What right do we have to decide to ignore some of
God’s requirements?

God tells us the specific kind of men we should appoint. We have no
more right to appoint a different kind of man from what God specified,
than we have to accept members who have not met the gospel require-
ments of salvation or to use a different action for baptism, a different
kind of music in worship, a different kind of food on the Lord’s Supper,
etc.
Each man must have all the qualifications.
Some people think that the qualities listed must be possessed by the
group of elders as a whole, but not necessarily by each man. They think
we may overlook the fact a particular man lacks some of the qualifica-
tions as long as other elders have those qualifications.
But the passages show that each man individually must possess the
qualities.
1 Timothy 3:1,2 – “If a man … a bishop must be …”
Titus 1:6,7 – “If a man is … For a bishop must be …” (“it is neces-
sary for the overseer to be” – LEB)
Which qualifications may we overlook? If we may overlook any of
the qualifications for one individual, why not likewise overlook most or
all of the other qualifications? Why not appoint some women, as long as
some of the other elders are “husbands of one wife”?
If one of the men had all the qualifications, could we also appoint
another man who had none of the qualifications? Where do you draw the
line, and who gets to decide which qualifications may be overlooked? As
long as you appointed a large enough number of people, for each quali-
fication there would surely be somebody who possessed it.
Each man must meet all the conditions for being an elder, just as
each individual must meet all the conditions for salvation before he can
be saved. (Compare Mark 16:16 – “He that believes …”) Could we accept
a group of people as members so long as one of them believed, another
repented, another confessed, and another had been baptized?
Each man must have all the qualifications before he can be
appointed, and must continue to possess them as long as
he continues in the office.
Some think that, if a congregation does not have qualified men, they
should appoint elders and let them develop the qualifications while they
serve in the office. Others think that, if a man was qualified when he was
appointed and then proves that he can do the job well, then he may con-
tinue in the office even if he loses certain requirements.
But note the Bible teaching:
Titus 1:5,6 – Appoint elders “if a man is” blameless, etc. The quali-
ties must be possessed at the time the man is appointed.
Titus 1:7 – “For a bishop must be” (“it is essential for the overseer
to be” – MLV). This is the kind of man a bishop must be (present tense).
Anytime and all the time while he is in the office, these are the qualities

he must possess. He must have them when he is put in the office, and
if he ceases to be this kind of man, then he must cease to serve in the
office.
1 Timothy 3:2 – A bishop “must be.” It does not say a bishop must
become this kind of man, but a bishop must be this kind of man. Verse
7 – Moreover, he must have, not he must develop.
1 Timothy 3:10 – “Let these also first be proved, then let them
serve …” The men are to be examined to see if they have the necessary
qualities first. First before what? First before they serve in the office,
not during the time they serve. (This verse is discussing deacons, but it
says to let these also first be proved. Also in addition to what? Also in
addition to the elders who had been discussed earlier in the chapter.)
Again, which qualification(s) may we overlook when the man is ap-
pointed? If we may appoint men who lack one or two qualifications, why
not appoint men who lack any or all of the other qualifications? Or if men
may continue to serve even though they lose a qualification, how many
qualifications and which ones may they lose and still serve? Where do
you draw the line and how do you decide?
And note that it follows that the requirements for continuing in
the office of an elder are the same as the requirements for entering or
being appointed to begin with. Since an elder must be the kind of man
described, if one ceases to be that kind of man, then he ceases to meet
the requirements. Therefore, he must no longer continue to serve.
All the alternative views we have examined effectively eliminate the
God-given qualifications. By following such reasoning, we can justify ap-
pointing or leaving in office whomever we want. The result is people fol-
low their own human reasoning and desires and simply set aside God’s
requirements. Wherein is that any better than what denominations do?
The purpose of the qualifications is to give a standard for examining
men, both before they serve and while they serve, to determine whether
or not they can properly do the job. If they lack the needed qualifications,
they should not be appointed. And if they lose them, they should not
continue in the office.
Men must not require qualifications God does not require.
In their zeal to make sure we get good men for elders, people some-
times set up manmade standards that God never intended.
All human changes in God’s plan are displeasing to God – Matthew
15:1-14; 2 John 9; Revelation 22:18,19. It is just as wrong to add
manmade requirements that God never set as it is to neglect to follow
the requirements God did set.
We have no more right to change God’s requirements for the organ-
ization of the church than we have to change His teaching about worship
or salvation. Jesus and Paul steadfastly refused any efforts to bind re-
quirements in addition to those God gave (Matthew 15; Acts 15; Gala-

tians 2). They insisted that people must obey all God-given require-
ments, but they equally insisted that men must not add other require-
ments.
So today we may err by appointing men who lack some of the things
God has required for elders. Or we may err by setting up requirements
that God never gave, and this may cause the church to not have elders
when it could have them according to God’s standard.
God’s qualifications for elders should be treated like God’s other
commands. We must not bend or stretch them to fit our personal desires
or preconceived ideas. Rather, we must mold our lives to conform to
what God said.
The complete and entire issue must be: What did God intend when
He stated the qualifications? That much, and no more, is what we should
insist upon.
The purpose of the qualifications is to select men who can
effectively do the work the office requires.
This is expressly stated regarding several qualifications (1 Timothy
3:5,10; Titus 1:6,7), and all the qualifications relate to the work God or-
dained. The qualifications are not an end in themselves but are simply a
means to an end. The goal is to have elders who are capable of doing the
work. The qualifications should be studied and applied in light
of their relation to the work.
Many qualifications serve to give us elders that set a good example.
As such, these are qualities that every Christian should strive to achieve.
Other qualifications are not necessary for all Christians, but serve to
guide us in selecting men capable of effectively doing the work.
Since the qualifications are designed to appoint men who
can do a certain job, we must seek positive evidence that the
man can do the job. We need not prove that there is fault or blame
against the man; if we lack evidence that a man possesses the needed
qualifications, that is reason to not appoint him.
Some people approach the appointment of elders with a mindset
similar to a church disciplinary action. In disciplinary actions, one
should be considered innocent till proven guilty. If we lack convincing
proof either way, then the man must be treated as though he is innocent.
But some folks want to use this approach regarding the qualifica-
tions for elders: they are determined to appoint a man unless somebody
can prove him guilty of something wrong. But what if there is no con-
vincing evidence either way: we really cannot prove him guilty of any-
thing, but neither can we prove he has the needed qualities?
When some people say a man lacks a qualification, others some-
times react, “That’s not his fault. I don’t think we should penalize him
for that. Why hold that against him?” But saying a man is unqualified
does not mean he should be punished or accused of fault. If we simply

lack evidence that he meets the Bible qualifications, then we still must
not appoint him to this important leadership position.
Consider the difference between deciding whether a man should be
jailed for a crime as compared to whether he should be hired to do brain
surgery. In the first case, you must prove guilt. In the second case, you
need no evidence of guilt nor must you accuse him of evil. If you simply
lack sufficient proof that he can do the job, that is sufficient rea-
son not to hire him.
So for elders, God said men “must be” the kind described. Some
members may lack one or more qualifications because of circumstances
that are no fault of their own (a woman, not married, no children, still a
novice, lack of ability as a teacher, etc.). Many good, faithful Christians
do not qualify for the eldership.
To conclude a man is not qualified is not equivalent to punishing
him or accusing him of fault. If you simply lack convincing evidence he
has the needed qualities, then you still must not appoint him.
Some qualifications are absolute, but others are matters of
degree.
Some requirements are absolute in the sense that a man either has
them or he does not. Absolute qualifications are not matters of degree.
For example, one is either the husband of one wife, or he is not.
There is no such thing as being the husband of one wife but only to a
certain degree! In these matters, the church must decide whether or not
the man possesses the stated characteristic. There is no need for judging
the extent to which he possesses it.
Other qualifications involve matters of degree or extent. In these
qualities, two men may both have the quality, but one may possess it to
a greater degree than another. Examples of such qualifications include
apt to teach, given to hospitality, not a novice, etc.
In such matters of degree, the church must evaluate the degree to
which the quality is possessed. The question becomes: Does this man
possess this quality to a sufficient extent to successfully do
the job for which we are considering appointing him? Does he
set an adequate example and does he have sufficient ability to serve as
an elder?
Developing qualifications requires time.
Several qualifications clearly involve a time element: “not a novice,”
“apt to teach,” “a good testimony” or reputation in the community. Many
of the family qualifications, especially those regarding raising children,
will take time to see how good a job a man will do.
The very word “elder” refers to one who is older. And however you
approach it, it takes time to become older!

This is why the Bible says to let the men be proved first (1 Timothy
3:10). It takes time for a man to develop ability and for people to know
him well enough to be convinced of his ability.
Many people want the church to have elders now, and some men
want to be elders now. But allowing sufficient time for men to develop
and demonstrate qualifications requires patience. How long it takes will
vary from case to case, and necessarily will involve an element of judg-
ment.
Specific Qualifications
Let us consider God’s descriptions of the qualifications of elders,
some applications, and how each qualification relates to the work elders
do. We will discuss here only the requirements listed in Titus but will
leave the additional requirements listed in 1 Timothy for notes on that
book.
“Blameless”
Definitions and translations
This word basically means there is nothing on a man’s record that
can be held against him, no fault or grounds of accusation.
The word is used twice in Titus 1:6,7 and is translated “blameless”
(NKJV, KJV, ASV, LEB), “above reproach” (NASB, ESV), “irreproacha-
ble” (MLV).
“Blameless” () – “…blameless, irreproachable …” –
“that cannot be called to account, unreprovable, unaccused, blame-
less: 1 Corinthians 1:8; Colossians 1:22; 1 Timothy 3:10; Titus 1:6,7”—
Grimm-Wilke-Thayer.

Other passages
Colossians 1:22 – (note verses 21-23) – People who had been alien-
ated from God were then reconciled to Him so they could be holy, with-
out blemish and “irreproachable” in His sight, if they are not moved
away from the faith, etc.
(Compare 1 Corinthians 1:8; 1 Timothy 5:7; 6:14; etc.)
Conclusions
This does not mean that one has never sinned, not even while serv-
ing as an elder, since everyone sins (1 John 1:8,10). Nor does it mean no
one ever accuses him of sin since Jesus and His apostles were often
falsely accused. Nor must other people always agree with the man’s judg-
ment since no two people always agree in matters of judgment.
However, there must be no proof that the man has committed sins
that he refuses to repent and correct. If he sins, he must be willing to
repent and correct the error (as in Colossians 1:21-23). This is a negative
qualification. As long as no convincing evidence exists against a man’s
life, he must be considered to have met this qualification.
Note, however, that if a man commits a publicly known sin, it may
be that he should step down from serving as an elder (or should not be
appointed) till enough time passes for him to re-establish his reputation
and example.
This qualification is required of all Christians, not just of elders (see
verses listed above).
Applications
Any unrepented sin could disqualify a man under this heading.
The Bible contains lists of things specifically forbidden – Galatians
5:19-21; 1 Corinthians 6:9-11 (Matthew 15:18,19; Romans 1:28-32, etc.)
If a man is guilty of any sin in these lists and has not repented, he should
not be an elder.
The Bible also lists many positive qualities God expects Christians
to develop: Galatians 5:22,23; 2 Peter 1:5-7 (Matthew 5:3-12; etc.). A
man who lacks these qualities is disqualified because he is not blameless.
Relationship to the work of elders
Elders must set a good example.
Elders should live so others can imitate them and receive eternal
life. But if the elders continue in sin, members who imitate them would
be lost!
Specifically, elders must avoid, not only extreme acts that even the
world considers immoral, but also what the world considers “little vices”:
white lies, drinking, gambling, smoking, off-color jokes, suggestive lan-
guage, etc.
People often begin these habits in their youth because of the influ-
ence of older people. If elders are guilty, they are a bad example to young

people. It follows that men who practice these should never be elders
among God’s people.
When a man’s life shows a pattern of faithful obedience to God’s
will, he can be trusted to likewise faithfully execute God’s will about the
duties of elders.
Titus 1:7 – The elder must be blameless as God’s steward. He is
responsible to care for the church on behalf of the Lord. He must manage
the affairs and finances of the church.
Such great responsibility should never be entrusted to anyone who
is known to be doing wrong in other areas. What reason is there to be-
lieve he will be faithful in his duties as an elder if he does not follow God’s
will in other areas?
How can one lead the members to live faithfully when he himself is
not living faithfully?
“Husband of one wife”
1 Timothy 3:2; Titus 1:6 both list this qualification. The literal word-
ing is “a man of one woman” (the words are   ). It is
translated “husband of one wife” in NKJV, KJV, ASV, NASB, ESV, and
MLV. (The NRSV says, “married only once.” This is a completely wrong
translation. The original does not say this. It says “husband of one wife.”
We will see the significance of the difference as we proceed.)
This requires the following:
An elder must be a MAN (male).
Feminists and many social forces demand that churches accept
women in supervisory positions. But the Bible teaches that only men be
in these positions.
The terms used prove an elder must be a male, not female.
“Husband” literally means “man” or “male” (the context is what in-
dicates that he is married, hence a “husband”).
Further, he must be a husband to one wife (literally “woman”). But
a woman cannot Scripturally be a husband to a woman/wife.
Further, he must rule well his own house (1 Timothy 3:4,5). But
other Scriptures clearly teach that the husband, not the wife, should be
the head of the family (Ephesians 5:22-24; Genesis 3:16; 1 Corinthians
11:3; 1 Peter 3:1,5,6; Titus 2:5; Colossians 3:18).
The work of elders requires authority that only men may possess.
Our previous study of the work of elders shows they must teach the
members, male and female, publicly and privately. This may require
strongly rebuking sin. Further, elders have oversight or authority to rule
in the local church, including authority over both men and women.
But God’s word clearly forbids women to exercise authority over
men, or even to teach authoritatively over men. Men have the oversight

or headship in the home (1 Corinthians 11:3; Ephesians 5:22-24; Colos-
sians 3:18; Genesis 3:16; Titus 2:5; 1 Peter 3:1,5,6). The same applies in
the church – 1 Timothy 2:11,12; 1 Corinthians 14:34,35.
The apostles were all men. For all the same reasons, elders should
all be men. Scripture simply does not permit women to do the kind of
work in the church that elders must do.
An elder must be married, not single.
The Catholic Church forbids bishops to marry. This forbids what
God specifically allows. It decrees an act to be sinful where God expressly
decreed it to not be sinful (Matthew 15:9; 1 Timothy 4:1-3).
Other denominations affirm the qualifications do not forbid single
men. They say the emphasis is on “one,” so they say polygamists are
forbidden but not single men. They argue that Paul and Jesus were un-
married, and surely they could have been elders. And they may say it is
not the man’s fault he is unmarried, so why blame him and penalize him?
But “one wife” excludes zero as surely as it does two, three, etc.
An unmarried man does not have “one wife” any more than a polygamist
does. Zero does not equal one any more than two equals one! Note some
comparisons:
Ephesians 4:4-6 – There is one God and Father. This rebukes the
worship of many Gods. But do we comply with the verse if we serve no
God? (Likewise for the one faith, one hope, one baptism, etc.)
1 Timothy 2:5 – There is one mediator between God and man. To
believe there is no mediator is as wrong as to believe there are many
mediators. Likewise, the “one wife” requirement excludes a man who is
the husband of no wife, just as surely as it does a man who is married to
two or more women.
Further, a bishop must be the husband of one wife: i.e., a man who
belongs to one woman. A bachelor is not a polygamist, but neither is he
a husband. He does not belong to a woman. (“Husband” is a proper
translation as proved by the context. A man who belongs to a woman is
a husband.)
One may as well argue that a married woman meets this require-
ment as to argue that an unmarried man can meet it. Neither one is “the
husband of one wife.”
Further, a man must have a house to rule (including children) to
demonstrate his ability to rule the church (1 Timothy 3:4,5; Titus 1:6).
But an unmarried man cannot legitimately have children and a family,
so he cannot meet this requirement.
This does not mean unmarried men are worthy of blame or penalty.
It simply means they cannot demonstrate the positive evidence the
church needs to be assured that they have the experience and ability to
be qualified. (See our earlier notes on this point.)
Regarding Jesus and Paul, there is no evidence they were ever el-
ders of local churches, so they offer no evidence for unmarried elders.

Though they held positions higher than elders, their duties were differ-
ent, requiring different qualifications. Different offices require different
qualifications.
Furthermore, God Himself directly appointed Jesus and the apos-
tles to their positions. God could perfectly know whether or not these
men could do the work for which He chose them. But humans can know
a man’s fitness for the eldership only by observing whether or not he
meets the qualifications.
(Compare this to salvation. Jesus could read men’s hearts; on that
basis He sometimes forgave people directly. We cannot read men’s
hearts so, for example, we need them to confess their faith before we can
baptize them. We must have observable evidence that they have met
God’s prerequisites.)
An elder must not have an unlawful marriage.
“Husband of one wife” forbids a man from being an elder if he has
an unscriptural divorce and remarriage, as surely as it forbids a polyga-
mist.
Genesis 2:24 – According to God’s plan, marriage involves one man
cleaving to one woman. There is no room for a man to have more than
one woman, either by polygamy or by divorce and remarriage.
Matthew 19:3-9 – Jesus explained that the original marriage law
(revealed in Genesis 2:24) forbade divorce and remarriage except on
grounds of fornication.
Romans 7:2,3 – Husband and wife are bound together by law so
long as they live. Taking another companion while the first one lives is
adultery because the first marriage bond is still binding before God. A
man who unscripturally divorces and remarries has not restricted him-
self to one wife any more than has a polygamist.
So, a man who has unscripturally divorced and remarried is not the
“husband of one wife” and must not serve as an elder. Such a man would
also be disqualified for other reasons as well. For example, he would also
not be “blameless,” etc. No Christian can please God if he has more than
one woman.
Note, however, according to these verses, if a man’s wife dies, he is
no longer bound to her and therefore has the right to marry another. If
he does so, he is not married to two women but would still be the “hus-
band of one wife.” The passage does not say an elder may only have mar-
ried once, but he must be “the husband of one wife.” (This demonstrates
the error of the NRSV.)
“Having faithful children not accused of dissipation or
insubordination”
See 1 Timothy 3:4,5 regarding the elder’s duty to rule his house well.

“Having faithful children” (Titus 1:6).
This is translated as: “having faithful children” (NKJV, KJV, MEV,
LEB, HCSB), “children that believe (or who believe)” (ASV, NASB),
“children are believers” (ESV, NRSV), “having believing children” (MLV,
LSV), “a man whose children believe” (NIV).
Consider some definitions of “faithful” (or “believing”) ():
“1. trusty, faithful; … one who kept his plighted faith …; wor-
thy of trust; that can be relied on … 2. easily persuaded; believing,
confiding, trusting …; in the N.T. one who trusts in God’s promises
…; is convinced that Jesus has been raised from the dead …; one
who has become convinced that Jesus is the Messiah and the au-
thor of salvation … [a believer] … Titus 1:6 …” – Grimm-Wilke-
Thayer.
“1 pertaining to being worthy of belief or trust, trustworthy,
faithful, dependable, inspiring trust/faith, … 2 pert. to being
trusting, trusting, cherishing faith/trust … Of one who confesses
the Christian faith believing or a believer in the Lord, in Christ, in
God … The abs. πιστός also means believing (in Christ), a (Chris-
tian) believer and is used both as adj. … and as subst. Ac 16:1; 2
Cor 6:15; 1 Ti 4:10; 5:16; 6:2ab; Tit 1:6; … the believers = the Chris-
tians…” – Bauer-Danker-Arndt-Gingrich.
This is the adjective from the same root as the verb for “believe” and
the noun “faith.” However, even as our word “faithful” may have a
slightly different significance than “faith” or “believe,” so it is in the
Greek.
Examples of use demonstrate the meaning.
God, Christ, and the word of God are all often said to be “faithful.”
But consider these examples where the word describes people:
Acts 16:15 – If you have judged me to be faithful to the Lord.
Ephesians 1:1 – To the faithful in Christ Jesus.
1 Timothy 6:2 – Believing masters … they are brethren.
Revelation 2:10 – Be thou faithful unto death…
1 Timothy 3:11 – Elders’ and deacons’ wives must be faithful in all
things. Note that the elders’ wife and children must all be “faithful.”
The primary application (the main point) of the word “faithful”
always, without exception, applies primarily to faithfulness to God.
The primary application of the word is never to faithfulness to a man.
The vast majority of cases (31 or 32 instances) directly refer to faith-
fulness to God, not to man (see the list of examples in our Addenda). A
relatively few cases (5 or 6) refer to faithfulness to man in a parable, but
even so the application of the parable is always to faithfulness to God.
No passage ever uses the term in a way that applies primarily to
faithfulness to a man. This is never the main point of the word. And no

passage ever in any manner uses the word to refer to faithfulness of
children to their father.
In every case, the term “faithful” describes people who do more than
just profess a conviction in the heart regarding who Jesus is. They are
people who have saving faith that leads to faithful service and obedience
to God (James 2:14-26; Galatians 5:6; Hebrews 10:37; chapter 11). One
who is “faithful” is a Christian who is actively working in God’s service
and repenting of any sins they may commit.
“Not accused of dissipation …” – Titus 1:6 (NKJV).
This is translated “dissipation” (NKJV, NASB, LEB), “riot” (KJV,
ASV), “debauchery” (ESV, NRSV), “wild” (MEV, Pickering, NIV), “wild-
ness” (HCSB), “riotousness” (MLV), “loose” (WEB).
Some definitions of “dissipation” (“riot”)
“Dissipation” () – “…gener. denotes 'wastefulness' … then
reckless abandon, debauchery, dissipation, profligacy…” – Bauer-
“(the character … of an abandoned man, one that cannot be saved
… hence, properly, incorrigibleness), an abandoned, dissolute, life; prof-
ligacy, prodigality…” _ Grimm-Wilke-Thayer.
Other passages for “riot” (“dissipation”) are:
Ephesians 5:18 – Drunkenness leads to “riot.”
1 Peter 4:4 – Sins of the world are called “riot” which Christians
must avoid. A list of examples (verse 3) includes lasciviousness, lust,
winebibbing, revellings, carousing, and idolatry.
Luke 15:13 uses a related word to describe the prodigal son’s “riot-
ous” living.
This word describes various kinds of loose, immoral conduct. It al-
ways, without exception, refers to disobedience to God’s moral laws,
never to human law.
“Not accused of … insubordination” – Titus 1:6 (NKJV).
This is translated “insubordination” (NKJV, ESV), “unruly” (KJV,
ASV, MEV), “rebellion” or “rebellious” (NASB; LEB, NRSV, HCSB,
MLV), or “disobedient” (Pickering, NIV).
Some definitions of “insubordinate” (“unruly”)
“Insubordination” () – “…1 not made subject, inde-
pendent … 2 pert. to refusing submission to authority, undisciplined,
disobedient, rebellious …” – Bauer-Danker-Arndt-Gingrich.
“1. (passively) not made subject, unsubjected … 2. (actively) that
cannot be subjected to control, disobedient, unruly, refractory…” –
Grimm-Wilke-Thayer.
Other passages using “unruly” (“insubordination”) are:
Titus 1:10 – Unruly men teach things they ought not.

1 Timothy 1:9 – Lawless and unruly (insubordinate) people practice
things listed in verses 9-11 including those who are ungodly, sinners, etc.,
and anything contrary to sound doctrine according to the gospel.
This word, when used regarding man’s subjection to authority, al-
ways refers to rebellion or disobedience to the authority of God. It never
refers to a man’s rebellion against men. (Hebrews 2:8 uses the word for
nature or the world not being in subjection to man, but this does not
refer to insubordination of a person to a man.)
So, an unruly/insubordinate person is disobedient and refuses to
submit to proper authority. This especially refers to rebellion against
God, but one who refuses to obey other proper authorities is also diso-
beying God. Any man is unqualified for the eldership if his children so
act.
Note that these phrases help explain the meaning of “faithful” chil-
dren. People often read the requirement to be “faithful” but overlook the
rest of the description. Faithfulness may involve more than this, but
clearly one is not “faithful” if he refuses to become a Christian, or if he
continues to live in immorality or in any kind of disobedience to God, for
such a person can justly be charged with “riot” or “unruly.”
Applications and conclusions
The elder’s children must be Christians.
This is the clear meaning of “faithful” in Titus 1:6. It is not just faith-
ful to their father’s will, but faithful to God. See the examples listed pre-
viously.
But must they all be faithful Christians? What if a man has some
children who are faithful Christians, but he also has one or more that
never became Christians or that were Christians but fell away? Does such
a man possess the necessary qualifications to serve as an elder?
Compare the language of Titus 1:6 to similar language elsewhere.
1 Timothy 5:10 – A widow indeed, to be cared for by the church,
must be one who “has brought up children.” Of the children that she had,
how many of them must she have brought up?
1 Timothy 3:4 – The elder must have “his children in subjection.”
How many of the children in his household must be in subjection? If
most are in subjection, but one or a few are clearly not in subjection, is
the man qualified? Can we honestly say that such a man has his children
in subjection?
1 Timothy 3:11 – The wives must be “grave, … temperate, … faithful
in all things.” Of the wives of the deacons and elders, how many of them
must have these qualities? If most of the wives have these qualities, but
one or a few of them are not faithful, etc., can we honestly say that the
wives of the officers are grave, temperate, and faithful?
Titus 1:6 – The elder’s children must be “not accused of riot or un-
ruly.” How many of his children must not be so accused? If all of his
children are faithful, but he has one or more that can be accused of riot

or unruly, is he qualified? Can it truthfully be said that the children of
such a man are not accused of riot or unruly?
Either all the man’s children must be faithful for him to be qualified,
or else the widow does not need to have brought up all her children, the
elder does not need to have all the children in his household in subjec-
tion, and not all the officers’ wives must be faithful, etc. But if we accept
that these other phrases mean all of the people involved, then the same
must be true regarding “faithful children.”
If accountable children are not Christians or if they have fallen
away, then they are by definition “unruly.” The word means one who is
not subjecting himself to proper authority. One who should be a Chris-
tian but is not, or who is not obeying God, is unruly.
The purpose of the qualification is to give visible evidence to the
congregation to demonstrate that the man possesses the positive quali-
ties needed to teach and rule God’s church. Remember that we do not
need proof of guilt or sin to conclude that man is not qualified and
should not serve. It is enough to conclude that we lack the necessary
evidence to prove he is qualified.
See our addendum for a further discussion of the faithful-
ness of an elder’s children.
The elder’s children must be faithful as Christians.
Some think the qualification is met if a man’s children have once
been baptized. But “faithful” and “not accused of riot and unruly” involve
much more.
If a child persists in disobeying authority (parents, civil rulers, or
God) he is “unruly.” Likewise, if he persists in teaching or practicing re-
ligious error.
If a child persists in immorality, he is both “riotous” and “unruly.”
This includes lying, stealing, gambling, drinking, drugs, lascivious cloth-
ing, cheating, fornication, petting, dancing, unscriptural divorce, etc.
If a child is not active in the work of the church, he is both unfaithful
and unruly. Some children are not immoral, but neither are they zealous
for the Lord. Examples are those who neglect church meetings, do not
study and pray and participate in the work, etc.
Importance of these qualifications to elders
Elders need to have their family in subjection, and have the kind of
children described, for several reasons:
An elder should be a good example and influence – 1 Peter 5:3.
An elder should lead his family in a way that the other men can im-
itate and lead their families and train their children properly. If the el-
der’s wife or children are not serving God or are not subject to the father,
this sets a bad example and hinders the elder’s influence for good.
Too often parents try to teach their children to do right only to hear
them refer to the children of an elder saying, “His kids smoke, dance,
miss services, go to the public beaches, etc.” Raising children is hard

enough without having to overcome a bad example set by the leaders in
the church.
Further, the elder must have a good report from those outside the
church. But if his wife or children are not faithful Christians or are not
subject to him, this causes God, His word, and His work to be blas-
phemed.
An elder needs the support and encouragement of his family.
An elder’s work is a great burden at best. He needs all the help he
can get. If his wife and children are faithful, they can encourage and help
him in the work. They can help carry the load, participate in the work,
and cheer him up when the burdens of the job trouble him.
But an ungodly family is a great burden and discouragement to an
elder. He spends time worrying about his own family, instead of actively
working for the church. He must bear the burdens of his office without
their support. In fact, they become part of the burden.
An elder should demonstrate experience and ability to teach others
and exercise authority – 1 Timothy 3:5.
If a man cannot teach and lead his own family, how can he teach
and lead the church? The duties of a husband and father are in many
ways parallel to those of elders. Both are responsible to teach others and
make decisions for the benefit of the group. If a man has successfully
done good work in his family, he has gained valuable experience toward
serving as an elder.
Church members, being human, cannot read minds and cannot pre-
dict the future as God can do. We need observable results on which to
base our decision regarding what work a man can do as an elder. A godly
family indicates the man’s ability to teach and lead. If his family is
worldly, even if we cannot prove it is his fault, the fact remains that we
lack the necessary evidence to appoint him.
1:7-9 – 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 good, sober-minded, just, holy, self-controlled,
holding fast the faithful word that he may be able, by
sound doctrine, to exhort and convict those who
contradict.
“Blameless, as a steward of God”
Regarding “blameless,” see our notes on verse 6. Also on the idea of
a “steward,” see our notes on the work of elders above.
“Not self-willed”
This is not listed in 1 Timothy 3.

Translations and definitions
This is translated “not self-willed” (NKJV, KJV, ASV, NASB, LEB,
MEV), “not arrogant” (ESV, NRSV, HCSB), or “not over-bearing” (NIV).
So, an elder must not stubbornly insist on his own way regardless
of what is best for others and regardless of the views of the group as a
whole. The theological dictionary points out that the word emphasizes
one who follows his own human views to the point of being willing to
disobey divine command.
“Self-willed” () – “…self-willed, stubborn, arrogant…” –
“…self-pleasing, self-willed, arrogant…” – Grimm-Wilke-Thayer.
“…denotes one who, dominated by self-interest, and inconsiderate
of others, arrogantly asserts his own will, ‘self-willed,’ … ‘one so far over-
valuing any determination at which he has himself once arrived that he
will not be removed from it’ (Trench…) …” – Vine.
“In the two passages in which αὐθάδης occurs in the NT the refer-
ence is to human impulse violating obedience to the divine command. In
both cases it is religious leaders who are exposed to this danger or suc-
cumb to it.” – Theological Dictionary of the New Testament.
Related passages
2 Peter 2:10 describes false teachers as “those who walk according
to the flesh in the lust of uncleanness and despise authority. They are
presumptuous, self-willed. They are not afraid to speak evil of dignitar-
ies.” Note the connection between being self-willed and being arrogantly
disrespectful of authority.
Philippians 2:3,4 – “Let nothing be done through selfish ambition
or conceit, but in lowliness of mind let each esteem others better than
himself. Let each of you look out, not only for his own interests, but also
for the interests of others.” Rather than acting through selfish ambition
or conceit, disciples should look out for the interest of others, not just
their own interests.
Applications
Nothing here forbids men from standing fast for truth, even
against opposition.
When men have a firm conviction to stand for truth in the face of
opposition, some people quickly label them as “stubborn, proud, jealous,
contentious, self-willed.” Yet some of the greatest heroes of the faith
stood alone against multitudes who did evil: Noah, Abraham, Daniel, the
three Hebrews, Elijah, the apostles, etc.
On the other hand, God’s disfavor fell on many who gave in to pres-
sures from the world and failed to stand for truth: Peter in denying Jesus
(Matthew 26), Pilate in condemning Jesus (Matthew 27), and the Jews
who would not confess Him though they knew He was from God (John
12:42,43).

The Bible warns Christians, especially leaders, that they must stand
for the truth. When they do, we must take care lest we imply they did
wrong!
“Self-will” involves standing for a position even when the Scrip-
tures have shown one to be wrong or insisting on one’s own way as a
matter of personal preference or personal advantage without regard
to the problems created for others.
If the Scriptures show one is standing for error, not for truth, then
no passage or Bible example will justify him.
One is self-willed when he has a position he cannot conclusively
prove by the Bible, yet he stubbornly insists everyone else give in and
accept his view. Or in a matter of degree or judgment in application of
Scripture, he insists, to the point of causing strife and division, that eve-
ryone accept his judgment. Or one may take a position for personal ben-
efit even when it may not be best for the group.
The difference is between standing for what one can prove to be the
will of God and standing for one’s own human opinion, preference, or
desire. It is self-will vs. God’s will. Are we seeking the wellbeing of the
whole group according to God’s will, or are we just determined to do
what we want or decide is best?
1 Peter 5:3 shows the importance of this for elders. They must not
“lord it over the flock.” This does not mean elders have no authority. It
means they recognize they are stewards who serve the Lord! They have
authority, but they use it to further God’s will and God’s purposes, not
their own.
Such men must stand without compromise for what God’s word
teaches. And when making decisions for a group they decide according
to what is best for the group, not just according to what they personally
would like.
This does not mean that the other members have the right to veto
or cancel the decisions made by elders. However, it surely does show that
elders should carefully consider the needs of the congregation as they
make decisions. This requires that they should have good communica-
tion so they know the needs of the group.
Too many elders just meet by themselves and decide what they want
without consulting the views and input of other members about deci-
sions that vitally affect them. God has not defined a specific way for el-
ders to hear members’ views; but before making decisions that affect the
members, elders should strive to understand the views of the members,
then decide for the good of the group. They should not just do what suits
their pleasure.

“Not quick-tempered”
Definitions and translations:
This is translated “not quick-tempered” (NKJV, NASB, ESV, LEB,
NRSV), “not soon angry” (ASV, KJV), “not hot-tempered” (HCSB), or
“not easily angered” (MEV).
The basic meaning refers to one who gets angry quickly, easily,
and/or frequently. He is characterized by anger.
“Quick-tempered” () – “…‘quick-tempered persons lose no
time being angry, and do so with those they ought not, over things they
ought not, and far more than they ought’; Herodian … inclined to anger,
quick-tempered …” – Bauer-Danker-Arndt-Gingrich.
“…prone to anger, irascible…” – Grimm-Wilke-Thayer.
Other passages
James 1:19,20 – Every man should be slow to wrath because man’s
wrath does not work God’s righteousness.
Ephesians 4:26 – Be angry but sin not.
For other passages about anger see Ephesians 4:31; Psalm 7:11;
37:8; Proverbs 14:17,29; 15:1,18,28; 16:32; 19:11,19; 22:24,25; 25:28;
29:11,22; Mark 3:5; Genesis 4:5-7; Galatians 5:19-21; Colossians 3:8;
Matthew 5:22.
Applications
Again, this is a characteristic all must possess. “Every man” should
be slow to wrath (James 1:19,20).
Does this mean a man must never become angry?
Ephesians 4:26 – Be angry, but sin not. Some anger is not sinful.
Mark 3:5 – Jesus looked on the Jews with anger. Did Jesus sin?
James 1:19,20 – It is human wrath that does not work God’s right-
eousness.
Moses was angered several times by the sins of the Israelites (com-
pare Exodus 32).
Just as there are different kinds of love and different kinds of works,
so there are different kinds of anger. Whether or not anger is sinful de-
pends on why we are angry and how we act as a result.
We must not be angered easily, quickly, or for little reason.
Translations of Titus 1:7 show the word means not “quick,” “soon”
or easily angered.
James 1:19 – We should be slow to wrath.
Some people fly off the handle quickly, easily, over things of rela-
tively little consequence. Jesus was angry because men disobeyed God.
But we sometimes become angry just because our human desires have
been frustrated or we did not get out own way.
We must not let anger lead to sinful conduct or poor judgment.

Often anger leads people to say or do things that violate Bible teach-
ing, things we would not do in a calmer moment, things we regret later.
We have “lost” our temper. We no longer control ourselves to do right.
We tend to speak from selfish motives, not to help other people, but
to hurt their feelings or reputation, make false accusations, etc. Some
even seek to do physical harm.
Such conduct violates, not only the instructions about anger, but
also the quality of temperance (vigilant self-control).
Elders often face circumstances that try their tempers. Leading
other people is often frustrating. They are opposing false teachers and
helping members see their errors. Such circumstances often lead to an-
ger and frustration. Often elders deal with people who lose control.
The elders themselves must be able to maintain control of their tem-
per. If they are hot-headed and stubborn, they will not show the good
judgment needed to act for the good of the group.
“Not given to wine”
This is translated: “not given to wine” (KJV, NKJV), “no brawler”
(ASV), “not addicted to wine” (NASB, LEB, NRSV), “not a drunkard”
(ESV), “not quarrelsome over wine” (ASV footnote). This expression is
used both in 1 Timothy 3:3 and Titus 1:7.
Vine and Thayer point out that the basic meaning of the word refers
to one who tarries at the wine, but the secondary meaning that follows is
one who is brawling and abusive, quarrelsome and argumentative, like
drunken people become.
In his discussion of Bible wines, Patton explains that the word liter-
ally simply means that the man should not be at, by, near, or with wine.
It does not necessarily refer to drunkenness let alone addiction.
“Given to wine” () – “…one who sits long at his wine, given
to wine, drunken … (others give it the secondary sense, quarrelsome over
wine; hence, brawling, abusive) …” – Grimm-Wilke-Thayer.
Applications
The exact meaning of the term is hard to determine. The qualifica-
tion of bishops is the only place the word is used. If the reference is to a
quarrelsome attitude, this would surely be condemned in an elder, and
will be discussed under other qualifications.
If the main reference is to drinking alcoholic beverages, then does
the expression forbid all drinking by elders, or does it just forbid drink-
ing to the point he becomes obnoxious and argumentative, or does it just
forbid drunkenness or addiction?
While the exact meaning may be difficult to determine, yet when we
consider all the qualifications and all the teachings of God’s word, I be-
lieve we can conclude: (1) Quarrelsome attitudes are condemned here
and under other qualifications. (2) Drunkenness is sinful, so an elder

who practiced it would not be “blameless” (Galatians 5:19-21; 1 Corin-
thians 5:11; 6:9,10; Ephesians 5:18). (3) An elder must not socially drink
the alcoholic beverages used in our society at all but be a total abstainer.
The fact that an extreme form of an act is forbidden, would not of
itself prove that a less extreme form is acceptable.
Some claim that, if an elder should not be given to wine or addicted
to wine, this would prove that they may drink alcoholic beverages mod-
erately so long as they do not become obviously intoxicated. However,
the reproof of an extreme practice does not prove that less extreme forms
are acceptable. Consider some examples:
Isaiah 10:2 rebukes those who “rob the poor.” Does that mean we
may covet or rob the rich as long as we do not steal from the poor?
Romans 13:9 forbids murder (compare 1:29; Matthew 15:19; 1 Tim-
othy 1:9). Is it acceptable to beat someone up as long as they do not die,
or to hate them in our hearts? No, other passages deal with the appar-
ently “lesser” extremes (see Matthew 5:22).
Matthew 15:19 – Adultery is forbidden. Does that justify lusting af-
ter a woman in the heart? No, that is forbidden elsewhere (Matthew
5:28,29).
If Titus 1:7 and 1 Timothy 3:3 condemn addiction, that would not
mean elders may be drunk occasionally. If it condemns obvious drunk-
enness, that would not condone drinking when one was not apparently
drunk. We still must consider other passages.
The least that can be said is that this passage restricts drinking, yet
people use it to permit it!
Modern “social drinking” would constitute excessive drinking by
gospel standards.
People today frequently use words like “baptism,” “church,” “saint,”
“love,” etc., much differently than in the Bible. We must understand
words as the Bible uses them, not necessarily as they are used today. So,
consider the Bible word for “wine” as compared to modern alcoholic
drinks. Any good encyclopedia on “wine” will show:
In Bible times “wine” could mean fermented grape juice, or unfer-
mented grape juice (Isaiah 16:10; 65:8; Jeremiah 48:33; Song 5:1; Gen-
esis 40:9-11; Revelation 19:15; 14:19,20). This is similar to our word “ci-
der.” “Wine” could also refer to fermented grape juice diluted with wa-
ter, usually one part of wine for 3-8 parts of water. Drinking fermented
wine undiluted was considered excessive, immoderate drink!
Distilled alcohol, which many people drink today, was unknown
in Bible times but has much higher alcohol content than wine. Would
you agree that it is wrong to drink a shot of whisky? (Remember your
answer.)
Modern wines are seldom diluted with water. Instead, modern
wines have higher natural alcohol content than Bible wines, and distilled

alcohol is often added to increase the alcohol content! Drinking mod-
ern wines would be excessive drinking by Bible standards.
Beer is made alcoholic by a brewing process. Modern beers are
lower in alcohol than undiluted Bible wines but higher than diluted
wines. And beer is drunk in greater quantities than wine: One can of beer
has as much total alcohol as a glass of wine or a shot of whiskey! All
Christians should agree that a shot of whiskey is excess of alcohol. Then
so is a can of beer!
Even if Titus 1:7 and 1 Timothy 3:3 condemn only “excessive” drink-
ing, then modern social drinking fits the definition of excess.
The Bible warns against practices that are likely to lead us deeper
into sin.
The Bible generally teaches that, if a practice can easily lead to sin,
the beginning forms should be avoided also. Specifically, Proverbs
23:29-33; 20:1 show that the result of drinking should lead us to com-
pletely avoid it from the beginning. See also Hosea 4:11.
One of every ten social drinkers becomes a “problem drinker,” and
a much higher percentage will get obviously drunk. When an extreme act
is condemned, instead of concluding that lesser forms of the act are jus-
tified, we should rather suspect that the lesser forms should also be
avoided. The sure way to avoid alcoholism and drunkenness is to avoid
the first drink.
Self-control and sobriety require avoiding practices that weaken
judgment and inhibitions.
These are qualifications for elders that we will study further as we
proceed. They are also required of all Christians.
Isaiah 28:7 – “But they also have erred through wine, and through
intoxicating drink are out of the way; the priest and the prophet have
erred through intoxicating drink, they are swallowed up by wine, they
are out of the way through intoxicating drink; they err in vision, they
stumble in judgment.” Qualities required of elders (and all of us) are de-
feated by drinking alcohol.
Leviticus 10:9,10 – “Do not drink wine or intoxicating drink, you,
nor your sons with you, when you go into the tabernacle of meeting, lest
you die. It shall be a statute forever throughout your generations, that
you may distinguish between holy and unholy, and between unclean and
clean.”
Proverbs 31:4,5 – “It is not for kings, O Lemuel, it is not for kings to
drink wine, nor for princes intoxicating drink; lest they drink and forget
the law, and pervert the justice of all the afflicted.”
1 Peter 5:8 – We should be vigilant so we are on guard for the devil
who seeks to destroy us.
1 Corinthians 9:25-27 – We should practice self-control so we have
our bodies in subjection to avoid sin and practice righteousness.

1 Thessalonians 5:6-8; 1 Timothy 3:2; Titus 2:2,4,6,12 – All Chris-
tians are commanded to be sober, not intoxicated. We should keep our
minds clear so we can recognize right from wrong and have the self-con-
trol to avoid error.
But the very first effect modern alcoholic drinks have on the body is
that they confuse the part of the brain that involves our discernment and
inhibitions. Just one or two beers affect the mind so one is not vigilant
and sober. His mind is not as sharp as it would otherwise be to recognize
and resist the devil’s temptations.
1 Peter 4:3 condemns various degrees of drinking:
(1) “Drunkenness” (NKJV) or “excess of wine” (KJV) or “winebib-
bing” (ASV). This is a drunken spree, “extravagant indulgence … long
drawn out” (Trench).
(2) “Revelry” is a wild party with drunkenness and sexual looseness.
(3) “Banqueting” (KJV) is “carousing” (ASV, NRSV, LEB) or “drink-
ing parties” (NKJV, NASB, ESV). It means “drinking” (Thayer, Vine),
“not of necessity excessive … but giving opportunity for excess…”
(Trench). In other words, a social gathering at which people drink, even
if they do not become obviously intoxicated – i.e., social drinking.
Elders and all Christians must set a good example.
Elders must set a good example (1 Peter 5:3; Hebrews 13:7). So must
all Christians (Matthew 18:6,7; 1 Timothy 4:12).
But the main reason people begin drinking is because of the influ-
ence of other people. This is why it is called “social drinking”! Young
people are especially affected by older people whom they look up to.
One of every ten social drinkers becomes an alcoholic, and a much
higher percentage will become obviously drunk. So, if other people are
encouraged to drink because of our influence, we have become a stum-
bling block leading people to drunkenness and alcoholism.
Elders must have a good report outside the church (1 Timothy 3:7).
There is no way an elder or any Christian can have a consistently
good influence on those around us if we are known to drink.
So, regardless of the specific meaning of the phrase “not given to
wine,” neither an elder nor any Christian can be the kind of faithful, ma-
ture servant God wants if they are social drinkers.
“Not violent”
Translations
This characteristic is listed in 1 Timothy 3:3 and Titus 1:7. It is trans-
lated “not violent” (NKJV, ESV, LWB, NRSV), “no striker” (ASV, KJV),
“not pugnacious” (NASB), “not a bully” (HCSB, MLV). The KJV transla-
tion has no reference to going on strike in a union (though that practice
surely could involve violence or other sins).

The meaning is that an elder must not resort to violence or force to
achieve his goals. One who would do such would surely fail to possess
several of the other qualifications as well.
“Violent” () – “…pugnacious person, bully…” – Bauer-
“…bruiser, ready with a blow; a pugnacious, contentious, quarrel-
some person…” – Grimm-Wilke-Thayer.
Applications
Some people strike out at others in a fit of anger or frustration.
When they cannot get their way, they become upset and use violence to
achieve their goal. Some husbands or wives are violent to one another.
Such men are unfit for elders.
Other people hate others to the point they deliberately plot harm to
them as a form of vengeance or malice. Our society has become increas-
ingly violent as people think that rioting, looting, stealing, and mugging
people are acceptable ways of achieving their ends.
God’s people are involved in spiritual warfare, not physical warfare
(Ephesians 6:10-18; 2 Corinthians 10:3-5). We use spiritual weapons –
teaching and persuasion using God’s word, not physical force – to ac-
complish God’s work. Christians in the gospel never resorted to physical
force even to avoid persecution. They sometimes appealed to civil au-
thorities or fled, but they never used violence toward their oppressors
(Romans 12:17-21).
Much modern entertainment consists of violence: shooting, killing,
vengeance, and hatred. How can a man be qualified as an elder if he en-
joys being entertained by violence? Remember the Bible says it is wrong
to justify, take pleasure in, or have fellowship in other people who prac-
tice sin (2 John 9-11; Ephesians 5:11; Proverbs 17:15; 2 Corinthians 6:17-
7:1; 1 Timothy 5:22; Psalms 1:1,2; 1 Corinthians 15:33; Romans 1:32; Acts
7:58; 8:1; 22:20).
Other qualifications are also violated when a man is violent. Such a
man fails to practice self-control as he should. So, he could not be blame-
less.
Elders must be men who have learned to work out their differences
by patient teaching and reasoning, not by violence and force.
“Not greedy for money”
Three phrases relate to the elders’ attitude toward money: “not
greedy for money” (this expression is missing in ASV) and “not covetous”
(1 Timothy 3:3 – NKJV), and “not greedy for money” (Titus 1:7).
“Not greedy for money” (NKJV, NRSV) in Titus 1:7 is translated
“not greedy for (or given to) filthy lucre” (KJV, ASV), “not fond of sordid
gain” (NASB), “not greedy for gain” (ESV, NRSV), “not greedy for dis-
honest gain” (LEB, MEV), “not covetous” (MLV).

“Greedy for money” () – “…shamelessly greedy for
money, avaricious, fond of dishonest gain…” – Bauer-Danker-Arndt-
Gingrich.
“…eager for base gain…” – Grimm-Wilke-Thayer.
Related passages
Hebrews 13:5 – All Christians should be free from love of money,
content with what we have, trusting God who will not leave us.
Luke 16:14 – We cannot have two masters, so we should use our
riches to serve God. The Pharisees mocked because they were lovers of
money. (Compare Matthew 6:19-34.)
2 Timothy 3:2 – Grievous times come when men are lovers of self,
money, etc.
1 Timothy 6:10 – Love of money is the root of all kinds of evil. Those
minded to be rich fall into temptations, lusts, etc. We should be con-
cerned primarily about godliness and be content with necessities (verses
6-9). A rich person can serve God but must not trust riches but use them
to further God’s work (verses 17-19).
Applications
These principles apply to all Christians since none of us should be
lovers of money.
Elders should not have a sinful or questionable source of income.
This would include stealing or extortion; dishonest business prac-
tices (lying about products, dishonest weights and measures); cheating
on taxes; gambling; selling, raising, serving, or manufacturing tobacco,
alcoholic beverages, or obscene literature.
Nor should they cheat their employer, but give an honest day’s labor
at an honest and upright job, working as to the Lord (Ephesians 6:5-8).
Elders should not be so fond of money that it hinders their service
to God.
Elders must let God determine how they will live their lives. They
should sacrifice money rather than allow it to stand in the way of serving
God. We should never sacrifice God’s service to obtain and enjoy the lux-
uries and pleasures of life.
Some people will go traveling, boating, or camping, and take a va-
cation from the Lord. Others will neglect worship meetings, Bible study,
or teaching the gospel to others to work overtime or to take a second job
to obtain more of this world’s goods when family needs could be met
without such.
Elders must not hold their money so tightly they neglect God’s
work. They should be generous in supporting the work of the church as
prospered. They should freely use their money, house, and possessions
to help other people.
These applications apply to elders and all mature Christians.
Importance to the elders’ work

Obviously, dishonest income would be a terrible influence in the
church and a bad example to other Christians.
1 Peter 5:2 – Elders are warned not to be motivated by the desire for
personal gain. They may be supported financially (1 Timothy 5:17), but
they should be willing to serve whether or not they are paid. If the church
supports them, it is so they can spend more time in the work (as with
preachers). An elder has a love of money if he would serve only if he
profited financially.
Elders must take not cater to the wealthy in the church. They may
be tempted to show favoritism toward the wealthy but ignore or belittle
those who are poor (James 2:1-13). They may allow their decisions to
favor the wealthy members, or they may fail to rebuke wealthy people
like they would the poor.
Elders must have right attitudes toward money because they are re-
sponsible to supervise the spending of church funds. Some have been
known to steal from the treasury, like Judas. Others want fancy, expen-
sive buildings for the sake of pride or to please the people, or they use
the money for unscriptural programs.
Some hoard the church funds and build up a big bank account with
no real purpose for the money. Souls die in sin and preachers beg for
support while some elders are hoarding church funds.
The fact a man is rich does not mean he is greedy. However, many
members want wealthy men as elders because it indicates financial suc-
cess and they think good businessmen make good elders. Elders should
be good managers, but this does not require large incomes.
“Hospitable”
This is translated “hospitable” (NKJV, NASB, NRSV, ESV, HCSB,
MLV), “given to hospitality” (ASV), or “lover of hospitality” (KJV). It is
also used in the qualifications in 1 Timothy 3:2.
The basic idea involves love for strangers and especially a care for
the needs of others, using one’s home to help other people. Like many
other qualities, this one is commanded of all Christians.
Hospitality is not just having good friends over for fun and games.
It is helping people in need, including people we do not know well and
people who are unlikely to be able to help us in return.
“Hospitable” () – “…hospitable, generous to guests…” –
Grimm-Wilke-Thayer.
Related passages
Romans 12:13 – All Christians should be “given to hospitality.”
1 Peter 4:9 – We should show hospitality one to another without
murmuring.
Hebrews 13:2 – Forget not to show love to strangers.

Applications
Elders and all Christians should be hospitable in the following ways:
We should help newcomers in town and especially in the church.
They may need a temporary place to stay, transportation, directions and
advice, meals, or help in finding a job or a place to live.
We should help gospel preachers who are traveling. They may need
meals or a place to stay.
We should help other travelers who, due to circumstances beyond
their control, have a genuine need.
We should greet visitors at our assemblies, welcome them, invite
them to come back, invite them over for a meal, etc.
We should use our homes to help anyone we know who has a real,
genuine need: elderly people, widows, orphans, people whose homes
have been destroyed, or who need a meal, etc.
Again, since all Christians should be hospitable, elders should set a
good example in this.
Since elders should be teachers, getting to know strangers may give
opportunities to teach.
Elders should watch on behalf of the souls of members. To know
their needs, they should get to know the members.
Hospitality helps promote the kind of good relationship in which
members and elders know one another well enough to be able to work
together effectively.
“Lover of good”
Translated “lover of good men” (KJV), “lover of what is good”
(NKJV), “lover of good” (ASV, ESV), “lover of goodness” (NRSV), or
“loving what is good” (LEB). The applications will be the same for all
translations because, if one is a lover of good men, it must be that he
loves them because they are good. So either way, the emphasis is on
loving good.
“Lover of good () – “…loving what is good…” – Bauer-
Applications
Note that this is an attitude toward good. A person values and ap-
preciates good. He does not just go through the outward motions of
goodness but loves good from the heart.
One who loves good will love truth and true teachings.
1 Corinthians 13:6 – Love rejoices not in iniquity, but rejoices in the
truth.
2 Thessalonians 2:10-12 – Those who do not love truth, but have
pleasure in unrighteousness, will believe a lie and be condemned.

Truth and teaching truth lead men to be good men. So one who
loves good and loves good men will love truth. They will love to learn
truth, so they will study diligently and will attend worship assemblies
and classes regularly. They will be willing to listen if someone has a crit-
icism of them, because they want to know and do what is good. They will
be determined that only truth will be taught in the church.
They will also love truth enough that they want to teach it whenever
they can. And they will want to be sure that what they teach is true, so
they and others can be good men.
Romans 12:9 – Those who love good will hate evil. Elders must
speak out against sin to defend the flock from error and must guard
against sin in the lives of the members. No man can serve as an elder
unless he has a burning love for good and hatred of evil.
See also Proverbs 15:9; 8:13; 6:16-19; 28:4; Psalm 97:10;
119:104,128,163; 139:21,22; Amos 5:15; 1 Kings 21:20; 22:6-8; 2 Chron-
icles 19:2; Luke 19:14; John 7:7; 15:18,19,23,24; Romans 1:32; 12:9; 1
Timothy 3:3; Hebrews 1:9; 1 John 2:15-17.
One who loves good will love good conduct and those who practice
it.
3 John 3,4 – John had great joy when he heard of those who walk
in truth. He was a “lover of good (men).”
2 Timothy 3:3 – Perilous times come (verse 1) when men are lovers
of themselves and lovers of money (verse 2), but despisers of good (verse
3). This word is the negative of the word for “lovers of good” in Titus 1.
What makes men good men? It is good conduct: good thoughts,
words, and deeds. One who loves good and loves good men, then, must
love good conduct. Many men hate what is good. Elders must be those
who love it.
They will surely want to practice good conduct and be around others
who do the same. They will not enjoy immoral pleasures, nor will they
allow personal pleasures to hinder their service to God. They will not be-
grudge the time and effort needed to serve God. They will get a real sense
of joy and fulfillment from living right and from being around others
who do likewise.
A lover of good will look for opportunities to do good and will sup-
port and encourage all others to practice good. He will be ready and will-
ing to participate in all good works. You will not have to beg him. He will
not continually be “too busy,” or make other excuses.
In short, a lover of good (men) will himself be an active, hard-work-
ing, dedicated Christian, and will truly appreciate other people who do
the same. Such a man will be a credit to any congregation, will set an
excellent example for others to follow, and will surely fulfill the role of
watching for the flock to encourage others to do good.
If there is anything the church needs it is members who are lovers
of what is good. No man can be an elder unless he is.

“Sober-minded”
This word is used in 1 Timothy 3:2 and Titus 1:8. In Titus it is trans-
lated: “sober” (KJV), “sober-minded” (NKJV, ASV), “prudent” (LEB,
NRSV), “self-controlled” (ESV, MEV), “sensible” (NASB, HCSB, MLV).
“Sober-minded” is closely related to “self-control.” Self-control em-
phasizes ability to control oneself. “Sober” emphasizes the state of
mind required to have self-control. One must think clearly and seri-
ously, using good judgment, and making good decisions to control one-
self.
We often use the word “sober” in contrast to one who is intoxicated.
Under the influence of alcohol, a person cannot think as clearly as usual.
His judgment is impaired. He is not “sober.” (See our previous discus-
sion of wine.)
Other things besides alcohol can hinder our clear thinking and judg-
ment is resisting sin and temptation. To be sober is to eliminate these
hindrances.
“Sober-minded” () – “…of sound mind, sane, in one’s senses
… curbing one’s desires and impulses, self-controlled, temperate…” –
Grimm-Wilke-Thayer.
“… being in control of oneself, prudent, thoughtful, self-con-
trolled…” – Bauer-Danker-Arndt-Gingrich.
Related passages
All Christians need to be sober, thinking seriously and using good
judgment. Related forms of the word are used elsewhere.
1 Timothy 2:9 – Women need to think seriously about the way they
dress. Some fail to see this as a serious concern. To them it is just a mat-
ter of fashion, so they go along with the styles, modest or not. God says
this is a matter to be taken seriously and dealt with using good judgment!
Titus 2:5,6 – Young men and women need to think seriously about
spiritual matters. Some young people do not give this serious consider-
ation. They think life is fun and games: have a good time, and live it up.
God warns them to take life seriously. This does not mean they have no
fun, but they always remember the true purpose of life so they use good
judgment to live to please God.
1 Peter 4:7 – All people need to think seriously about death and
judgment. Some are not concerned. They are too busy with money,
pleasure, and education to take their eternal destiny seriously. They do
not use good judgment about preparing for eternity.
(See also 2 Timothy 1:7; Mark 5:15; Luke 8:35; Romans 12:3; 1 Tim-
othy 2:15; Acts 26:25.)
Relationship to elders’ work
It should be obvious that elders need this quality. They need it to set
a good example, distinguishing right from wrong, etc.

This does not mean elders never laugh or joke. There is a time to
laugh and a time to weep (Ecclesiastes 3:4). But they need good judg-
ment to see things as they really are, control thoughts, discern good from
evil, and resist temptation. Elders need good judgment to make the right
decisions.
One of the main responsibilities of elders is to make decisions on
behalf of the church. This surely requires control of the mind to discern
evil and to make wise decisions. Some men are zealous for truth but lack
good judgment. They show little wisdom in making decisions. To ap-
point them to manage the affairs of the church would lead to disaster.
Elders must have good judgment in spiritual matters, seriously con-
sider the needs of the church, and lead members to avoid error. Such a
quality is a matter of degree. Some have better judgment than others.
The church is seeking men who have a high degree of sound, sober judg-
ment.
“Just”
This is translated “just” (NKJV, ASV, KJV, NASB, LEB, MEV), “up-
right” (ESV, NRSV), or “righteous” (HCSB).
An elder must be “just” in the sense of righteous, but this is covered
under other terms, including “holy” (see below; compare “blameless,”
“of good behavior,” etc.) The emphasis here seems to be on the narrower
meaning of fair or just treatment of others.
“Just” () – “…1. in a wide sense, upright, righteous … keep-
ing the commands of God … 2. in a narrower sense, rendering to each
his due; … passing just judgment on others, whether expressed in words
or shown by the manner of dealing with them: Titus 1:8” – Grimm-
Wilke-Thayer.
“…1 pert. to being in accordance with high standards of rectitude,
upright, just, fair … 2 The neuter denotes that which is obligatory in view
of certain requirements of justice, right, fair, equitable …” – Bauer-
Related passages
Matthew 20:4 – The owner of the vineyard promised to pay laborers
what was right (“just”).
Colossians 4:1 – Masters should render to servants what is “just”
and equal.
John 7:24 – Judge not according to appearance but judge “right-
eous” (just) judgment.
2 Thessalonians 1:5 – God’s judgment on men will be “just” (right –
verse 6).

Applications
All people need this quality, especially those who exercise authority
or leadership. Their judgments must be fair if they expect others to fol-
low their lead and cooperate.
Justice requires uprightness in financial and business affairs: fair
treatment of employer or employees (see Matthew 20:4; Colossians 4:1
above). Employers should pay a fair wage and workers should do the
work they were hired to do. Fairness requires Christians to pay their
debts as promised and not cheat or take advantage of others in business.
Justice requires considering people’s circumstances in deciding
how to treat them. Sometimes people are wrong, but their circumstances
or background should lead us to show patience.
Proverbs 18:13 – He who answers a matter before he hears, it is folly
and shame. Justice requires that we seek the real facts of a case before
making a decision. We should be willing to listen to both sides of a dis-
pute when reaching decisions or resolving differences. We should not
decide based on outward appearance or first impressions (John 7:24).
Elders should not show favoritism based on wealth, race, national-
ity, education, or family relationship (James 2:1-13). Physical relation-
ships with other people should not affect their decisions as church lead-
ers. They should treat people fairly based on their conduct compared
to God’s word, not on physical advantages or disadvantages.
“Holy “
Translations and definitions:
This is translated “holy” (NKJV, KJV, ASV, NRSB, ESV, MLV) or
“devout” (NASB, LEB, NRSV).
“Holy” (`) – “…undefiled by sin, free from wickedness, reli-
giously observing every moral obligation, pure, holy, pious…” – Grimm-
Wilke-Thayer.
“…1 pert. to being without fault relative to deity, devout, pious,
pleasing to God, holy …2 pert. to being the standard for what constitutes
holiness, holy …” – Bauer-Danker-Arndt-Gingrich.
“…signifies religiously right, holy, as opposed to what is unrighteous
or polluted…” – Vine.
Related passages
Jesus and God are holy (Acts 2:27; 13:35; Hebrews 7:26; Revelation
15:4).
1 Timothy 2:8 – Men should pray lifting up holy hands.
Luke 1:75 – We should serve God in holiness and righteousness all
our days.
Ephesians 4:22-24 – Put away the old man (former way of life) with
its lusts and be renewed in mind, putting on the new man created in
righteousness and holiness.

Applications
All disciples must be holy. This is a general term covering much the
same meaning as “blameless,” “of good behavior,” “lover of good,” etc. It
emphasizes moral and religious purity including nearly all areas of ser-
vice to God. Any negligence, indifference, moral or religious error that
persists in a man’s life would disqualify him as a bishop.
Like other general areas already covered, holiness is necessary in an
elder so that he might set a good example for the members. An elder
would also need this devotion to God to continue doing the work of an
elder because it is a good work, despite the hardships and frustrations
involved.
“Self-controlled”
“Temperate” in Titus 1:8 (KJV) is translated “self-controlled”
(NKJV, ASV, NASB, NRSV, HCSB, MLV), or “disciplined” (ESV).
This qualification is also required of all Christians. The idea is not
just moderation. Elders must practice sober good judgment so they
control themselves to do all things to the extent most useful in serving
God.
“Self-controlled () – “pert. to having one's emotions, im-
pulses, or desires under control, self-controlled, disciplined…” – Bauer-
“…2. having power over, possessed of (a thing) … 3. mastering, con-
trolling, curbing, restraining: … controlling oneself, temperate, conti-
nent…” – Grimm-Wilke-Thayer.
Regarding related words: “This group takes its sense from the stem
krat- denoting power or lordship. Thus enkratḗs means ‘having power
over all things and the self,’ enkráteia means ‘dominion over the self or
something,’ with the nuances of ‘steadfastness’ and ‘self-control’…” –
Kittle, Theological Dictionary.
Elders must set a good example.
All Christians must control themselves to avoid Satan’s influences.
We must not allow alcohol, drugs, or any selfish pursuits to weaken our
will-power or inhibitions so that we are more easily led astray by temp-
tation.
To set a good example for other members, an elder must be on
guard to control his life in all these areas. He must “take heed” to himself
(Acts 20:28), so he can take heed to the flock.
Other duties of elders require watchful self-control.
In particular, sin often comes into a congregation because the elders
are willing to participate in it. Scriptures warn elders to first get their

own lives right, then they can lead the congregation to do what is right
(Acts 20:28-30).
Elders especially watch, not just for themselves, but for all members
(Hebrews 13:17). Wise elders watch for early signs of trouble and “nip it
in the bud.”
Holding fast the faithful word … that he may be able … to
exhort and convict those who contradict
This is related to “able to teach” (1 Timothy 3:2).
Translations
Titus 1:9 is translated: “holding fast the faithful word as he has been
taught, that he may be able, by sound doctrine, both to exhort and con-
vict those who contradict” (NKJV). Other variations are: “able to exhort
in the sound doctrine and to convict the gainsayer” (ASV); “…that he may
be able to give instruction in sound doctrine and also to rebuke those
who contradict it” (ESV); “holding fast to the faithful message according
to the teaching, in order that he may be able both to exhort with sound
instruction and to reprove those who speak against it” LEB).
Again, all Christians should seek to learn how to do these things,
though it may take time to learn how (Hebrews 5:12; 2 Timothy 2:2,24-
26). But teaching is a major work of elders. Before a man may be ap-
pointed an elder, there must be convincing, positive evidence that he can
do this work well.
Related passages:
“Hold fast”
2 Timothy 1:13 – Hold fast the pattern of sound words which you
have heard from me, in faith and love which are in Christ Jesus.
2 Thessalonians 2:15 – Therefore, brethren, stand fast and hold the
traditions which you were taught, whether by word or our epistle.
(1 Timothy 1:19; 2 Timothy 3:14; 2 Thessalonians 3:6; Hebrews
10:23; 3:6,14; 4:14; 1 Corinthians 11:2; 16:13)
“Faithful word”
Revelation 19:9 – These are the true sayings of God.
Revelation 21:5 – Write, for these words are true and faithful.
Revelation 22:6 – Then he said to me, “These words are faithful and
true.”
“Sound doctrine”
1 Timothy 1:10 – for fornicators, for sodomites, for kidnappers, for
liars, for perjurers, and if there is any other thing that is contrary to
sound doctrine,
1 Timothy 6:3 – If anyone teaches otherwise and does not consent
to wholesome words, even the words of our Lord Jesus Christ, and to the
doctrine which accords with godliness,
2 Timothy 1:13 – Hold fast the pattern of sound words which you
have heard from me, in faith and love which are in Christ Jesus.

Titus 2:1 – But as for you, speak the things which are proper for
sound doctrine:
“Exhort”
Hebrews 13:22 – And I appeal to you, brethren, bear with the word
of exhortation, for I have written to you in few words.
1 Thessalonians 5:11 – Therefore comfort each other and edify one
another, just as you also are doing.
1 Timothy 5:1 – Do not rebuke an older man, but exhort him as a
father, younger men as brothers,
(Philippians 4:2; 1 Thessalonians 4:10)
“Exhort” () – “…1 to ask to come and be present
where the speaker is, call to one's side … 2 to urge strongly, appeal
to, urge, exhort, encourage … 3 to make a strong request for
someth., request, implore, entreat …4 to instill someone with
courage or cheer, comfort, encourage, cheer up …” – Bauer-
“Convict”
This is elsewhere translated reprove, etc.
Matthew 18:15 – Moreover if your brother sins against you, go and
tell him his fault between you and him alone. If he hears you, you have
gained your brother.
Luke 3:19 – But Herod the tetrarch, being rebuked by him concern-
ing Herodias, his brother Philip's wife, and for all the evils which Herod
had done
John 3:20 – For everyone practicing evil hates the light and does
not come to the light, lest his deeds should be exposed.
John 16:8 – He will convict the world of sin, and of righteousness,
and of judgment:
James 2:9 – if you show partiality, you commit sin, and are con-
victed by the law as transgressors.
Ephesians 5:11 – And have no fellowship with the unfruitful works
of darkness, but rather expose them.
Ephesians 5:13 – But all things that are exposed are made manifest
by the light, for whatever makes manifest is light.
1 Timothy 5:20 – Those who are sinning rebuke in the presence of
all, that the rest also may fear.
2 Timothy 4:2 – Preach the word! Be ready in season and out of
season. Convince, rebuke, exhort, with all longsuffering and teaching.
Titus 1:13 – Therefore rebuke them sharply, that they may be sound
in the faith,
Titus 2:15 – Speak these things, exhort, and rebuke with all author-
ity. Let no one despise you.
Hebrews 12:5 – And you have forgotten the exhortation which
speaks to you as to sons: “My son, do not despise the chastening of the
LORD, nor be discouraged when you are rebuked by Him”

Revelation 3:19 – As many as I love, I rebuke and chasten. Therefore
be zealous and repent.
“Convict” () – “…1 to scrutinize or examine carefully,
bring to light, expose, set forth … 2 to bring a pers. to the point of
recognizing wrongdoing, convict, convince … 3 to express strong
disapproval of someone's action, reprove, correct … 4 to penalize
for wrongdoing, punish, discipline …” – Bauer-Danker-Arndt-
Gingrich.
An elder must know what to teach.
He must have a good overall knowledge of the Bible. He must be
well enough acquainted with God’s word, not just to live it himself, but
also to instruct others, even to the point of showing by the Bible when
other people are wrong.
He must know and teach truth. He must hold fast to the faithful
word, sound doctrine, so he can recognize and oppose those who teach
error. A main job of elders is to keep the church pure in doctrine and
practice, and watch for spiritual problems in the lives of members (Acts
20:28-30; Hebrews 13:17). This requires a man who knows right from
wrong.
This does not mean everybody must agree regarding every applica-
tion of every passage of Scripture. We will never find such men as that.
Romans 14 shows there are some matters about which we can disagree.
We may hold different views about things that do not affect anyone’s
practice or matters that will not hinder anyone’s eternal salvation or per-
sonal views where we differ but cannot prove others to be in sin.
But no man should be appointed as elder who will be likely to teach,
or to neglect teaching, in such a way as would lead people to be lost eter-
nally. No one should be appointed whose views, if practiced, will lead the
church to practice error. No one should be appointed whose views, even
in personal and family matters, will hinder his ability to properly guard
the members against error.
An elder must be able to present God’s word to others ef-
fectively.
The elder should be able to “exhort” and “convict.”
People who are serving God need to be encouraged to remain faith-
ful and to grow and achieve more. People who are weak and struggling
need to be urged to overcome and grow stronger. People who have re-
pented of sin need to be comforted and strengthened. People with seri-
ous personal problems need comfort and cheer. People in sin must be
rebuked. False teachers must be proved to be wrong.
In holding fast and teaching sound doctrine, the elder should use
the faithful word. Do not just talk about what God’s word says but read
it together with those he teaches. Let people see for themselves that

Scripture substantiates what is being taught. Let the power of the word
“convict” others, especially when dealing with those who contradict.
Elders must be able to teach different kinds of people: young people,
members (faithful and unfaithful – Hebrews 13:17), non-members, and
even false teachers.
Elders must be able to present the truth publicly and privately.
Shepherds must seek the individual sheep that stray (Luke 15:3-6; He-
brews 13:17). But they must also feed the whole flock. One of their main
duties is to protect against wolves who teach error (Acts 20:28-30; Titus
1:9-14). But error that is taught publicly, must be refuted publicly (note
1 Timothy 5:20).
Surely there will be variation in the abilities of men as teachers: not
all elders must be equally gifted. But each one must be able to teach suf-
ficiently to do the work that elders are required to do: to privately teach
each member as needed, to publicly admonish and encourage the con-
gregation, and to teach non-members and show where they are in error
even when they are false teachers.
An elder must be willing to teach.
The work of watching for souls and convicting the gainsayers will
require speaking out at the time when it is needed. It is one thing to know
the truth and even to be able to teach, but it is another matter to be will-
ing to do it when needed.
Titus 1:9-14 – Note carefully that elders must speak out against sin
to protect the members. Some people must be rebuked sharply! If a
man is negligent, indifferent, too busy, too fearful, or for any other rea-
son has not shown a pattern of rebuking error when needed, such a man
should not be appointed as an elder.
To be appointed, a man should first have demonstrated a history of
speaking to people in the community who are lost, going to erring mem-
bers to try to restore them, visiting weak and indifferent members, and
defending the truth against those who contradict it, even publicly if nec-
essary.

1:10-16 – The Danger of False Teachers
1:10,11 – There are many unruly men, vain talkers and

deceivers, especially of the circumcision, whose mouths
must be stopped. Such men overthrow whole houses,
teaching things which they should not, for filthy lucre’s
sake.
Having described the importance of elders and the qualities men
must have to serve as elders, Paul enlarges on the need for elders to be
able to convict the gainsayers. He warns about the danger of false teach-
ers, especially from among the Jews. He emphasizes the need for elders
to protect the flock from false teachers and the importance of rebuking
sinners.
This is one of many passages in which Paul warns the young evan-
gelists Titus and Timothy about the danger of false teachers. He dis-
cussed this theme repeatedly in 1 & 2 Timothy. See 1 Timothy 1:3-11,18-
20; 4:1-7; 6:3ff,20,21; 2 Timothy 2:14,16,23-26; 3:1-9; 4:2-4; Titus 1:9-
14; 3:9-11.
We ignore this danger at our peril. Yet incredibly many people want
to downplay it. Consider also many passages elsewhere that warn about
the danger of false teachers. See Matthew 7:15-23; 15:14; 2 Corinthians
11:13-15; Acts 20:28-30; 1 John 4:1; 2 John 9-11; Romans 16:17,18; Ga-
latians 1:6-9; 2 Peter chapter 2.
Note the terms Paul uses here to describe these people. They are:
Insubordinate
This is translated “insubordinate” (NKJV, ESV), “unruly” (ASV,
KJV), or “rebellious” (NASB, LEB, MLV).

This is the same word used for the children of an elder in verse 6. It
means one who will not be subject to the rules; he will not be in subjec-
tion. Here the context refers to those who will not submit to the rules of
Divine law, hence a rebel.
Such is surely an appropriate term for false teachers. See 1 Timothy
1:9. Consider also what 2 Thessalonians 3:6,14,15 says should be done
about those who are “disorderly” (using a different original word).
“Insubordinate” () – “… 1 not made subject, independ-
ent … 2 pert. to refusing submission to authority, undisciplined, disobe-
dient, rebellious …” – Bauer-Danker-Arndt-Gingrich.
“1. (passively) not made subject, unsubjected … 2. (actively) that
cannot be subjected to control, disobedient, unruly, refractory…” –
Grimm-Wilke-Thayer.
Idle talkers
This is translated “idle talkers” (NKJV, NRSV), “vain talkers” (ASV,
KJV), or “empty talkers” (NASB, ESV, MLV).
This is the only place this word is used in the New Testament but 1
Timothy 1:6 uses a closely related form in a similar reference. Clearly
“vain” or “idle” is used here negatively for that which is empty or worth-
less regarding truth. These men do lots of talking but what they say is
without value. See the context of verses 10-14.
See similar expressions in 1 Timothy 1:6; 6:20; 2 Timothy 2:14,16;
Titus 1:10 (note especially the “vain babblings” in 1 Timothy 6:20 and 2
Timothy 2:16). These expressions in context appear to refer to false doc-
trine that is not just a waste of time but actually subversive to faith.
In the context here Paul refers to false teachers whose talk is empty
of truth yet may well lead people astray through deceit. This often occurs
when a man is a smooth talker, using words convincingly but without
the power of truth. See Romans 16:17,18.
“Idle talkers” () – “… talking idly, subst. …. an idle
talker, windbag…” – Bauer-Danker-Arndt-Gingrich.
“…an idle talker, one who utters empty, senseless things…” –
Grimm-Wilke-Thayer.
Deceivers
This term is consistently translated “deceivers” or related terms.
Scripture often describes false teachers as deceitful and being de-
ceived. They cannot convince people by giving valid evidence and hon-
estly admitting the consequences of their doctrine, so they make it pal-
atable by disguising its true nature. See 2 Timothy 3:13; 1 Timothy 4:1;
Matthew 7:15-23; 2 Corinthians 11:13-15; 2 Peter chapter 2:1-3.
Not everyone who teaches error is a deceiver. But those who are
honest can learn the truth and change. If they refuse, then they are either
deceivers or else are themselves deceived by others who are deceivers.
Those Paul describes here were motivated by greed (verse 11).

Paul says he refers especially to those of the circumcision: i.e., the
Jews (see verse 13). These had persecuted him throughout his work as
an apostle. Some bitterly resented the fact that he had been a leading
Jewish opponent of Christ and the gospel but had been converted to
Christ.
Other opponents were Jewish Christians who believed Gentile con-
verts must be required to keep the Old Testament. Whether Paul is talk-
ing about Judaizers in the church or outside is not yet clear. Perhaps
both are included.
Whose mouths must be stopped, who subvert whole
households, teaching things which they ought not, for the sake
of dishonest gain
Paul here shows why these people are so dangerous. Their mouths
must be stopped, not by force or violence of course, but by use of truth
to refute their error. This is especially the work of elders (compare Acts
20:28-30; Hebrews 13:17). And this is why elders must be able to convict
the gainsayers (verse 9). Elders must prove such men to be in sin, then
they must warn the flock to avoid such false teachers.
These men subvert (“overthrow” – ASV, “upset” – NASB, RSV)
whole households. That is, they undermine the faith of their listeners so
they turn from truth to error. Observe that the teaching is dangerous,
not just to the teacher, but to others who may be influenced. This multi-
plies the importance of defeating the error.
They influence others by teaching things that they ought not to
teach (see references on verse 10 above regarding false teaching). There
is a real danger in false teaching. On the danger of faith being subverted,
see 2 Timothy 2:18; 4:2-4; 1 Timothy 1:19; 4:1-3; 1:3-6; 6:20,21.
These teachers are dishonest for they teach false doctrine for the
sake of personal gain. They are in it for the money. They seek dishonest
gain since they are not motivated by a sincere love of truth as faithful
teachers ought to be.
Some preachers, if they can make money, will preach whatever peo-
ple want to hear. This may not be true of all false teachers, but it is true
of many. The Bible often warns against the danger of preachers who
teach error for the sake of money. See 1 Timothy 6:5; 2 Timothy 4:2-4;
Ezekiel 34:2,3; 2 Peter 2:1-3,14-16; Romans 16:17,18.
Paul will explain what to do about such people in Titus 3:10,11 (see
our notes there). See also Romans 16:17 and related verses.

1:12-14 – Even a Cretan prophet said Cretans are always
liars, evil beasts, and idle gluttons. They should be
reproved sharply so they may be sound in the faith, not
giving heed to Jewish fables and commandments of men
who turn from the truth.
“Cretans are always liars, evil beasts, lazy gluttons.”
Paul then quoted a “prophet” (so-called) who was himself a man
from Crete and apparently known by the Cretans. Remember that Titus
was on the island of Crete (verse 5). This prophet himself acknowledged
the errors of the Cretans. He said they were liars, evil beasts, and lazy
gluttons. Paul said this was a true testimony regarding them.
The accusation that they were liars would confirm Paul’s warnings
about their deceit and vain talk (verse 10). They could not be trusted to
be truthful or accurate. Attempting to teach untruthful people men is
especially difficult. Such people will misrepresent their evidence, saying
whatever they think will establish their point regardless of whether or
not it is accurate.
Such people will also say anything to misrepresent you and your po-
sition. They will misrepresent what you said or did. They may try to make
you appear inconsistent. They may impugn your motives to make you
appear to be evil, selfish, or mean-spirited. In short, they will not hesi-
tate to say anything, no matter how inaccurate, if they think they can get
away with it.
Such people are commonly found in politics, in entertainment, in
business, in education, in false religions, even in families, and some-
times even in the Lord’s church.
Dealing with such people can be extremely hazardous. You are at a
serious disadvantage in that you must carefully document everything
you say, check your sources, and be sure you are being honest with the
facts. You may avoid using some evidence, though you strongly believe
it to be true but cannot completely prove it. The false teacher has no such
restrictions!
On the other hand, your “disadvantage” is simultaneously a great
advantage: you have the truth! It may be harder to convince people. And
you will not likely convince the liar himself, so long as he remains dis-
honest. But you can be sure that people who want to know the truth will
come to trust your integrity and accuracy, and they will eventually see
the liar for what he is. Most important, you will please the Lord.
The Cretan’s laziness and gluttony also explain their willingness to
teach error (verse 11). Almost invariably the way of error is easier and
more materially rewarding than the way of truth (Matthew 7:13,14). It is
a way of easy “salvation.” All the false teacher must do is find out what
the people want to hear and then preach it. As a result, he can satisfy his
selfish desires with relatively little effort.

Note that Paul here quotes “one of their own” as his “au-
thority.”
He did a similar thing in Acts 17:23. Generally, the Bible shows that
we should not follow human wisdom. Under what circumstances is it
right to cite such statements?
First, Paul did not appeal to the Cretan prophet as his highest au-
thority. Paul cited him because his testimony was “true”: in harmony
with the facts and with God’s word. Had the prophet been wrong accord-
ing to God’s word, Paul would certainly have disagreed with him. But the
Cretans could hardly dispute Paul’s statement when their own spokes-
man acknowledged it.
More important, however, Paul was not citing the Cretan to estab-
lish what is right or wrong according to God’s will. He cited him only to
establish the nature of the Cretan people. This is an important distinc-
tion. It is right to study and cite the evidence regarding the
beliefs or character of others.
We can cite the statements of others to document their character or
beliefs, especially when (as in this case) they admit something they
would not naturally want to admit. Having established their position
from their own statements, then we can apply God’s word to show their
error.
One of the best ways to refute false beliefs of other people is to es-
tablish their views by their own statements, then apply God’s word to
show where His will rebukes their error. This is exactly what Paul does
here.
“It was Epimenides who said this, himself a Cretan … And as
to the question, why does he cite the testimonies of the Greeks? It
is because we put them most to confusion when we bring our tes-
timonies and accusations from their own writers, when we make
those their accusers, who are admired among themselves.…” –
Chrysostom (Ancient Christian Commentary)
Therefore, rebuke them sharply, that they may be sound
in the faith,
Having established the evil character and conduct of the Cretan
false teachers, Paul then required Titus (and the elders – verse 9) to re-
buke them sharply. This is the proper way to deal with false teaching,
especially when it becomes clear the teacher is not being honest. We
must plainly show his error and reprove him for it.
The goal of such reproof is that the sinner “may be sound in the
faith”: he must hold to wholesome or correct teaching. This shows there
may be some hope even for a dishonest teacher. He generally knows he
is dishonest. Perhaps his conscience condemns him. In any case, the best
hope for him and his followers is if his error is plainly exposed.

Notice that the Scriptures teach that sharp rebukes are sometimes
needed. This does not mean sharpness is always needed. But despite the
passages that teach Christians to be meek, patient, kind, and loving to
others, not only is rebuke sometimes needed, but sharpness is some-
times needed.
This does not say to be mean and seek to hurt him. We must act to
defend the truth for his good and the good of others who may know about
his false views. But it must be plainly done. To fail to do so is to disobey
God’s command and to leave the sinner in danger of eternal punishment.
For other passages on the importance of sound faith and holding to
the truth see Titus 2:1,2; 2 Timothy 1:13; 1 Timothy 1:10; 4:6; 6:3.
For further discussion on reproof, see notes on verse 9 above and
on 2 Timothy 2:24-26; 4:2-4. For other passages on rebuking sin see
Revelation 3:19; Matthew 5:23,24; 18:15-17; Luke 17:3,4; Galatians
6:1,2; James 5:19,20; 1 Thessalonians 5:14; Ephesians 5:11; 1 Timothy
5:20; Proverbs 28:4.
Not giving heed to Jewish fables and commandments of
men who turn from the truth
Here Paul specifies some errors that must be rebuked and avoided.
First, the errors related to Jewish viewpoints (see verse 10). Not all
false teachers, of course, are Jewish. But in the circumstances facing Ti-
tus, this was the most likely situation. Jewish people had often opposed
and persecuted Paul for his teaching.
Second, they taught fables. Note that “fables” here refer to that
which is untrue, yet people may believe it anyway. This helps show how
Paul is using the term “fable” throughout the letters to Timothy and Ti-
tus. (See 1 Timothy 1:4; 4:7; 2 Timothy 4:4; 2 Peter 1:16. See our notes
on verse 10.)
Further, the false teachers taught commandments of men: doc-
trines that men have invented but are taught as valid or even required in
service to God. Following such doctrines causes one to turn away from
the truth. Paul had repeatedly warned Timothy and Titus about this
problem (see references on verses 10 and 11 above).
For other passages on human doctrines see 1 Timothy 1:3; 6:3 and
also Matthew 15:9,13; Galatians 1:8,9; 2 John 9-11; Colossians 3:17; Jer-
emiah 10:23; 26:2; Proverbs 14:12; 3:5,6; Isaiah 24:5; 30:1; Revelation
22:18,19; 1 Timothy 1:3; 2 Timothy 1:13; John 5:43; 1 Chronicles 15:13; 1
Kings 12:26-33; 2 Kings 17:19.
1:15,16 – To the pure, all things are pure. But nothing is pure
to those who are defiled and unbelieving; their mind and
their conscience are defiled. They profess to know God
but they deny Him by their works, being abominable,
disobedient, and reprobate to every good work.
Paul then gives some final descriptions of these false teachers.

To the pure all things are pure.
“Pure” (see all our usual translations) here means cleansed so that
impurities or defiling characteristics are removed.
This, of course, does not mean that sinful actions will be counted as
“pure” just because the people who do them are otherwise good people.
Such would contradict Bible teaching about the nature of right and
wrong. Acts are right or wrong because they do or do not violate God’s
word, not because of who does them (1 John 3:4; 2 Timothy 3:16,17;
John 17:17).
The lesson is that people who are determined to be pure will find
ways to maintain their purity. They will do everything in a pure way.
Everything that God has created has a good or proper use. Pure people
will find good ways to use what God provides. They will not allow sin to
corrupt anything they do. They make sure everything they do is pure.
The context refers to the Judaizing teachers who were misusing the
law and perverting the teachings of the gospel (see verse 14). God gave
the teachings of the Old and New Testaments for good, but these false
teachers perverted them into that which was defiled. In contrast, those
who were pure in their doctrine would use God’s word properly.
“God has made all things pure. If anything is unclean, the use to
which it is put makes it so.” – Severian of Gabala (Ancient Christian
Commentary)
There is also a sense in which some acts are wrong only because of
the motivation, intent, or purpose of it. Evil people will do even good
things for evil motives. Pure people will make sure their motives are al-
ways pure.
See Matthew 5:8; 1 Timothy 1:5; 3:9; 2 Timothy 1:3; 2:22; James
1:27; etc.
“Pure” () – “…1 pert. to being clean or free of adul-
terating matter, clean, pure … 2 pert. to being cultically/ceremo-
nially pure, ritually pure … 3 pert. to being free from moral guilt,
pure, free fr. sin … 4 pert. to being pure ritually and morally,
pure…” – Bauer-Danker-Arndt-Gingrich.
To those who are defiled and unbelieving, nothing is pure;
but even their mind and conscience are defiled.
Paul contrasts those who are pure to those who are defiled and un-
believing. Note how sin is associated with a lack of faith. Those who have
a true faith have an obedient faith. Disobedience shows a lack of faith.
Sin is what defiles. People who live in sin can make almost anything
impure. They willingly participate in sinful acts, and in many cases they
actively seek to do what is sinful because they enjoy it. And even when
they do things that are not inherently sinful (such as worshiping God),
they may act with impure or selfish motives. So, they can make any act
sinful.

I doubt that Paul means here that absolutely and literally “nothing”
these people did was pure. But every good thing that God has provided
has been perverted and defiled by evil people. Sin fundamentally con-
sists of perverting good things, and men have found ways to defile them
all: the gospel, the church, baptism, marriage, the Lord’s Supper, prayer,
preaching – everything good.
Their lives and words are evil because their minds and consciences
are defiled. Sin starts in the inner man just as righteousness starts in the
inner man. We must keep our hearts pure in order to keep our lives pure.
Likewise, if the heart and thoughts are evil, the result will be a defiled
life. See Matthew 15:18,19; 5:8; Romans 12:1,2; 1 Timothy 6:5; Proverbs
4:23.
In discussing purity with Timothy, Paul had emphasized the im-
portance of a pure conscience. Here Paul warns of the danger of an im-
pure conscience. Paul also discussed with Timothy an example of such
people. See 1 Timothy 1:5,19.
This summarizes why false teachers pervert their teaching. Their
teaching is defiled for the same reasons other things in their lives are
defiled. The men are defiled within, so it shows in what they teach and
practice. This also shows why people often teach error. It is because they
(and others) want to practice error, so they invent doctrines to justify
their practices.
They profess to know God, but in works they deny Him,
Despite their evil characteristics, these were not irreligious people
who professed no faith in God and made no attempt to serve Him. They
were religious people who claimed to be servants of God. But their con-
duct proved that they did not really know him.
1 John 2:3-6 states that, if we profess to know God but do not keep
His commands, we are liars and the truth is not in us. Such was the case
with these false teachers. See also 1 Timothy 5:8; 2 Timothy 2:12; 3:5; 1
John 3; Matthew 7:21-27; James 1:18-25; 2:14-26.
Pleasing God requires more than just outward profession of faith.
We must also live lives according to His will. See also Matthew 22:36-
39; John 14:15,21-24; Acts 10:34,35; Romans 2:6-10; 6:17,18; Hebrews
5:9; 10:39; 11:8,30; Galatians 5:6; 2 Thessalonians 1:8,9; 1 Peter 1:22,23;
1 John 5:3.
Many people today claim that God will accept all religious people,
regardless of how they live. Many teach salvation by “faith only” and
“once saved, always saved.” If these doctrines are true, then these men
should have been acceptable for they professed to know God. Yet the
context shows clearly that they were not acceptable.
People likewise tell us that works are not essential to salvation. Yet
these men denied God by their works. Can a person receive eternal life
if he denies God? Once again we learn that true faith in God requires
obedience.

What about us? As Christians we too profess to know God. Do our
works confirm our profession or deny it?
Being abominable, disobedient, and disqualified for every
good work.
Instead of practicing good works, these people lived in such a way
that their works denied they were truly God’s people. They were disobe-
dient in good works. As a result, they were abominable and disqualified.
So again Scripture affirms that good works are necessary to please God.
Abominable
This word is translated “abominable” (NKJV, KJV, ASV) and “de-
testable” (NASB, ESV, LEB).
God hates evil and He expects us to hate it. People who live as these
people did are truly abominable in God’s sight. See Proverbs 15:9; 8:13;
6:16-19; Psalm 97:10; 119:104,128,163; Amos 5:15; Hebrews 1:9; Ro-
mans 12:9; 1 Corinthians 13:6; 1 John 2:15-17.
“Abominable” () – “…pert. to a pers. or thing that stirs up
feelings of repugnance, abhorrent, detestable..” – Bauer-Danker-
Arndt-Gingrich.
Disqualified
“Disqualified” (NKJV, HCSB) is translated “reprobate” (ASV, KJV),
“worthless” (NASB), “unfit” (ESV, LEB), and “unapproved” (MLV).
This term describes things that are put to a test and rejected. They
are not satisfactory for their intended use, so they are cast out. This is
the case of the people described here. They are not satisfactory according
to God’s standard, so they will be rejected at the judgment. What a sad
state.
“Disqualified” () – “…‘not standing the test,’ then unquali-
fied, worthless, base…” – Bauer-Danker-Arndt-Gingrich.
“Every good work”
This again appears to me to be similar to verse 15. Every good thing
that God has provided for our good has been perverted by evil people.
Even when they do what appears to be good, they often do it with evil
intent or false motives. So in every good work that they should do, in-
stead their conduct is abominable, disobedient, and disqualified.

Titus 2
Chapter 2 – Sound Instruction for

Various Groups in the Church
2:1 – Titus should speak the things that are fitting for sound
doctrine.
Having discussed the problem of false teachers (1:10-16), Paul then
urges Titus to be sure that he speaks things that are proper according to
sound doctrine. Paul has repeatedly discussed the need for sound doc-
trine in 1 and 2 Timothy as well as Titus. See notes on Titus 1:9,13. See
also Titus 2:2; 2 Timothy 1:13; 4:3; 1 Timothy 1:10; 4:6; 6:3.
Sound doctrine is that which is spiritually healthful or wholesome
in contrast to that which is perverted or corrupted. It is that which leads
to pleasing God instead of turning away from His will.
For people to serve God properly, they must know His will. Preach-
ers are responsible to speak the sound doctrine so people know how to
live. Failure to preach sound doctrine leads to the problem of false teach-
ing that Paul just discussed.
Having introduced the need for sound doctrine, Paul proceeds to
instruct Titus regarding what constitutes sound doctrine. He identifies
various categories of people in the church and discusses specific teaching
each needs to receive.
In a sense every member needs to know all of God’s word. We must
obey all the teachings that apply to us including many teachings in addi-
tion to the ones listed here. Never do we find all God’s will in just one
passage. And all of us also need to understand the parts that do not apply
to us so we can teach people to whom those teachings apply. However,
for each group that he names, Paul summarizes a few points that are es-
pecially needed for those people.

“Sound” () – “…1 to be in good physical health, be healthy …
2 to be sound or free from error, be correct, fig. in the Pastoral Epistles
w. ref. to Christian teaching…”– Bauer-Danker-Arndt-Gingrich.
2:2 – Instructions for Older Men
2:2 – Aged men should be taught to be sober, reverent,

temperate, sound in faith, in love, and in patience.
Titus 2:2 lists requirements of all aged men. This word is related to
the word for an “elder” () but is slightly different
(). Context also shows that this does not refer specifically to
“elders” as overseers (bishops), but to older men in general (in contrast
to older women, young women, etc.).
Many of these qualities have already been studied in 1 or 2 Timothy
or in the qualifications of elders in Titus 1. While the reference is to older
men in general, surely all elders (bishops) should also have these quali-
ties.
Sober
This is translated “sober” (NKJV, KJV) or “temperate” (ASV, NASB,
NRSV, MLV), “sober-minded” (ESV), and “level-headed” (HCSB).
The word appears to involve more than just moderation. It also em-
phasizes vigilance and self-control so one discerns right from wrong.
Older men must practice sober watchfulness so they do all things to the
extent most useful in serving God.
“Sober” () – “…sober, temperate; abstaining from wine, ei-
ther entirely … or at least from its immoderate use …” – Grimm-Wilke-
Thayer.
“…1 pert. to being very moderate in the drinking of an alcoholic bev-
erage, temperate, sober … 2 pert. to being restrained in conduct, self-
controlled, level-headed…” – Bauer-Danker-Arndt-Gingrich.

The word is also used in 1 Timothy 3:2,11. But the related word 
means “1) to be sober, to be calm and collected in spirit; 2) to be temper-
ate, dispassionate, circumspect” (Grimm-Wilke-Thayer). It is used in 1
Thessalonians 5:6,8; 2 Timothy 4:5; 1 Peter 1:13; 4:7; 5:8.
This characteristic is also required of all Christians. All Christians
must guard against Satan’s influences. That requires sober-mindedness
and clear thinking (1 Peter 5:8). We must not allow alcohol, drugs, or any
selfish pursuits to dim our thinking so that we are more easily led astray
by temptation.
Elderly men should set a good example for other members in this
area.
Reverent or grave
Translated “reverent” (NKJV), “grave” (KJV, ASV), “dignified”
(NASB, ESV), “serious” (NRSV), “worthy of respect” (HCSB), and “hon-
orable” (MLV).
The word refers to giving serious consideration to living life to
please God, dignified, worthy of respect, and honorable. It is also re-
quired of deacons in 1 Timothy 3:8 and of the wives of elders and dea-
cons in 1 Timothy 3:11. Compare Philippians 4:8.
Older men should always act in a way that is honorable and respect-
ful to God, and that sets an example worthy of respect and imitation. It
does not mean they have no sense of humor, but that they take serious
matters seriously and act responsibly so others see a reason to show re-
spect.
“Reverent” () – “…pert. to evoking special respect … α.
human beings worthy of respect/honor, noble, dignified, serious
… β. transcendent beings worthy of reverence, august, sublime,
holy … b of characteristics, states of being, and things honorable,
worthy, venerable, holy, above reproach…” – Bauer-Danker-
Arndt-Gingrich.
“…august, venerable, reverend; to be venerated for character, hon-
orable…” – Grimm-Wilke-Thayer.
Temperate
Meaning
This is translated: “temperate” (NKJV, KJV), “sober-minded”
(ASV), “sensible” (NASB, MLV, HCSB), “self-controlled” (ESV), and
“prudent” (NRSV).
The word is also used for elders in 1 Timothy 3:2 and Titus 1:8. The
idea is similar to that of the word “sober” which was previously listed in
this verse.
In Titus, not only should elders be sober (1:8), but so should all aged
men (2:2), and young women and young men (2:5,6 – “discreet” in KJV).
God’s grace teaches all to live soberly (2:11,12).

“Sober-minded” () – “…of sound mind, sane, in one’s senses
… curbing one’s desires and impulses, self-controlled, temperate…” –
Grimm-Wilke-Thayer.
“… being in control of oneself, prudent, thoughtful, self-con-
trolled…” – Bauer-Danker-Arndt-Gingrich.
See further notes on Titus 1:8 regarding elders.
Applications
“Sober-minded” is closely related to “self-control.” Self-control em-
phasizes ability to control oneself. “Sober” emphasizes the state of
mind required to have self-control. One must think clearly, using good
judgment and making good decisions in order to control oneself.
His judgment is impaired. He is not “sober.” Other things besides alco-
hol can hinder our clear thinking and judgment in resisting sin and
temptation. To be sober is to eliminate these hindrances.
All Christians need to be sober, thinking seriously and using good
judgment.
1 Timothy 2:9 – Women need to think seriously about the way they
dress. Some do not see this as a serious danger or problem. God says this
is a matter to be taken seriously and dealt with using good judgment!
Titus 2:5,6 – Young men and women need to think seriously about
spiritual matters. Some young people do not give this serious consider-
ation. They think life is fun and games: have a good time and live it up.
God warns them to take life seriously. This does not mean having no fun,
but realizing the true purpose of life and using good judgment to live life
to please God.
1 Peter 4:7 – All people need to think seriously about death and
judgment. Some are too busy with money, pleasure, and education to
take their eternal destiny seriously. They do not use good judgment
about preparing for eternity.
othy 2:15; Acts 26:25.)
Sound in faith
“Sound” means healthful or wholesome, free from contamination
that would make it unhealthful (see verse 1). For “faith” to be healthful
or wholesome, one must believe what is pure, free from admixture of
error. This would include, not just basic doctrines about the death, bur-
ial, and resurrection of Jesus, but also doctrines about service to God in
general.
Ephesians 4:4-6 – There is one faith.
Jude 3 – We must contend for that faith.
Elders must “hold fast the faithful word” (Titus 1:9).
Older men should set an example of faith that harmonizes with
truth. One whose beliefs are mixed with error will not stand for the truth,

either because he will not know what is true or because he will not desire
to stand for it.
Sound in love
A person devotes or commits himself to that which he loves
(). Older men must devote themselves to that which is spiritually
healthful and wholesome, free from admixture of error.
Matthew 22:37ff – They must love God with all their heart, soul,
and mind, and love their neighbor as themselves. Such devotion would
lead to obeying God’s commands (John 14:15; 1 John 5:3).
Titus 1:8 – Elders must love good (and hate error). One who is
sound in love will want lost souls to receive the message of truth.
1 John 2:15-17; Colossians 3:1,2 – One who is sound in love must
not love the world and things in the world, but must have affections set
on things above. One who lets the world hinder his service to God is not
“sound in love.”
One who is sound in love must have a burning desire above all else
to please God and help others serve God. Such men will let nothing hin-
der them from active, zealous work for the Lord.
Sound in patience
“Patience” (NKJV, KJV, ASV) is translated “perseverance” (NASB),
“steadfastness” (ESV), and “endurance” (NRSV, HCSB, MLV).
Patience requires one to endure, persevere, and be steadfast in do-
ing what is “sound.” He will continue doing right regardless of hin-
drances. Financial hardships, persecution, opposition, and false teach-
ers will not stop him. Unfaithfulness and mistreatment by members will
not stop him.
1 Corinthians 13:7 – Love sustains us to keep believing, hoping, and
enduring. We never give up our faithfulness no matter what. Too often
we allow hardship and suffering to cause us to lose heart, lose faith, lose
hope for the future, and lose our willingness to keep on serving God. We
need the patience to go on, no matter how hard it is.
1 Corinthians 10:13 – No temptation is so hard that it is beyond
man’s ability to bear. God will give a way of escape so we can bear it. No
problems can force us to give up. No matter how bad it is, God will sus-
tain us.
Galatians 6:9 – We must not be weary in well doing. We shall reap
in due season if we do not faint. A farmer plows, plants, and cultivates in
spring and summer. These are not the seasons for reaping.
So today is not the season for reaping eternal life (verse 8). This life
is a time of planting and watering, preparing for eternal life. We receive
eternal life when Jesus comes again if we faint not. We need the patience
to keep going.
(1 Corinthians 15:58; Romans 15:1; Galatians 6:2; 2 Timothy 2:10)

“Patience” () – “1. steadfastness, constancy, endurance …;
in the N.T. the characteristic of a man who is unswerved from his delib-
erate purpose and his loyalty to faith and piety by even the greatest trials
and sufferings … 2. a patient, steadfast waiting for … 3. a patient endur-
ing, sustaining …” – Grimm-Wilke-Thayer.
“…1 the capacity to hold out or bear up in the face of difficulty, pa-
tience, endurance, fortitude, steadfastness, perseverance … 2 the act or
state of patient waiting for someone or someth., expectation…” – Bauer-
2:3 – Instructions for Older Women
2:3 – Older women should be reverent in behavior, not

slanderers, not enslaved to much wine, teachers of what
is good.
Who is an older woman?
All translations say simply “older women” or “aged women,” simi-
larly to the terms “older men” or “aged men.” The word for “older
women” () is simply the feminine form of the word for “older
men” in verse 2. So a woman would be an “older woman” if she is as
mature as an “older man.”
Why does it matter? Some people, especially women, prefer not to
admit that they are “older.” Many think “older men” and “older women”
refer to people of retirement age (65 to 70 at least): old enough to quit
working and let others do the work. As a result, many people deny that
these instructions apply to them, so they may spend many years not
obeying verses that clearly do apply to them!
Consider carefully the following facts:
Would elders (bishops) be included among the “older men” of verse
2? Surely they would be. Now if “older men” includes elders, then does
it not follow that any man is included if he is old enough that he could

be an elder if he met the other qualifications? If he is old enough that he
could qualify from the standpoint of age, then he must be an “older
man,” right?
And then would it not follow that a woman is an “older woman” if
she has reached the age that a man must reach to serve as an elder? That
is, if she is old enough to have a husband who could be old enough to
serve as an elder, then she must be an older woman, right? So, we are
talking about people old enough that they could serve as elders or elders’
wives if they qualified.
Then when is a man mature enough that he could serve as an elder?
Obviously, it is not a matter of absolute years (just like the age of ac-
countability is not a matter of absolute age). But from the standpoint of
age, isn’t a man old enough to serve as an elder if he is old enough to
have children all of whom have reached the age of accountability so that
they could be Christians?
So, whether or not a man possesses the qualifications, wouldn’t he
be an “older man” if he is old enough that he could serve as an elder?
And by the time his children are old enough that they could leave home
and be on their own, surely by that time he would be old enough to serve
as an elder, right?
So, does it not follow that any man is an “older man” and any
woman is an “older woman” if they are old enough that they could have
children who are all accountable and surely if the children are old
enough to leave home? But this generally comes years before retirement
age including people who are at some of their most productive years.
Could it be that you are an older man or an older woman but simply
have not realized it? And could it be that you have responsibilities as an
older man or an older woman that you have been neglecting because you
have failed to recognize that these instructions apply to you?
True, some people are converted later in life, so they may lack the
spiritual maturity to fulfill the roles described here. But wouldn’t it be a
shame if people should fulfill the role but do not because they have not
prepared themselves for it or are not willing to accept it?
Reverent in behavior
“Reverent in behavior” (NKJV, NASB, ESV, NRSV, LEB) is trans-
lated “in behavior as becometh holiness” (KJV), “reverent in demeanor”
(ASV). This is a different word from “grave” or “reverent” as used regard-
ing elders’ and deacons’ wives in 1 Timothy 3:11, but is similar in mean-
ing.
“Reverent” literally means “suiting or fitting to that which is sa-
cred.” The idea is that older women should act in a way that shows
proper respect for sacred things.
Older people should set examples of respect for God and His word.
They should always desire to worship God whenever the church meets,
and they should do so respectfully. Likewise, at other times they should

speak and act with respect for God, not in ways that bring reproach upon
God, His name, or His work in any way.
“Reverent” () – “…reverent, venerable …” – Bauer-
“…befitting men, places, actions or things sacred to God; rever-
ent…” – Grimm-Wilke-Thayer.
Not slanderers
“Not slanderers” (NKJV, ASV, ESV, NRSV) is translated “not mali-
cious gossips” (NASB) or “not false accusers” (KJV).
All people should avoid slander. But older women may become idle
and simply enjoy spreading tales about others, especially juicy rumors.
They may spread information that ought to be kept confidential. Or they
may jump to conclusions and spread inaccurate statements based on
partial information. They may become overly critical and spread “dirt”
for no useful reason and perhaps even to maliciously hurt the reputation
of others.
For other passages about slander or malicious speech see Psalm
101:5; 1 Corinthians 6:9,10; 5:11; Proverbs 16:28; 26:20-22; 11:9; 10:18;
11:13; 18:8; 20:19; Romans 1:30,32; Titus 3:2; 1 Peter 2:1,23; 3:9; 2 Tim-
othy 3:3; Exodus 23:1; Psalm 41:5-7; 3 John 9,10; 1 Timothy 6:3,4; 5:13;
2 Thessalonians 3:11; Leviticus 19:16; James 4:11.
“Slanderer” – () “Prone to slander, slanderers, accusing
falsely … a calumniator, false accuser, slanderer …” – Grimm-Wilke-
Thayer.
“…the reference is to those who are given to finding fault with the
demeanour and conduct of others, and spreading innuendos and criti-
cisms in the church” – Vine.
Note that the word is also a name for Satan.
Not given to much wine
Translations: “not given to much wine” (NKJV, KJV), “nor enslaved
to much wine” (ASV, NASB, MLV), “slaves to much wine” (ESV), “slaves
to drink” (NRSV), “not addicted to much wine” (HCSB).
The word for “wine” is , the standard word for wine. The word
can be used for unfermented grape juice or fermented, either way. But
negative references to wine generally refer to the fermented kind.
“Given” is the word for enslaved:
“Given” () – “…1 to make someone a slave … enslave … 2 to
make one subservient to one's interests, cause to be like a slave…” –
“to make a slave of, to bring into bondage…; in the Passive Voice, to
be brought under bondage…; to be held in bondage…; Titus 2:3, of being
enslaved to wine…” – Vine.
“Much” is  -- “…much, i.q. great, strong, intense, large…” –
Grimm-Wilke-Thayer.

Does the expression forbid all drinking by older women, or does it
just forbid drunkenness or addiction? Drunkenness is sinful for anyone
(Galatians 5:19-21; 1 Corinthians 5:11; 6:9,10; Ephesians 5:18).
However, when an extreme form of an act is forbidden, that would
not in itself prove that a less extreme form is acceptable. See our notes
on Titus 1:7. If Titus 2:3 condemns addiction, that would not mean older
women (or anyone else) can be drunk occasionally. If it condemns obvi-
ous drunkenness, that would not condone drinking when one was not
apparently drunk. We still must consider other passages.
For further discussion about drinking alcoholic beverages, see our
notes on Titus 1:7. Older women and all Christians should avoid the use
of modern alcoholic beverages for many good reasons.
Note that Titus 1:12 describes Cretans as the kind of people that
would be expected to commonly be drunkards. This may be why Paul
mentions this problem regarding older women.
Teachers of that which is good
The New Testament places restrictions on the role of women as
teachers. They should not teach in any manner or circumstance that ex-
ercises authority over men (1 Timothy 2:11,12). Nor are they permitted
to address the local congregation when it assembles as a church (1 Co-
rinthians 14:34,35).
Nevertheless, the Scriptures teach all Christians to be teachers of
God’s word. This specifically applies to older women.
God wants all His children to speak to others about His word.
Acts 8:1,3,4 – Those who were scattered by persecution went every-
where preaching the word. This included men and women (verse 3).
Galatians 6:1 – Those who are spiritual should restore a brother
who sins. But Christian women should be spiritual, so they should help
restore the erring. (James 5:19,20)
2 Timothy 2:24-26 – The Lord’s servant must be able to teach. But
godly women should be servants of the Lord, so they must develop the
ability to teach.
1 Thessalonians 5:11 – Christians should encourage and build one
another up.
Ephesians 4:15,16 – Every part of the body should work to edify the
body. This includes “speaking the truth in love.”
Hebrews 3:12-14 – Those who partake of Christ should exhort one
another to avoid falling away. But women should be partakers of Christ,
so they should exhort others.
Hebrews 5:12-14 – By reason of time we ought to be teachers. This
instruction is addressed to Christians in general.
Hebrews 10:23,24 – Those who hold fast the confession of our hope
need to stir one another up to love and good works. But women should
hold fast their confession, so they should stir others up.

1 Peter 3:15 – Those who sanctify the Lord in their hearts should be
ready to give a defense for their hope. But women should sanctify the
Lord in their hearts, so they should give an answer for their hope.
Jude 3 – Those who partake of the common salvation should con-
tend for the faith. But women should partake of the common salvation,
so they should contend for the faith.
These verses show that all Christians, including women, should de-
velop the ability to teach the gospel to others. Paul is instructing Titus
that he should instruct older women that they should instruct others.
The Scriptures specifically encourage women to be teachers of
God’s word.
Exodus 15:20,21 – Miriam, as a prophetess, led the women of Israel
in singing praise to God.
Ruth 1:8-17; 2:20 – Ruth and Naomi had spiritual discussions.
1 Samuel 25:2-42 – Abigail very respectfully gave David counsel to
avoid doing wrong.
2 Kings 22:14-20 – Huldah was a prophetess who gave a revelation
to the king’s servants.
Proverbs 1:8 – A son should not forsake the law of his mother.
Proverbs 31:1 – King Lemuel was taught by his mother.
Proverbs 31:26 – The worthy woman spoke words of spiritual wis-
dom. Godly women today should imitate this.
Luke 1:39-56 – Elisabeth and Mary mutually admonished and ex-
horted one another.
John 4:28-30,39-42 – The Samaritan woman told people, including
men, about Jesus and encouraged them to go learn from Him.
Acts 2:17; 21:9; Judges 4:4 – Women, including young women, ex-
ercised the gift of prophecy.
Acts 18:24-26 – Priscilla, together with her husband, showed Apol-
los his error. Note that “they took him aside” to do this. It was not done
in a public assembly.
2 Timothy 1:5 – From childhood Timothy had been taught the sa-
cred Scriptures (3:15). His faith came through teaching by his grand-
mother Lois and mother Eunice.
Yes, God has placed limitations on women in teaching men based
on the principle of woman’s subjection to man. But this does not mean
women cannot teach. On the contrary, God commands women to
teach! They must teach children and other women, and they may even
instruct men provided they do not do so in public church assemblies nor
in a way that exercises authority over the man.
Observations and conclusions
“Lift up your eyes and look at the fields, for they are already white
for harvest” (John 4:35). “The harvest truly is plentiful, but the laborers
are few” (Matthew 9:37).

Men are responsible to teach, but is it just the men? Women have a
major role alongside men in bringing in the harvest for the Master. They
must teach the next generation of children to serve the Master. They
must teach other women how to serve the Master. Have the women so
fulfilled the command that they can just spend their time doing other
things instead of teaching?
Have we finished this work so all the lost souls are fully taught and
all the children are fully taught and all the women are fully taught? If
not, then should a Christian woman think there is little for her to do so
she spends her time doing other things while making little effort to teach
God’s word?
In some cases it is hard to find women who are willing to teach the
regular children’s Bible classes, let alone do other teaching. Most con-
gregations have some women who are really trying to do this work, but
most of them are overwhelmed with far more than they can handle be-
cause other women, instead of helping, are busy doing other things.
I know of congregations where young women want to have a
women’s class. But the class ends up being taught by a younger woman
(often a young preacher’s wife) because the older women are too in-
volved in other things that God never told them to do.
Where could you find anything more fulfilling than leading some
lost soul to Christ or leading some child to grow up to serve God faith-
fully or helping some young woman grow strong as a Christian wife and
mother? As a Christian woman, do you appreciate the great service you
can do for the Master in teaching others God’s word?
On the other hand, if the older women should teach the younger
women, it follows that the younger women should desire to learn. Teach-
ing requires both teachers and students to participate willingly. Young
women need to appreciate the value of studying with older women. This
leads us to the next section.

2:4,5 – Instructions for Younger Women
2:4,5 – They should train the young women to love their

husbands, love their children, be sober-minded, chaste,
workers at home, kind, in subjection to their own
husbands, that the word of God be not blasphemed.
“Love their husbands … love their children”
Love emphasizes concern for others. Here young women should be
taught to pursue the wellbeing of their husbands and their children. The
words used here ( and ) literally mean, as trans-
lated, to love a man (husband) and to love children. They are so trans-
lated in all major translations.
Note that Biblical love must be learned. We might think young
women would naturally love their husbands and children. But when one
considers all that Biblical love entails, there is much that needs to be
learned. See Matthew 22:37-40; Luke 6:27,28,31-33; 10:25-37; 1 Corin-
thians 13:1-8,13.
Instead of teaching that woman was created to be a companion to
man, society often teaches women to assert themselves and insist on
equal everything in the family: equal authority in decisions, equal time
for outside employment, equal time and effort from their husbands in
doing housework, etc. If the husband does not give this willingly, young
women are taught to insist on it. Young women who have accepted such
ideas need to be “taught” to think differently.
Likewise, young women today often grow up thinking children are
time-consuming, expensive, and a hindrance to the mother’s freedom,
pleasure, and contribution to society. So, children are looked upon as at
best a necessary evil.

As a result, young women may attempt to avoid having children,
may get abortions, and may neglect and fail to appreciate their children
when they have them. Once again, such young women clearly have much
they need to learn.
God’s word emphasizes that women should be family oriented:
their lives should focus on serving God by serving their families. Woman
was created to be a companion to man and to raise children. A woman
may remain unmarried as described in 1 Corinthians 7, especially under
certain circumstances. However, if she chooses to marry, God’s word
teaches that her family should become the primary focus of the service
to God.
Consider passages that emphasize the role of godly wives in the
home.
Help and care for her husband
Genesis 2:18-24 – Woman was created to be a helper and compan-
ion to man. So the marriage institution began.
1 Corinthians 11:9 – Man was not created for the woman, but
woman for the man.
Genesis 3:16 – Her desire shall be for her husband.
Proverbs 31:12 – She does her husband good, not evil, all her life.
Ephesians 5:33 – The wife should respect her husband.
Many examples express the love between husband and wife – Gen-
esis 24:67 (Isaac and Rebekah); 29:18-20 (Jacob and Rachel); 1 Samuel
1:5,8 (Hannah and Elkanah). See also Esther 2:17; Deuteronomy 24:5;
Song of Solomon.
Titus 2:4 – Young women should be taught to love their husbands.
Bearing children
Genesis 3:16; John 16:21 – Because of sin, childbirth is painful. But
when the child has been born, a mother rejoices in having brought a
child into the world.
Psalm 113:9 – For a barren woman to have a child is a blessing from
God in which she rejoices.
Psalm 127:3-5; 128:3-6 – By bearing children, a woman gives bless-
ing and honor to her husband.
Matthew 1:18-25; Luke 1:26-56; Galatians 4:4 – God greatly hon-
ored women by allowing a woman to give birth to God’s own Son (com-
pare Genesis 3:15).
1 Thessalonians 2:7 – A nursing mother cherishes her own children.
1 Timothy 5:14 – Younger widows should be taught to marry and
bear children.
Godly women considered bearing children to be a great blessing.
Genesis 3:20 (Eve); 21:1-6 (Sarah); 25:21 (Rebekah); 29:31-30:24 (Ra-
chel and Leah); Judges 13:2-24 (mother of Samson); Ruth 4:12-21
(Ruth); 1 Samuel 1 (Hannah); Luke 1:7,13-15,24,25,57,58 (Elizabeth)l
Love, care, and training of children

Exodus 2:1-10 – Jochebed cared for Moses and protected him.
1 Samuel 1:23; 2:19 – Hannah provided Samuel with food and cloth-
ing.
1 Kings 3:16-27 – Solomon determined who was the true mother of
a child based on her care for the child.
Proverbs 1:8; 6:20; 31:1 – My son, hear the instruction of your fa-
ther, and do not forsake the law of your mother.
Ephesians 6:1; Luke 2:51 – Jesus was subject to His mother as well
as His father.
1 Timothy 5:10 – One of the “good works” of widows indeed is that
they are to have “brought up children.”
2 Timothy 1:5; 3:15 – Timothy’s sincere faith had first been pos-
sessed by his mother and grandmother. From childhood, he had known
the Scriptures so he could be wise to salvation. (His father was not a be-
liever – Acts 16:1).
Proverbs 29:15 – If a child is left to himself, the result brings shame
to his mother.
Titus 2:4 – Young women should be taught to love their children.
One of the greatest joys of motherhood is to instill an abiding
knowledge of God’s will in the children and see them faithfully follow
those teachings as they grow. But the “good work” of mothers is not
simply to give birth to children and then expect others to care for them:
the daycare center or the babysitter. Their good work is to bring up
their children.
God deliberately planned for a woman to have the closest possible
relationship to a child. This is illustrated by the very way the child comes
into the world and is provided for in early life. The woman carries the
baby within her, sustaining its life and protecting it. When it is born,
God’s plan enables the woman’s body to provide the exact nourishment
the baby needs.
This should establish a natural bond of love and care that gives a
mother a great sense of satisfaction and joy. None of this is true of the
father who is left physically free to labor elsewhere to provide for the
needs of his wife and children.
The role of a godly wife and mother provides women with the great-
est contribution they can make to society and the greatest source of ful-
fillment they can have. The Bible ideal is so far from what our society
expects that all young women need diligent teaching in order to give
proper priority to their children and husbands.
Older women should teach young women that God wants them to
give priority to their family. To teach this properly, older women must
set examples of devotion to their own husbands and children. They
should clearly be women who are family oriented.
See further related discussion below on “homemakers.”

“Discreet”
This is translated “discreet” (NKJV, KJV), “sober-minded” (ASV),
“sensible” (NASB, MLV), “self-controlled” (ESV, NRSV, LEB).
In Titus, this word () is used regarding elders (1:8) and also
all aged men (2:2), and young women and young men (2:5,6). God’s
grace teaches all disciples to live soberly (2:11,12). See the definitions
and comments on those verses.
Proverbs 11:22 – As a ring of gold in a swine’s snout, so is a lovely
woman who lacks discretion.
1 Timothy 2:9 – Women should dress modestly with shamefaced-
ness and “sobriety.” This passage again applies to women, certainly to
young women. They need good judgment in dressing modestly.
1 Peter 4:7 – We should be sober because the end of all things is at
hand.
othy 2:15; Acts 26:25.)
“Discreet” or “sober” emphasizes the state of mind required to have
self-control. One must think clearly and seriously, using good judgment,
making good decisions in order to control oneself.
His judgment is impaired. He is not “sober.” Other things besides alco-
hol can hinder our clear thinking and judgment is resisting sin and temp-
tation. To be sober is to eliminate these hindrances.
Young women need clear-minded good judgment to make proper
choices to control themselves to serve God faithfully. Older women
should teach this to younger women, and this requires the older women
themselves to practice it.
See further notes on Titus 1:8 regarding elders.
“Chaste”
Meaning
This is translated “chaste” (NKJV, KJV, ASV, NRSV) or “pure”
(NASB, ESV, LEB).
“Chaste” (`) – “pure, holy…” – Bauer-Danker-Arndt-Gin-
grich.
“1. exciting reverence, venerable, sacred … 2. pure … a. pure from
carnality, chaste, modest: Titus 2:5 … 2 Corinthians 11:2 ... b. pure from
every fault, immaculate: 2 Corinthians 7:11; Philippians 4:8; 1 Timothy
5:22; 1 Peter 3:2; 1 John 3:3; James 3:17…: -- Grimm-Wilke-Thayer. It is
related to the word for holy.
“Originally meaning ‘what awakens awe,’ this word for ‘pure’ is …
Uncommon in the NT, it signifies ‘moral purity’ … ‘innocence’… – and
‘chastity’…” Kittle, Theological Dictionary.

The English word “chaste” is defined: “not indulging in unlawful
sexual activity; virtuous … Not indecent, modest” (Webster’s New World
Dictionary).
“1 innocent of unlawful sexual intercourse … 3 pure in thought and
act modest…” (Merriam-Webster)
General applications
Marital fidelity means it is wrong to have the physical sexual act
with someone other than one’s lawful spouse. This would constitute for-
nication or adultery (Mark 7:20-23; 1 Corinthians 6:18-20; Galatians
5:19-21; Hebrews 13:4; etc.). But this word requires more than that.
Consider the comparison to the church as a chaste bride of Christ (2
Corinthians 11:2). Surely this requires more than just avoiding adultery.
Women should not act suggestively or stir up desires in other men. They
should not flirt suggestively, participate in suggestive jokes, or practice
suggestive recreation such as dancing. They should not enjoy suggestive
entertainment on TV, movies, music, etc. See also 1 Peter 3:1-6.
In order to properly teach these things to young women, older
women must set the proper example.
Application to clothing
1 Peter 3:2-4 uses this word in a context that includes proper cloth-
ing. This passage, perhaps even more directly than 1 Timothy 2:9,10, ap-
plies to scanty or indecent apparel.
Not only is it wrong to commit the physical act of fornication, but it
is also wrong to dwell on that act in one’s mind, desiring to do it with
someone to whom we are not married. To control our conduct, we must
first control our thinking.
Mark 7:20-23; Matthew 5:27,28; Proverbs 6:25 – A person should
not only avoid the physical union with someone other than his or her
Scriptural spouse, but one should also avoid “fantasizing” about im-
proper sexual activities with someone other than one’s spouse. If it
would be wrong to do the act, then it would be wrong to take pleasure in
thoughts of doing the act.
Since the Bible teaches us not to tempt other people, it follows that
sexually suggestive clothing is sinful. We must not tempt people, to
whom we are not married, to think evil and improper thoughts. Such
conduct is not “chaste.” (Matthew 18:6-9; 1 Timothy 4:12; Titus 2:7,8;
etc.)
2 Corinthians 11:2 – Women should be chaste like the bride of
Christ. If you were literally engaged to Christ, would He be pleased with
the way you dress? If you were to sit beside Him in worship or walk the
streets beside Him or go to a place of recreation with Him, would the
clothes you normally wear cover you adequately?
Lascivious/licentious
Notice this word in Mark 7:21-23; Romans 13:13,14; Galatians 5:19-
21; 1 Peter 4:1-4. (2 Corinthians 12:21; Ephesians 5:19; 2 Peter 2:2,7,18;

Jude 4). This word is translated: lascivious, licentious, lewd, sensual,
wanton, indecent, lustful, filthy, impure, shameful.
Here are some definitions of these English words: “inclined to lust-
fulness,” “arousing or exciting sexual desire,” “inclined to, characterized
by, or inciting to lust,” “obscene or indecent,” “[sexually] suggestive,”
“causing or intended to cause sexual excitement or lust.”
A definition of the Greek word is: “wanton (acts or) manners, as
filthy words, indecent bodily movements, unchaste handling of males
and females” (Fritzsche via Grimm-Wilke-Thayer).
As applied to clothing, we should not wear anything that has the
effect of arousing or exciting the sexual desires of others. Our apparel
should not be sexually suggestive. But it should be chaste or pure.
Other Bible teaching about clothing
Proverbs 7:10 – A woman who seeks to seduce a man is described
as wearing the attire of a harlot. Clothing can suggest sexual immorality
to someone of the opposite sex. This is not “chaste.”
Proverbs 5:18-20 – Solomon also urges a man to be satisfied with
the pleasures of his own wife, which God says is pure and undefiled (He-
brews 13:4).
Job 31:1 – I have made a covenant with my eyes; why then should I
look upon a young woman? Job knew it was wrong to look lustfully at a
woman (other than his wife). So, he had determined in his heart he
would not allow his eyes to do so (Leviticus 20:17; 2 Samuel 11:2-4)
Genesis 3:7-11 – When Adam and Eve ate of the Tree of Knowledge
of Good and Evil, they realized they were naked, so they made coverings.
But afterward they still hid themselves when God came because they
were still naked. A person can be wearing some clothes and still be na-
ked so that he or she should be ashamed to be inadequately covered
in the eyes of God!
3:21 – God solved the fact they were inadequately covered by mak-
ing “tunics” (“coats” – KJV; Hebrew kethoneth) for them from skins.
Note: God cares when people are not adequately covered. From the be-
ginning He has ordained that people who are not wearing enough should
put more on!
Exodus 28:42 – Covering nakedness includes wearing clothing that
reaches from the waist (loins) to the thighs. (The expression “from ... to”
in the Old Testament means the entire area described is included in what
should be covered. See Leviticus 13:12,13; Numbers 6:4; 2 Samuel 14:25;
Esther 8:9; Job 2:7; Isaiah 1:6; Jeremiah 6:13.)
Since “nakedness” is shameful under both testaments, young
women (and men) should completely cover (among other things) their
waist and their thighs (and everything in between).

Bible passages show that God intends clothing to cover us suffi-
ciently that we do not tempt others to lust. Bible passages help us under-
stand the extent to which God wants us covered. Young women should
be taught to be “chaste.”
“Good”
This is translated “good” (NKJV, KJV, LEB) or “kind” (ASV, NASB,
ESV, NRSV).
Young women should be taught to live good, upright lives, and in
particular to be kind and caring for others in their needs and problems.
“Good” () – “1 pert. to meeting a relatively high standard of
quality, of things … 2 pert. to meeting a high standard of worth and
merit, good…” – Bauer-Danker-Arndt-Gingrich.
“… excelling in any respect, distinguished, good. It can be
predicated of persons, things, conditions, qualities and affections
of the soul, deeds, times and seasons. … 1. of a good constitution
or nature … 2. useful, salutary … 3. of the feeling awakened by
what is good, pleasant, agreeable, joyful, happy … 4. excellent, dis-
tinguished … 5. upright, honorable…” – Grimm-Wilke-Thayer.
Paul will emphasize to Titus the importance of teaching God’s peo-
ple to maintain good works. Let us list specific good works for the older
women to teach the younger women by word and by example.
* Helping needy people
1 Timothy 5:10 – One good work of the widow indeed is that she has
relieved the afflicted.
Acts 9:36-39 – Dorcas was full of good works, especially helping
widows.
Proverbs 31:20 – The virtuous woman extends her hand to care for
the poor and needy.
1 Timothy 5:4,16 – This especially includes caring for elderly or wid-
owed relatives.
Many people send their relatives to nursing homes and other insti-
tutions. This may be needed at times, but often women do not want to
be tied down so they are free to do other things.
* Hospitality
1 Peter 4:9; Hebrews 13:2; Romans 12:13 – Be hospitable to one an-
other without grumbling. Hospitality refers to helping others by sharing
the blessings of our homes.
1 Timothy 5:10 – Good works of the widow indeed include hospital-
ity both to strangers and to saints. This hospitality requires special effort
by the wife. (Compare Genesis 18:1-8.)
Acts 12:12ff – Mary, the mother of John Mark, opened her home for
people to meet for prayer.
2 Kings 4:8-11 – The Shunammite woman regularly provided Elisha
with meals and a room where he could stay. (Compare Acts 16:15; Gala-
tians 6:6.)

Nearly everybody has relatives who are sick, elderly, widowed, or-
phaned, shut-in, needy, or distressed in some way. Nearly every congre-
gation has people in these circumstances. Nearly every neighborhood
has such people. Too many women “don’t have time” for such work, be-
cause they are so involved in things God never commanded them to do.
* Bible study, and prayer
1 Samuel 1:10-2:5 – Samuel’s mother Hannah was frequently pray-
ing to God.
Luke 2:36-38 – Anna continued in the temple worshiping and pray-
ing.
Luke 10:38-42 – Jesus praised Mary for her interest in learning His
teachings.
Acts 12:12 – People gathered to pray in the home of Mary, mother
of John Mark.
Acts 16:13 – Paul taught women who customarily went to a place of
prayer.
Acts 17:11,12 – Noble Bereans, including women, searched the
Scriptures daily.
1 Timothy 5:5,6 – Widows indeed continue in prayer and supplica-
tion daily.
Christian women need strong faith and great wisdom, which comes
only from the study of God’s word (Romans 10:17).
* Attending church meetings for worship and study
Deuteronomy 31:12 – Women and children attended when the peo-
ple assembled for the reading of the law.
Nehemiah 8:2,3,8 – Ezra read the law and explained it while the
whole congregation was gathered, including the women. (Compare
12:38,43; Ezra. 10:1ff).
John 4:23,24 – God desires His true children to worship Him in
spirit and in truth.
Acts 1:14 – Women were present with the disciples who continued
in prayer waiting for the coming of the Holy Spirit.
Acts 11:26 – The early church met regularly so people could be
taught.
Hebrews 10:23-25 – We should consider one another to provoke to
love and good works. We should not forsake church meetings but should
exhort one another.
1 Corinthians 14:34,35 – Though restricted in their speaking out,
women were present in the assemblies of the church.
* Teaching others
See the passages listed under verses 3,4.
Romans 16:1-3,6,12 – Phoebe, Mary, and other women are men-
tioned who labored much in the Lord’s work and also helped Paul. Ex-
actly what they did is not specified, but there is much that women can
do to help and encourage the work if they will look for opportunities.

Older women should teach the younger women to be good, and
should themselves set an example in this work.
“Homemakers”
Meaning of the term
This is translated “homemakers” (NKJV, HSCB, MEV), “keepers at
home” (KJV), “workers at home” (ASV, NASB), “working at home”
(ESV), “busy at home” (LEB), “domestic” (RSV), “good managers of the
household” (NRSV), “housekeepers” (MLB).
“Homemakers” () – “… pert. to carrying out household re-
sponsibilities, busy at home, carrying out household duties…” – Bauer-
On  – “caring for the house, working at home…” –
Grimm-Wilke-Thayer.
“…‘working at home’ (oikos, and a root of ergon, ‘work’), is used in
Titus 2:5, ‘workers at home,’ RV, in the injunction given to elder women
regarding the training of the young women. Some mss. have ,
‘watching’ or ‘keeping the home’ (oikos, and ouros, ‘a keeper’), AV, ‘keep-
ers at home’” – Vine.
Grimm-Wilke-Thayer on  – “…keeping at home and taking
care of household affairs, domestic…”
Note the connection to verse 4 (love her husband and love her chil-
dren) and further in verse 5 (subjection to their own husbands). The con-
text clearly shows that the primary work of a wife and mother is caring
for her family and her home. Family orientation is the focus of her ser-
vice to God. This is the career or occupation she chooses when she
chooses to marry.
Note some other Bible teachings showing the woman’s family du-
ties:
Companionship and help to her husband (See our notes on loving
her husband – verse 4)
Bearing, loving, and training of children (See our notes on loving
her children – verse 4)
Managing household affairs
1 Timothy 5:14 – Young widows should be taught to marry, bear
children, and “manage the house/home” (NKJV, MEV, MLB), or “guide
the house” (KJV), “keep house” (NASB), “rule the household” (ASV),
“manage their households” (ESV, NRSV, HSCB, LEB). A young woman,
who is disobedient in these things, gives the enemy occasion to speak
reproachfully.
Psalm 113:9 – God blesses a barren woman by granting her a home
(NKJV, ESV, NRSV) or a household (HCSB), as a joyful mother of chil-
dren. For this, the Lord should be praised! He makes such a woman “to
keep house” (KJV, ASV, MLV), He makes her “abide in the house”
(NASB), and “settles” her “in her home” (NIV).

Proverbs 31:27 – The virtuous woman “watches over the ways of her
household” (NKJV), “looks well to the ways of her household” (KJV,
ASV, NASB, ESV, NRSV), “watches over the activities of her household”
(HCSB), “oversees the activities of her household” (Tanakh).
Proverbs 7:11,12 – An evil woman, among other things, “would not
stay at home.” Though she has a husband (verse 19), she is found con-
tinually in public places away from home.
(Compare 2 Samuel 15:16; 20:3.)
These verses do not mean a woman must never leave the four walls
of her house, else how then could she obey other commands such as as-
sembling with the saints, visiting the sick, etc. Often her family respon-
sibilities even require her to leave the house (shopping, etc.).
But the clear point is that a mother has a primary responsibility to
be with her family, working to make the home the place God wants it to
be. This includes helping her husband and fulfilling his needs for com-
panionship. It also includes care and training of the children. (Compare
Proverbs 14:1; Luke 10:38ff; 15:8.)
Purchasing/growing food and preparing meals
One of the domestic responsibilities of the wife includes various as-
pects of preparing meals (Genesis 18:6; 1 Kings 17:11; Matthew 13:33;
24:41; 1 Samuel 28:24,25.)
Proverbs 31:14-16 – The virtuous woman brings food from afar (as
in shopping trips) and provides food for her household. She also helps
raise food by buying a field and planting a vineyard. As with raising a
garden, orchard, or vineyard, this woman was helping grow the food for
her family.
(Note that she worked in her field and vineyard, where she would
still be accessible to her family. Nothing here describes a woman who
leaves her children at the babysitter to work in someone else’s business
that takes her away from her family for long hours every week like men
often do.)
Purchasing/making and caring for clothing
Bible women not only prepared food and meals, but they also made
or purchased clothing so they and their families would be well-clothed.
See 1 Samuel 2:19. Women also provided garments to meet other needs
besides those of their own family – Exodus 35:25,26; Acts 9:39.
Proverbs 31:13,19,21,22 – The virtuous woman works with her own
hands making cloth and clothing. She sees that she and her whole family
are well clothed so they need not fear the elements. This would still leave
her with her family where she can fulfill her other family responsibilities
to her children and husband. Nothing in the context implies otherwise.
In fact, this woman is so good at her domestic work that she is able
to make more clothes than even her family needs. This she sells (verse
24). In this way, women may contribute to the family being able to “make
ends meet” on the income provided by the husband.

By saving money and reducing expenses (coupons at the store, rum-
mage sales, etc.) a woman can do much to help the family budget. But all
this can be done while still being a homemaker to care for her children
and husband.
(Note that the worthy woman made garments obviously in the same
way and place she made garments for her family, then she delivered
them to the merchant – verse 24. The passage nowhere says that she
went to work in the merchants’ factory or store.)
Conclusions
Note that being a good homemaker and managing the household

involves far more than just cooking meals and cleaning. These are
needed, but just because a woman does these things does not mean she
has fulfilled all her God-given duties. She should also be a companion to
her husband and train and instruct the children. These are challenging
and valuable responsibilities, not the drudgery that some present them
as being.
When one considers all the good works a woman must do, just for
her home and family, there is enough to challenge the skills of any
woman. But this is just part of what God expects women to do.
Add to this the many other duties women have as Christians: Bible
study, prayer, worship, teaching others, training young women, caring
for the sick and needy, practicing hospitality, working in the church, etc.
A woman must jealously guard the time she spends on her God-given
duties, lest she be guilty of neglecting them for other activities that God
does not require of her.
For the Christian woman, caring for her family should take priority
over other activities that God has not required her to do. She should fit
other activities around her commitment to the family. She should not
commit her time schedule and her efforts to unrequired activities to the
extent they hinder her service to her family.

In contrast, the husband is commanded to provide family income
(Genesis 3:17-19; Ephesians 5:28,29; 1 Timothy 5:8; 2 Thessalonians
3:12; 1 Thessalonians 4:10-12). This often involves the man in an occu-
pation or employment that may take him away from home and family
for long hours regularly. Men in the Bible had occupations such as shep-
herds, farmers, physicians, carpenters, tentmakers, preachers, sailors,
etc.
Some think the wife may be the provider and the husband be the
homemaker (“role reversal”) or that they may share the roles equally. Is
this what God’s word says? God never gave a mother the duty to leave
her family and home, like men do, hour upon hour, week in and week
out, controlled by an employer’s schedule, in order to provide income for
the family.
Yet how often in our society do we see families where a woman ne-
glects some aspect of her God-given responsibilities because she is so
involved in things God does not require? If women in our society are
successfully fulfilling all their God-given duties, why has it become ac-
cepted practice to put the children in daycare?
The very practice of daycare for women who are employed outside
the home acknowledges that the women are not themselves doing all
God expects of them, so they hire others to do it. May a woman hire
someone else to be a companion to her husband for her or to submit to
her husband for her or be discreet or chaste or good for her? May the
man hire someone else to be the head of his family for him?
There may be some things a woman can do to help with family fi-
nances without leaving her home and family. And there may be emer-
gency circumstances in which she may need to help her husband in this
matter. Nevertheless, providing family income is primarily the role of
the husband, not the wife. The woman’s career is to work where her fam-
ily lives, to care for the family and the home.
“Obedient to their own husbands”
Definitions
This is translated “obedient to their own husbands” (NKJV, KJV),
“being in subjection to their own husbands” (ASV), “subject to” (NASB,
MLV), or “submissive to” (ESV, NRSV, HCSB).
“Obedient” (`) – “… 1 to cause to be in a submissive rela-
tionship, to subject, to subordinate …Of submission involving recogni-
tion of an ordered structure, …” – Bauer-Danker-Arndt-Gingrich.
…to arrange under, to subordinate; to subject, put in subjection …
to subject oneself, to obey; to submit to one’s control; to yield to one’s
admonition or advice…” – Grimm-Wilke-Thayer.
Other passages
Genesis 2:18 – Woman was created to be a helper (assistant) suita-
ble to meet man’s needs. Note carefully: woman is a helper to man, not
a substitute nor a competitor.

Genesis 3:16 – Part of woman’s punishment for sin was that her
husband would rule over her.
Ephesians 5:22-24,33 – The wife should submit to her husband as
the church submits to Jesus. The husband is the head of the wife just as
Jesus is the Head of the church. This applies “in everything” (verse 24),
not just in certain areas or in “the major decisions.” (Compare Colos-
sians 3:18; 1 Corinthians 11:3.)
1 Peter 3:1-6 – Wives should submit to their husbands as Sarah
obeyed Abraham. This is true even when the husband himself is not
obeying God’s word. Misconduct by the husband does not excuse the
wife from her duty to be in subjection, just like misconduct by the wife
does not excuse the husband from his duty to love his wife (compare Ro-
mans 12:17-21).
Acts 5:29 – The only case where a woman could disobey her hus-
band would be when he expects her to do something sinful against God.
Note that this means she must disobey her husband if necessary to do
what God says even when she really would like to do what her husband
wants her to do!
(Proverbs 19:13; 21:9,19; 25:24; 27:15; 30:21,23; 1 Corinthians
14:34,35; 1 Timothy 2:11,12; 3:2-5,12; Esther 1:20-22; Isaiah 3:12.)
Observations and conclusions
Since the husband should be the head of the family, one way a wife
may be guilty of disrespecting him and usurping his role is by making
final decisions instead of allowing him to make them or worse yet refus-
ing to follow his decisions. But there are other ways she could disrespect
him or usurp his role.
Sometimes a woman’s activities outside the home make her feel in-
dependent from her husband (“I can make it on my own. Why do I have
to do what he says?”) Sometimes the people the wife associates with en-
courage this attitude of rebellious independence. Modern feminism ex-
pressed this with the bumper sticker: “A woman needs a man like a fish
needs a bicycle.”
Being a submissive follower and a truly helpful supporter is not easy
for the wife. Using authority with the proper love and respect toward the
wife is also not easy for the husband (compare Ephesians 5:25ff). But
God’s way is best.
Husband and wife have the best relationship when the wife fulfills
her womanly roles in her most feminine way and when the man fulfills
his manly roles in his most godly and masculine way. This is something
that must be learned, especially in a rebellious, liberation-minded soci-
ety like ours. Young women must be taught this, and older women
should teach it.
Subjection is not demeaning to the wife. It does not mean God loves
the husband more than He loves her or that her role is less valuable than
the husband’s. Is it demeaning to the church to be subject to Christ? Is a

citizen necessarily of less value as a person than a civil ruler? Does God
love parents, but does not love children?
Specifically, Jesus taught plainly that possession of authority does
not make one person more important or valued than those without au-
thority, nor does being in subjection to authority make a person less im-
portant – Matthew 20:25-28. Value in God’s eyes is determined by ser-
vice rendered, not by authority.
Further, note that God’s word also regulates and guides the hus-
band in his treatment of the wife. He is not free to mistreat her and mis-
use his authority with impunity. See Ephesians 5:22-25 and 1 Peter 3:1-
6 for further details.
That the word of God may not be blasphemed
When women profess to be Christians but neglect their husbands
and children, this causes people who are not Christians to turn away
from the gospel. Even if they themselves are not doing right, people
know that godly women should care for their families. See also 1 Timothy
5:14.
Yes, some will ridicule a homemaker saying she is not contributing
to society. God is not saying we should disobey Him to satisfy the opin-
ions of other people. But neither should we allow our failure to fulfill our
God-given duties to give others an excuse to rationalize their own diso-
bedience.
See Proverbs 22:1; Romans 12:17; 2 Corinthians 8:20,21; 6:3; 1 Pe-
ter 3:15,16; 2:11-15; Romans 2:23,24; Philippians 2:15,16; 1 Timothy 6:1;
2 Samuel 12:14; 2 Peter 2:2; 1 Timothy 4:12; Matthew 5:13-16; 18:6,7;
Titus 2:7,8; 1 Peter 2:11,12.
2:6-8 – Instructions for Young Men

2:6-8 – Younger men should be exhorted to be sober-minded.
In all things show yourself to be an example of good
works. In doctrine showing uncorruptness, gravity,
sound speech that cannot be condemned, so opponents
may be ashamed having nothing evil to say of us.
Having given instruction to the older men and older women, then
to the younger women, Paul now gives Titus instructions about what
should be taught to the younger men.
Sober-minded
The young men should also be taught to be sober-minded. This is
also a form of the word , which has been used repeatedly in con-
text.
It is translated as “sober-minded” (NKJV, KJV, ASV), “sensible”
(NASB, MLV), “self-controlled” (ESV. LEB, NRSV),
See under “discreet” above regarding younger women for defini-
tions.
Other passages
In Titus, not only should elders be sober (1:8), but so should all aged
men (2:2), and young women and young men (2:5 – “discreet” in KJV).
God’s grace teaches all to live soberly (2:11,12).
1 Timothy 2:9 – Women should dress modestly with shamefaced-
ness and “sobriety.” But here we are told that young men should be so-
ber-minded, so they too should use good judgment regarding clothing.
1 Peter 4:7 – We should be sober because the end of all things is at
hand.
othy 2:15; Acts 26:25.)
Conclusions
“Discreet” or “sober” emphasizes the state of mind required to have
self-control. One must think sensibly, using prudence and good judg-
ment, making good decisions in order to control oneself.
“Sober” contrasts with one who is intoxicated. Under the influence
of alcohol, a person cannot think as clearly as usual. His judgment is im-
paired. He is not “sober.” Surely this is a serious problem for young men
in our society. They must learn to avoid alcoholic drinks that hinder their
sobriety.
However, other things besides alcohol can hinder our clear thinking
and judgment in resisting sin and temptation. To be sober is to eliminate
these hindrances. See further notes on Titus 1:8 regarding elders and our
discussion of the word “discreet” regarding young women.
Young men need clear-minded good judgment to make proper
choices to control themselves to serve God faithfully.

A pattern of good works
Paul addresses this to Titus, but he appears to still be talking about
young men in general. He specifically addresses Titus because he was a
young man and a gospel preacher. But what he says applies to all young
men.
Paul had admonished Timothy to set an example for believers (1
Timothy 4:12). Titus, likewise, needed to set a good example and be a
good influence for others, especially as a young preacher. If we want to
influence people to accept the truth, they must see a proper example in
our lives.
Often young people do not think their example matters much. They
do not think they should be held accountable for working for the Lord
yet. They anticipate no serious consequences if they “sow their wild
oats,” live in sin, or at least postpone their decision to become a Chris-
tian.
Young people often want to “have their cake and eat it too” when it
comes to maturity. They want the privileges of maturity without the re-
sponsibility that goes with it. If they want to do a thing, they expect older
people to trust them to do it: “Don’t treat me like a child. I’m sixteen!
Why don’t you trust me?”
But if they do not want to do some task or take the blame associated
with responsibility, we hear: “It’s not my fault. How can you expect me
to know that? Don’t blame me. What did you expect? I’m only sixteen!”
Some of this is natural, but sometimes it leads to an unwillingness
to accept the responsibility to fulfill our spiritual obligations. Many
young men are old enough to become Christians, learn to teach others,
and learn to lead in the worship assemblies, but they want to postpone
these duties till later. Paul urges Titus, as he did Timothy, to accept the
responsibility to live a godly example.
Note that Titus should be an example of “good works.” He should
actively seek ways of accomplishing good for the Lord. See notes on 2:14
below.
Many Scriptures urge Christians to be a good example: Matthew
5:13-16; 18:6,7; 1 Peter 2:11,12; 2 Corinthians 6:3; 8:20,21; 1 Corinthians
8:9-13; 10:23-33; Romans 2:21-24; 12:17; 16:17.
In doctrine showing integrity, reverence, incorruptibility
Not only in example, but also in teaching (doctrine) Titus and all
young men must take care to do right. Paul had discussed at length the
problem of false teachers in 1:10-16, and beginning in 2:1 he urged Titus
to be sure that he spoke sound doctrine. The need for sound doctrine has
been repeatedly discussed in 1 and 2 Timothy as well as Titus. See Titus
1:9,13; 2:2; 2 Timothy 1:13; 4:3; 1 Timothy 1:10; 4:6; 6:3.
Integrity
“Integrity” (NKJV, ESV, NRSV) is translated “uncorruptness” (ASV,
KJV), and “purity” (NASB).

A faithful teacher must be so devoted to the true doctrine that he
will refuse to allow his teaching to be corrupted by error or watered down
by compromise. He must be committed to truth without perversion.
“Integrity” () – “incorruptibility, soundness, integrity”
– Grimm-Wilke-Thayer.
Reverence
“Reverence” (NKJV) is translated “gravity” (ASV, KJV), “dignified”
(NASB), and “dignity” (ESV, LEB).
This word refers to giving serious consideration to living to please
God, dignified, worthy of respect, and honorable. Young men must be
sure that, regarding the doctrine they teach, they always act in a way that
is honorable and respectful to God.
The related adjective “grave” is used regarding deacons and the
wives of officers in 1 Timothy 3:8,11 and aged men in Titus 2:2 (see notes
above). See also Philippians 4:8.
“Reverence” () – “…a manner or mode of behavior that in-
dicates one is above what is ordinary and therefore worthy of special re-
spect a of a human being dignity, seriousness, probity, holiness …” –
“…that characteristic of a person or a thing which entitles to rever-
ence or respect, dignity, gravity, majesty, sanctity…” _ Grimm-Wilke-
Thayer.
Incorruptibility
This word is translated “incorruptibility” in the NKJV and MEV,
and “sincerity” in KJV, but is absent from the text used for other trans-
lations. It appears to be related to the word translated “integrity” above.
This word re-emphasizes the need for purity of doctrine without
corruption by error. It also requires that the teacher himself be incor-
ruptible. That is, he should be unwilling to allow harmful influences to
corrupt his life and teaching.
“Incorruptibility” () – “incorruption, perpetuity … 1 Co-
rinthians 15:42,50,53f … Romans 2:7; 2 Timothy 1:10 … Ephesians 6:24
[…The word seems to have the meaning purity, sincerity, incorruptness
in Titus 2:7]” – Grimm-Wilke-Thayer.
Sound speech that cannot be condemned
Speech that is pure and uncorrupted is sound or wholesome speech.
Just as impurity, pollution, and decaying sewage can defile drinking wa-
ter, so doctrinal error can defile our teaching. We must keep our teaching
pure. See verses listed above about sound doctrine and false doctrine.
Such pure teaching cannot be condemned. That is, God will not con-
demn it, and men cannot successfully disprove it. Men often object to
sound doctrine (2 Timothy 4:2-5), but they cannot prove it to be wrong
(see the next phrase). This is the kind of preaching God desires from His
faithful teachers.

That opponents may be ashamed, having nothing evil to
say of you.
If young men in their teaching show no corruption of any kind,
those who oppose the truth will have nothing evil to say against them.
This does not mean no one will say anything, but any accusation they
make will be without foundation and unprovable.
People have always spoken against true teachers and will always
continue to do so. We cannot prevent that. But we can live and teach so
that those who do speak against us ought to be ashamed. They really
have nothing against us: there is no real substance to their charges. They
cannot prove anything against us because we have done no wrong.
Regarding reputation and influence see Proverbs 22:1; Romans
12:17; 2 Corinthians 8:20,21; 6:3; 1 Peter 3:15,16; 2:11-15; Romans
2:23,24; Philippians 2:15,16; 1 Timothy 6:1; 2 Samuel 12:14; 2 Peter 2:2;
1 Timothy 4:12; Matthew 5:13-16; 18:6,7; 1 Peter 2:11,12.
2:9,10 – Instructions for Servants
2:9,10 – Urge servants to be subject to their masters, well

pleasing in all things, not gainsaying or purloining, but
showing all good fidelity, that they may adorn the
doctrine of God.
Having discussed older men and older women, young women and
young men, Paul next discusses servants. Several New Testament Scrip-
tures deal expressly with the subject of masters and servants: Ephesians
6:5-9; Colossians 3:22-4:1; 1 Timothy 6:1,2; 1 Peter 2:18.
Obedient to their own masters, well pleasing in all things
Servants should obey earthly masters and be well pleasing in all
things. This requires sincere service and obedience. This refers to “all
things,” though we understand they still must not sin against God (Acts
5:29). Beyond that, however, the servant can make no exceptions. He
cannot refuse the master’s instructions, picking and choosing what work

he wants to do. See 2 Corinthians 7:15; 1 Corinthians 2:3; Philippians
2:12; Ephesians 6:5.
This service must come, not from a false front, but from a sincere
desire to do the master’s will. The Christian should want to please his
master just like he wants to please Christ. This is true even if the master
is grouchy and unreasonable (1 Peter 2:18). The Christian is not trying
to get away with as little work as possible. He is not trying to get his own
way contrary to his master’s will. He sincerely wants to know the mas-
ter’s will and do it.
Not answering back
“Not answering back” (NKJV) is also translated “not answering
again” (KJV), “not gainsaying” (ASV), “not argumentative” (NASB,
ESV), “not talk back” (NRSV, HCSB), “not contradicting” (MLV).
A Christian who is a servant should not be argumentative and quar-
relsome with his master, stubbornly refusing to cooperate. He should
not reject the supervisor’s decisions, continually finding fault with them,
and generally attempting to evade or rebel against authority. Such atti-
tudes are common today.
This does not mean it is wrong for an employee to express his view
to his supervisor. But he must speak respectfully in a manner that shows
he realizes he is in subjection and the supervisor’s will must prevail. But
we may reason with those in charge when we believe we have a better
idea.
“Answer back” () – “…1 speak against, contradict … 2 op-
pose, refuse …” – Bauer-Danker-Arndt-Gingrich.
“to speak against, gainsay, contradict …” – Grimm-Wilke-Thayer.
Not pilfering
“Pilfering” (NKJV, NASB, ESV, MLV) is also translated “purloining”
or “purloin” (ASV, KJV), “stealing” (LEB).
The word means to steal or embezzle. Today it may refer to small
amounts stolen from time to time, but it would of course also condemn
taking large amounts.
Workers may be tempted to appropriate for themselves items they
use or see on their job. They may justify this by claiming that the item is
small and will never be missed, or the company is large and can afford
it, or the company does not pay as much as the employee thinks he is
worth. But still, he is taking without permission that which is not his
property, so it constitutes theft.
Stealing is stealing, regardless of the amount and regardless of from
whom we steal. The solution, of course, is to always practice honesty. If
we think the company or boss might not mind our having or using some-
thing, we may simply ask for permission.

Other passages about stealing include: Romans 13:6-10; Ephesians
4:28; 1 Corinthians 6:9,10; Exodus 20:15; Isaiah 6:18; 1 Peter 4:15,16;
Matthew 15:19,20; Psalm 37:21; Ezekiel 33:15.
“Pilfer” () – “to set apart, separate, divide; mid. to set apart
or separate for one’s self, i.e. to purloin, embezzle, withdraw covertly and
appropriate to one’s own use …” – Grimm-Wilke-Thayer.
Showing all good fidelity
“Fidelity” (NKJV, ASV, NRSV, KJV) is translated “faith” (NASB,
ESV), “faithfulness” (HCSB, MLV), and “reliability” (MLB). The word
here () is the common New Testament word for faith, but it is often
used for faithfulness. The idea is that one should be trustworthy or faith-
ful to his duties.
A servant would show fidelity by being trustworthy on his job. He
should be reliable, working diligently as instructed, regardless of
whether or not the supervisor is around to watch him. Given a task, he
should complete it diligently in a manner pleasing to the master.
Servants often had serious responsibilities in using or caring for
their master’s possessions. Some supervised their master’s entire house-
hold as in the case of Joseph (Genesis 39). Such men were sometimes
called “stewards.” Serious responsibility required serious faithfulness.
The servant must not misuse his master’s possessions nor betray the
trust the master placed in him.
But whether a servant had great responsibilities or relatively little
responsibilities, his character should be such that his master could com-
pletely trust him that he would fulfill the responsibilities given him.
That they may adorn the doctrine of God our Savior in all
things.
“Adorn” is so translated in most major translations, though the LEB
says “do credit” and the NRSV says “ornament.”
This reminds us of the instruction to young women that their con-
duct should not lead others to blaspheme God’s word (verse 5). Likewise,
young men should conduct themselves such that those who speak
against them would be ashamed (verse 8).
Regarding servants, Paul expresses this concept positively. They
should conduct themselves in a way that makes the doctrine or teaching
of God attractive to others. The idea of “adorning” the doctrine is to show
forth its good points or highlight its advantages so as to encourage others
to want to enjoy its benefits.
This does not mean that we should try to attract others by adding to
God’s word things that He has not authorized. Nor should we put on a
false front as though decorating that which is not inherently attractive.
But Christians (servants, in particular) should demonstrate or express in
their lives the gospel in its true character so that people can see the real
blessings and benefits it offers.

For many people, the primary contact they have with the gospel
comes from seeing it in the lives of those who profess to follow it. If our
lives are repulsive, others are driven away from the truth. If they see
good in our lives, they may be attracted to it. Christians should live good
lives primarily to please God; but when we do, we show people the ben-
efits of doing things God’s way, which in turn encourages them to want
to live that life.
Specifically, some employees neglect their work, do shoddy work-
manship, or are rebellious toward supervisors. If these people claim to
be Christians, others may be repulsed by their claim. If the gospel does
not lead its adherents to live any better than these people, why should
others want to accept it in their lives?
But when people see workers who are dedicated, respectful, and
productive, they wonder what leads them to be such wholesome work-
ers. When they learn these people are Christians, they are challenged to
see the value of the gospel in their own lives.
See 1 Timothy 4:12; Matthew 5:13-16; 18:6,7; Titus 2:7,8; 1 Peter
2:11,12; 2 Corinthians 6:3; 8:20,21; 1 Corinthians 8:9-13; 10:23-33.
“Adorn” () – “…1 to put in order so as to appear neat or well
organized, make neat/tidy … 2 to cause someth. to have an attractive
appearance through decoration, adorn, decorate…” – Bauer-Danker-
Arndt-Gingrich.
Observations regarding slavery.
These instructions are addressed to bondservants, but the princi-
ples apply also to those who are hired servants. Both existed in the first
century.
Bondage or slavery is illegal in our society, so Christians should
obey the law. But slavery was legal in the first century. God’s word does
not forbid it as such, and has never forbidden it in any age: Patriarchal,
Mosaic, or Gospel. God’s word does, however, forbid the abuses that of-
ten characterize slavery.
For example, to capture free people by force and violence against
their will and make them slaves (as generally happened with American
slavery) would be manstealing, kidnapping, and violence. To in any way
participate in such traffic of humans would be sinful and surely unloving.
The primary errors of American slavery consisted of the slave trade and
the abusive treatment of slaves.
However, people did not always become slaves through force or vi-
olence. Some people simply became so impoverished that they had no
other means to provide an income. So they sold themselves as slaves to
a master (Leviticus 25:39,47; Genesis 47:13-26). Others voluntarily be-
came slaves in order to marry a man or woman, or simply because they
liked the master and wanted to work for him (Exodus 21:5).
In such cases, people willingly became slaves and sometimes were
grateful to those who offered them work because the alternative was so

much worse. Such a practice would not inherently violate Scripture then
or now, though it would be illegal according to our civil law today.
A number of the passages that we cited previously regarding slavery
instruct masters on how to properly treat their slaves. Does God under
the New Testament instruct people how to practice things that are sinful
in and of themselves?
Many commentators think that God did not directly forbid slavery
but gave restrictions intended to ultimately lead to its elimination. I
simply cannot see where the Scriptures teach this concept. If slavery
were inherently wrong, why did God not directly forbid it like He did
other evils that were so prominent in the Roman Empire: fornication,
idolatry, homosexuality, and divorce?
If a person obtained slaves even in a morally upright way, he would
surely be required to treat them as he himself would want to be treated
(Matthew 7:12). If masters would treat their servants benevolently with
genuine concern for their wellbeing, the objections to slavery would be
unfounded.
Nevertheless, the principles Paul teaches here apply to hired serv-
ants too. Ephesians 6:8 expressly says that the Lord will reward diligent
service, whether one is “slave or free.”
A hired servant does not belong to his master 24 hours a day, 365
days a year, as slaves do. But he does belong to his master for the hours
that he has hired out to work. He has sold those hours of his life to his
master. So, when he is under pay to be working for the master, that part
of his life belongs to the master, and he should follow the rules Paul de-
scribes here. The advantage he has is that, if he dislikes the job and finds
a better job, he is free to move to another master.
“The apostolic teaching assumes the placement of the master above
the slave and the slave beneath the master, but Christ has given the same
price for each of them. Do not neglect even the lowliest among your
household.” – Augustine (Ancient Christian Commentary)

2:11-15 – The Effect of Grace in Our Lives
2:11,12 – God’s grace has appeared, bringing salvation to all

men, teaching us to deny ungodliness and worldly lusts
and to live soberly, righteously, and godly in this present
world.
Having described the application of sound doctrine in the lives of
various groups or kinds of individuals, Paul proceeds to discuss how
God’s grace benefits all Christians and leads us to live better lives. The
result is one of the more significant discussions of grace to be found in
the gospel.
The grace of God
Grace is, without question, a major theme of the gospel. Basically,
the term refers to “unmerited favor”: blessings or gifts given freely by the
giver to those who have not so labored as to earn or merit the gift given.
This does not, of course, mean that the receiver has done nothing at all
to receive the gift. A gift may be conditional. But grace means that, if the
giver did something to meet the conditions to receive the gift, whatever
he did was not of such a nature as to earn or merit what he received. See
Ephesians 2:8,9.
Here are other important passages about God’s grace: Acts 15:7-11;
20:24,32; Romans 4:4-7; 5:1,2; 2 Corinthians 9:8; Ephesians 1:5-11; 2:5-
10; 1 Timothy 1:13-16; 2 Timothy 1:8-10; Titus 3:3-7; Hebrews 2:9;
Psalm 119:132; 1 Peter 5:10; Romans 3:23,24; Matthew 9:27; 2 Corinthi-
ans 1:3,4; Exodus 34:6; Psalm 103:8; Romans 9:15; Hebrews 4:16.
“Grace” () – “…1 a winning quality or attractiveness that
invites a favorable reaction, graciousness, attractiveness, charm,
winsomeness … 2 a beneficent disposition toward someone, fa-
vor, grace, gracious care/help, goodwill … 3 practical application
of goodwill, (a sign of) favor, gracious deed/gift, benefaction … 4
exceptional effect produced by generosity, favor … 5 response to

generosity or beneficence, thanks, gratitude …” – Bauer-Danker-
Arndt-Gingrich.
“…good-will, loving-kindness, favor … kindness which be-
stows upon one what he has not deserved … NT writers use (grace)
pre-eminently of that kindness by which God bestows favors even
upon the ill-deserving, and grants to sinners the pardon of their
offences, and bids them accept of eternal salvation through Christ
…” – Grimm-Wilke-Thayer.
God’s grace offers salvation or forgiveness of sins.
Here Paul says that salvation has appeared as a result of God’s
grace.
Ephesians 1:7 – In Christ we have redemption through His blood,
the forgiveness of sins, according to the riches of His grace. We ought
to die eternally for our sins. But God’s grace provided a sacrifice: Jesus
died for us, so we do not have to die.
Ephesians 2:8 – For by grace you have been saved through faith,
and that not of yourselves; it is the gift of God. “Save” means to rescue
or deliver from harm or danger. Sin endangers our soul, but God offers
deliverance. We do not deserve deliverance, so it is not of ourselves but
is a gift of God. So, it is of grace: unmerited favor.
Titus 3:3-7 – By His kindness, mercy, and grace, God saved and
justified us. “Justify” means to declare one to be right or just: to pro-
nounce one to be what he ought to be. The deeds we have done do not
merit or deserve such a right standing before God. On the contrary, we
have all sinned (Romans 3:23), and sin leads to death (Romans 6:23).
So based on our deeds, we all ought to be punished eternally. But
God sent His Son to die for us so we can have eternal life instead: a gift
we surely do not deserve. That is supreme grace or “unmerited favor.”
In addition, God’s grace has provided us with many other great
blessings which we do not deserve. (Romans 3:23-26; 5:12-21; 4:2-8;
Luke 1:76-78; 2 Timothy 1:9; Acts 15:11; 20:32; 1 Timothy 1:13-16; 1 Peter
1:3-16)
Salvation has appeared to all men.
This simple statement completely and forever defeats a fundamen-
tal tenet of Calvinism. Among its other errors, Calvinism teaches “lim-
ited atonement.” This says that Jesus did not really die for everyone,
grace is not available to everyone, and in fact God does not really love
everyone. Instead, God arbitrarily chose certain individuals to be saved
and doomed others to be lost regardless of anyone’s choice, will, con-
duct, or beliefs.
According to Calvinism, those whom God decided to save He loves
and sent Jesus to die to offer them salvation through grace. In reality,
He compels them to receive it, regardless of their will in the matter.

Those whom He did not decide to save, God actually hates; so they can-
not access God’s grace or the benefits of Jesus’ death regardless of any
will or choice they may have.
All such is completely disproved by this simple statement in Titus 2
and similar statements elsewhere, showing that the grace and love of
God and the benefits of Jesus’ death are available to all. Whether or not
we receive them is a matter of our choice.
See also John 1:29; 3:16; Ezekiel 33:11; 2 Corinthians 5:19; Romans
5:18,19; Mark 16:15,16; Acts 17:30,31; Luke 2:10; 24:47; 1 Timothy 2:4,6;
Acts 10:34,35; Matthew 11:28; 1 John 2:2; 4:14.
Teaching us
Another important lesson about grace is that grace teaches, and it
teaches through the word of God. In order to benefit from grace,
we must learn about it and understand what it requires of us.
This also contradicts Calvinism which claims that the Holy Spirit acts
directly on man’s heart, apart from the gospel, to give him “irresistible
grace.”
Others say, “Surely the grace of God will cover” certain sins of cer-
tain people. In application this means that certain people will be saved
even though they continue practicing certain sins with no repentance. I
ask, “How do you know that? Do you have a passage that says so?”
People speculate endlessly about grace regardless of the fact they
have no Scripture. How do we know what grace will or will not do? Do
we have the right to say God’s grace will cover certain sins when we have
no Scripture that says so?
God’s word is the only means by which people can learn
what God’s grace requires of us. The grace of God acts in a har-
mony with the word of God. There is no other way to know what grace
will or will not do, or whom it will or will not save.

Ephesians 1:5-11 – We become God’s sons according to God’s will
(verse 5). We have forgiveness according to His grace. He made known
the mystery of His will, according to His good pleasure which He pur-
posed in Himself (verse 9). We inherit according to His purpose, and
He works all things according to His will (verse 11).
God’s grace works according to His will and purpose. The one
who extends favor has the right to decide how and to whom he will ex-
tend it. A major lesson in Ephesians is that the mystery of God’s will is
revealed in the Scriptures (3:3-5). Scriptures provide us to all good
works (2 Timothy 3:16,17). So, the only way to know what is required for
us to benefit from God’s grace is through God’s word!
2 Timothy 1:8-10 – God saved and called us according to His pur-
pose and grace, revealed in Christ who brought life and immortality
to light through the gospel. God’s grace operates according to God’s
purpose. God’s purpose is revealed in the gospel. So if we want to under-
stand grace, we must study the gospel!
We have no right to expect (let alone to teach) that God’s grace will
do anything except what the gospel says it will do. We must not expect it
to save any except those whom His word says it will.
Acts 15:11 – Jews are saved by God’s grace in the same manner
as Gentiles. Note that God’s grace saves in a certain manner: there is a
way it operates. Further, His grace saves all men in the same manner.
How do we know the manner in which Gentiles (and therefore all men)
were saved? Verse 7 – The Gentiles heard the word of the gospel and
believed.
Acts 11:14 – Peter spoke to them words whereby there were saved
(compare 10:33-48). No one will be saved by the direct operation of the
Spirit apart from the word. Grace saves through the word.
Acts 20:24,32 – Paul’s ministry was to testify the gospel of the
grace of God. His preaching commended them to the word of God’s

grace (verse 32). Note the connection between grace and the word. The
only way to understand what grace does is to learn of it through the
word. (Compare verses 20,21,25,26; 14:3.)
Galatians 1:6-9 – We are called in Christ’s grace. But if we follow
another gospel, we remove ourselves from Him who called us in grace.
If we preach another gospel, we are accursed. To receive the benefits of
God’s grace, we must follow the gospel. To follow other teachings re-
moves us from grace (5:4).
(See also Colossians 1:5,6; 1 Peter 5:12; 1:10-12; 2 Peter 1:2; Gala-
tians 6:16; John 1:17; Acts 4:33; Ephesians 3:2-8.)
What God’s grace is said to do for men, the gospel is also
said to do.
This confirms what we just learned. The benefits of God’s grace are
received only through the gospel. Note:
The only way to learn what God’s grace will and will not do is to
know what the word says. Only God can say what His grace will cover,
and the only way to know is by what He says in the Bible.
The passage proceeds to tell us what grace teaches, and everything
it says is also what the gospel teaches. So, what grace teaches is the same
as what the gospel teaches. The passage does not discuss how grace
teaches, so the emphasis is not on how grace teaches but on what it
teaches. All of us should teach the same truths that grace teaches which
is what the gospel teaches.

Grace is conditional.
Calvinism teaches that God saves those whom He has uncondition-

ally chosen. It has nothing to do with the will, choice, or conduct of those
whom He chooses to save. Calvinists say if a person must do anything to
receive salvation, it ceases to be grace but becomes salvation by works.
But the Bible contains many examples of people who received God’s
blessings by grace, yet they had to meet conditions. Those who chose to
meet the conditions received the blessings. Had they failed to meet the
conditions, they would not have received the blessings. Nevertheless,
meeting the conditions did not earn the blessing, so it was still a gift by
grace. Consider:
The fall of Jericho – Joshua 6:1-20
Verse 2-5 – God said He had given Jericho to Israel. To receive the
gift, the people had to march around the city repeatedly, blow horns, and
shout. When they did so, the walls fell.
This was a favor or gift from God, but the people were required to
meet conditions to receive the gift. They would not have received it had
they not met the conditions. So, it was conditional grace. Hebrews 11:30
uses this very example to illustrate the kind of faith we need to please
God and be saved under the gospel system of grace (cf. 10:39; 11:6).
The cure of Naaman – 2 Kings 5:9-14
Elisha told Naaman his leprosy would be cured if he would dip
seven times in Jordan (verse 10). Naaman eventually did as he was told
and was cured (verse 14).
This was surely a favor from God, but dipping did not earn the
gift. So it was unmerited favor: grace. But Naaman was required to meet
conditions to receive the gift. He would not have received it if he had
not met the conditions. So it was conditional grace!
If removal of leprosy was still a gift by grace even though one must
dip in water to receive the cleansing, then why can’t the removal of sin

still be a gift by grace even though one must dip in water (baptism) to
receive the cleansing (Acts 2:38; 22:16; Mark 16:16; etc.)?
Gideon’s defeat of the Midianites – Judges 7:1-22
With only 300 men, Gideon defeated an innumerable host of Midi-
anites. God said He saved Israel, so this was a favor from God (verses
7,9). But God deliberately arranged this so the people could not claim
glory for themselves saying their own hand had saved them
(verse 2). Their actions did not deserve the defeat of the army, so this
was unmerited favor: grace.
Yet Israel had to meet conditions to receive the gift. They had to
surround the enemy, hold torches, blow trumpets, and shout. They
would not have received the victory if they had not met the conditions.
So this was conditional grace!
Who can honestly deny that Israel was saved by grace yet had to
meet conditions? If we understand their case, why deny that our salva-
tion by grace can involve conditions?
Noah’s salvation from the flood – Genesis 6
Noah found grace in the eyes of the Lord: unmerited favor (6:7,8).
But Noah had to build the ark and do all that God commanded (6:13-
15,22; 7:5). He would not have been saved if he had not built the ark, so
this was conditional grace!
Hebrews 11:7 – Again, this very example is cited to illustrate our
salvation by faith (10:39; 11:6).
Jews – Acts 2:36-41
Acts 15:7-11 – Jews (“we”) are saved through grace “in the same
manner as” Gentiles (“they”). Grace saves in a certain manner or
way. Is that manner conditional or not?
The first Jewish converts were taught what they must do (Acts
2:14,37,38). They had to know assuredly (believe) in Jesus (verse 36).
They had to repent and be baptized for the remission of sins
(verse 38). 3000 did so (verse 41).
Did these Jews earn salvation? No more so than did Naaman, Gid-
eon, Noah, etc. The work done did not earn the gift received. Yet obedi-
ence was necessary to receive the gift. So grace in salvation is received
conditionally.
Gentiles – Acts 10,11
Acts 15:11 says both Jews and Gentiles would be saved in the same
manner. So consider the conversion of Cornelius, the first recorded Gen-
tile convert.
Acts 11:14; 10:33ff – Cornelius was required to hear words
whereby he could be saved.
10:43 – Peter said people must believe to receive remission. They
heard the word of the gospel and believed (15:7). So their hearts
were cleansed by faith (15:9).
11:18 – God granted the Gentiles repentance unto life.

10:34,35 – Those who work righteousness are accepted by God.
10:47,48 – Peter commanded them to be baptized in water.
Jew and Gentile are saved by the grace of God in the same manner.
It is conditional, the conditions are always the same, and those condi-
tions include baptism!
Paul
1 Timothy 1:13-16 – Paul was saved by the grace of God, and he
was a pattern for others who believe for eternal life. So, was his salva-
tion a pattern of conditional or unconditional grace?
Acts 9:1-6 – Jesus appeared to Saul on the Damascus road and said
to go into the city to be told what he must do. There were things he
must do (i.e., conditions to be met). (Clearly, he believed and repented
at this point.)
9:18; 22:16 – In Damascus he was baptized because the man, whom
God sent to tell him what he must do, said to be baptized and wash
away his sins.
Paul, the apostle who taught salvation by grace and who set a pat-
tern for our salvation, was himself saved by conditional grace, including
baptism to have his sins washed away.
The Romans
Romans 5:1,2 – The book of Romans is an essay on salvation by
grace through faith under the gospel. Was the salvation of the Romans
conditional or unconditional?
1:16; 10:17 – The gospel is God’s power to save all who believe.
Faith comes by hearing God’s word. Note that this is obedient faith
(1:5; 16:26).
2:4-10 – God’s goodness leads men to repent. To receive eternal
life, we must do good and obey the truth.
10:9,10 – In his heart, one must believe (faith); but this faith must
lead him to confess with the mouth to be saved. If grace were uncondi-
tional, then neither faith nor confession would be needed. And note that
confession is an outward physical act done with the mouth.
6:3,4,17,18 – To be made free from sin one must obey the teaching
delivered. This includes baptism since in baptism we come into Christ
and into His death, so we walk in a new life (born again).
Paul’s essay on salvation by grace shows that grace is conditional,
and the conditions include baptism. Forgiveness is a gift we do not de-
serve, but one must meet the conditions to receive it.
Other passages that teach conditional salvation include: Matthew
7:21-27; 22:36-39; John 14:15,21-24; Hebrews 5:9; Galatians 5:6; 2
Thessalonians 1:8,9; James 2:14-26; 1 Peter 1:22,23; 1 John 5:3; 2:3-6;
Mark 16:15,16; Acts 2:38; 22:16; Galatians 3:27; 1 Peter 3:21.
Denying ungodliness and worldly lusts
Grace teaches us both negatively and positively. That is, it teaches
us some things we should not do and some things we should do.

Because God extends grace to mankind, some people think we
should not speak against the sins people commit. But the very first thing
Paul tells us that grace teaches is that ungodliness and worldly lusts must
be denied. Grace does not excuse sin; it teaches us to deny it
(compare Romans 6). Compromisers say that grace teaches us to excuse
and overlook sin, but the Bible says that grace teaches us to deny it!
Ungodliness
“Ungodliness” (NKJV, KJV, ASV, NASB, ESV) is translated “impi-
ety” (LEB, NRSV), and “godlessness” (MLB, HCSB).
Godliness is a sincere concern for God and His will. It expresses it-
self in a diligent effort to learn and obey His will. Paul has emphasized
godliness several times in the letters to Timothy and Titus. See the last
part of this verse.
Ungodliness is the opposite attitude from godliness. It expresses it-
self in indifference or negligence or even open resentment toward God
and His will for our lives. This results in lack of effort to learn and obey
God’s will which in turn leads to disobedience to Him.
This may occur in moral matters, but it also includes sins of reli-
gious service. This may express itself as neglect of service to God or prac-
ticing things differently from what God says about worship, church or-
ganization and work, etc. So, rather than grace teaching us to justify
practices that differ from God’s word, this passage shows that grace
teaches us to deny such errors.
“Ungodliness” () – “…in general  is understood ver-
tically as a lack of reverence for deity and hallowed institutions as dis-
played in sacrilegious words and deeds: impiety…” – Bauer-Danker-
Arndt-Gingrich.
“…want of reverence toward God, impiety, ungodliness…” –
Grimm-Wilke-Thayer.
Worldly lusts
This is translated “worldly lusts” (NKJV, KJV, ASV, HCSB),
“worldly desires” (NASB, LEB), and “worldly passions” (ESV, NRSV).
“Lust” refers to desire. It can be good or bad, depending on context,
but in the Bible it usually refers to evil desires. Here the desires referred
to are definitely evil as shown by the fact they are “worldly” and we
should deny them. See 3:3; 1 Timothy 6:9.
“Worldly” also clearly refers to the world in a bad sense. It refers to
the attitudes and conduct that commonly characterize people who do not
serve God. We are forbidden to follow the world because it contradicts
God’s will.
1 John 2:15-17 explains further that worldly lusts include the lust of
the flesh, the lust of the eyes, and the pride of life. Worldly desires can
tempt us in any of these ways. Natural desires are not inherently wrong
but our will must control them in harmony with God’s will. Grace may

teach that God will forgive us, but He forgives only if we commit our-
selves to serving Him instead of following our worldly desires.
For other passages about the world see James 4:4; 1:27; Romans
12:2; 2 Peter 1:4; 2:20; Ephesians 2:2; Matthew 13:22; 1 Corinthians
1:20; 2 Corinthians 4:4; Galatians 1:4; 6:14; 2 Timothy 4:10.
“World” () – “… 6. the ungodly multitude; the whole
mass of men alienated from God, and therefore hostile to the
cause of Christ … 7. worldly affairs; the aggregate of things earthly;
the whole circle of earthly goods, endowments, riches, advantages,
pleasures, etc., which, although hollow and frail and fleeting, stir
desire, seduce from God and are obstacles in the cause of Christ
…” – Grimm-Wilke-Thayer.
“… 6 humanity in general, the world … 7 the system of human
existence in its many aspects, the world a as scene of earthly joys,
possessions, cares, sufferings … b the world, and everything that
belongs to it, appears as that which is hostile to God, i.e. lost in
sin, wholly at odds w. anything divine, ruined and depraved …” –
We should live soberly, righteously, and godly in the pre-
sent age
Grace teaches us both negatively and positively: there are things we
should deny and things we should practice. Besides denying ungodliness
and worldly lusts, we must live in harmony with God’s will. The Bible
simply does not teach the idea that grace covers us no matter how we
live.
This present age refers to the time we live on earth. It is temporary
(this present age) in that, when Jesus returns, the earth will be de-
stroyed and we will enter a new heaven and new earth. It is especially
temporary in that, no matter how long God allows the world to stand, all
of us will soon leave it.
Soberly
This word () is a related form of the word for sober (tem-
perate) for old men in verse 2, the young women in verse 5, and the
young men in verse 6. See definitions there.
Here we are told that grace requires all of us to exercise this serious
good judgment and self-control regarding spiritual matters.
Righteously
“Righteously” is sometimes translated “upright.” This refers to a
right standing before God, also referred to as “justification.” Matthew
6:33 tells us to seek first God’s kingdom and righteousness above mate-
rial interests. That we should live righteously has been emphasized many
times in 1 and 2 Timothy and in Titus. See 1 Timothy 6:11; 2 Timothy
2:2; 3:16; 4:7.

Righteousness is the condition or state in which we are acceptable
or have a right standing before God. It is the way of life that God calls
upon us to live as defined in His word. None of us practice it perfectly,
which is why we need forgiveness. As a result, to be “justified” or de-
clared righteous we must have our guilt removed by Jesus’ death.
The word here is the adverb form of the following noun:
“Righteousness” () – “…1. in the broad sense, the
state of him who is such as he ought to be, righteousness …; the
condition acceptable to God … a. univ. … b. integrity, virtue, purity
of life, uprightness, correctness in thinking, feeling, and acting: …
c. in the writings of Paul [it] has a peculiar meaning, opposed to
the views of the Jews and Judaizing Christians. … the Jews … sup-
posed that they secured the favor of God by works conformed to
the requirements of the Mosaic law, as though by way of merit;
and that they would thus attain to eternal salvation. But this law
demands perfect obedience to all its precepts, and threatens con-
demnation to those who do not render such obedience (Gal.
3:10,12). Obedience of this kind no one has rendered (Rom. 3:10)
… On this account Paul proclaims the love of God, in that by giving
up Christ, his Son, to die as an expiatory sacrifice for the sins of
men he has attested his grace and good-will to mankind, so that
they can hope for salvation as if they had not sinned. … [it] denotes
the state acceptable to God which becomes a sinner’s possession
through that faith by which he embraces the grace of God offered
him in the expiatory death of Jesus Christ. … 2. in a closer sense,
justice, or the virtue which gives each one his due …” – Grimm-
Wilke-Thayer.
Godly
Godliness is also frequently emphasized in the letters to Timothy
and Titus (see our previous notes on “ungodliness” on the first part of
this verse). Compare 1 Timothy 2:2; 3:16; 4:7,8; 6:3,5,6,11; 2 Timothy
3:5,12; Titus 1:1.
Again, this verse uses the adverb form of the following noun:
“Godliness” () – “reverence, respect; in the Bible every-
where piety towards God, godliness…” – Grimm-Wilke-Thayer.
“…awesome respect accorded to God, devoutness, piety, godli-
ness…” – Bauer-Danker-Arndt-Gingrich.
2:13,14 – We should look for the blessed hope and appearing
of the glory of our great God and Savior, Jesus Christ,
who gave Himself for us that He might redeem us from
every lawless deed and purify for Himself a people for his
own possession, zealous for good works.
Looking for the appearing of Jesus
The Bible teaches that Jesus will come again just as surely as He
came the first time. At His second coming, all people will be judged, the

earth will be destroyed, and we will enter into our eternal rewards. See
Matthew 25:31-46; John 12:48; Acts 1:9-11; 10:42; 17:30,31; Romans
2:4-11; 14:10-12; 2 Corinthians 5:10; 1 Thessalonians 4:13-18; 2 Thessa-
lonians 1:5-9; 2 Timothy 4:1; Hebrews 9:27; 10:26-31; Revelation 20:11-
15; Ecclesiastes 12:13,14.
Surely this day will be of immense significance to every person. This
should surely teach us to “look” for that day in the sense of being pre-
pared for it. We are ready only when we are living lives that please Him
(as discussed in verse 12) so that we are found acceptable before Him on
that day.
So, grace teaches us to be ready for that day. It does not teach us to
postpone obedience or to expect another chance when Jesus comes. It
does not teach us that we can live as we choose, yet God will find some
way to justify us in the end. It does teach us that we must live so our lives
will be found acceptable when Jesus returns.
Specifically, Christians look forward to that day, because it is the
day when we will enter into our “blessed hope.” Christians hope for eter-
nal life with God and Christ in heaven. That reward is not now a present
possession, as some teach, but is a hope that we anticipate receiving
when Jesus appears. See more about hope and eternal life in our notes
on 1:3. It will also be glorious in that we will see the glory of Jesus and
He will take the righteous with Him to eternal glory.
Our great God and Savior Jesus Christ
Jesus is our Savior because He died on the cross as the sacrifice to
pay the price so we can be forgiven of our sins (see verse 14). But this
passage calls Him our great God and Savior. This is one of many pas-
sages that refer to Jesus as “God.”
The passage is translated “…looking for the blessed hope and glori-
ous appearing of our great God and Savior Jesus Christ” (NKJV, NASB,
ESV, LEB, NRSV, HCSB, MEV, MLB). Older translations say “the great
God and our Savior” (KJV, ASV), which some argue implies two separate
persons. Consider:
* Newer translations listed above all make clear that one person (Je-
sus) is being referred to both as “God” and “Savior.”
* We are looking for the glorious appearing of this “great God.” But
whose appearing are we expecting? Surely we look for the coming of Je-
sus, so it is Jesus who is here called “our great God.” Other similar pas-
sages refer to the coming of Jesus: 1 Timothy 6:14 (1 Corinthians 1:7;
Colossians 3:4; Philippians 3:20; Acts 1:11; 2 Timothy 4:1,8).
* Further, the passage refers to the One who gave Himself for us
(verse 14). Who can that be but Jesus?
* In the Greek, one article here precedes two descriptive terms
(“God” and “Savior”) connected by “and.” This construction shows that
both terms describe the same person or thing. In order for two people to

be meant, two articles would be needed. Regarding the Greek language,
this is known as Granville Sharp’s rule.
Here are other similar examples:
2 Peter 1:11 – “the everlasting kingdom of our Lord and Savior Jesus
Christ”
2 Peter 2:20 – “the knowledge of the Lord and Savior Jesus Christ”
(compare 3:18)
2 Peter 3:2 – “the apostles of the Lord and Savior”
In each case, one Greek article precedes two descriptive terms, so
both terms describe the same person. This is one of the many New Tes-
tament passages in which Jesus is described by the term called “God” or
similar terms.
“Here he calls the same one both Savior and great God and Jesus
Christ.” – Theodoret of Cyr (Ancient Christian Commentary)
Other passages proving the Deity of Jesus are John 1:1-3,14; 20:28;
Colossians 2:9; Hebrews 1:2,8,9; Philippians 2:5-8.
Who gave Himself for us
The one whose appearing we anticipate (verse 13) is the one who
gave Himself as the sacrifice for us. This clearly refers to Jesus. This sac-
rifice is the means by which the grace of God provides the salvation that
has appeared to all men (verse 11). See Matthew 20:28; 26:28; Acts
20:28; Romans 3:25; Colossians 1:19,20; Ephesians 1:7; John 3:16; 1
Timothy 2:6; etc.
Please note that Jesus gave Himself. He was not forced or compelled
against His will. Those who killed Him thought they were defeating Him
contrary to His purpose. Although Jesus dreaded the suffering, He knew
it was necessary and could have stopped it at any time. He chose, how-
ever, to allow evil men to kill Him so He could achieve our salvation. He
truly gave Himself as a sacrifice for us.
That He might redeem us from every lawless deed
To “redeem” someone means to buy his or her freedom, especially
someone who has been kidnapped, enslaved, or captured by an enemy.
Such a person may be set free by payment of a “ransom” or an exchange
of prisoners. See Ephesians 1:7.
Spiritually, we become captives or prisoners of Satan through our
own sins (John 8:34; 2 Timothy 2:26; Romans 6). Jesus’ crucifixion was
the sacrifice that paid the price to redeem us or set us free from Satan so
we can return to God’s service. See 1 Corinthians 1:30; Romans 3:24.
Note that Jesus’ sacrifice can redeem us from “every” lawless deed.
There is no sin a man may commit that cannot be forgiven if he will truly
repent, turn from it, and humbly submit to God’s will for forgiveness.
Jesus’ blood can wash away every sin. See also 1 John 1:7,9; Hebrews
7:25.

On the other hand, note also that, to be God’s special people, we
need to be redeemed from every lawless deed. It is not enough just to
turn from some of our sins. God cannot fellowship sin at all. We cannot
continue to practice sin and fellowship error and expect God to accept
us. Our commitment must be to turn from “every lawless deed.” See 2
Corinthians 6:14-7:1.
For other passages about redemption see Matthew 20:28; Colos-
sians 1:14; 1 Peter 1:18,19; 2:24; 1 Timothy 2:4-6; Titus 2:14; Isaiah 53:5-
9; Hebrews 9:11-15,24-28; 10:9-13; 13:20,21; Revelation 5:9.
“Redeem” () – “…1. to release on receipt of ransom … 2. to
redeem, liberate by payment of ransom…” – Grimm-Wilke-Thayer.
“1 to free by paying a ransom, redeem … 2 to liberate from an op-
pressive situation, set free, rescue, redeem …” – Bauer-Danker-Arndt-
Gingrich.
And purify for Himself His own special people
This redemption involves a purifying or cleansing process for it re-
moves from our souls the stain of sin’s guilt. The blood of Jesus washes,
cleanses, or purifies us before God. See notes on 3:5; 1 John 1:7,9; Acts
15:9; 22:16; Hebrews 10:22; 1 Peter 1:22; Revelation 1:5; Ephesians 5:26.
Having been purified, we belong to Jesus as His own special people.
The KJV says “peculiar people,” but this is outdated English. The lan-
guage used here does not mean weird or strange but refers to that which
has been chosen or designated to special status. See also 1 Peter 2:9,10.
Note that we cannot belong to God as His people while we remain
in sin. Sin separates us from God (Isaiah 59:1,2; Ephesians 2). Only
when our sins are cleansed or forgiven can we become His people. God
has many special blessings for those who are His special people, but all
of them require that we be cleansed from sin so we can be in His fellow-
ship.
This is truly the manifestation of God’s grace (verse 11). How can
anyone say that sinful people such as ourselves deserve to be God’s spe-
cial people or that we can possibly earn such a gift? It is given by grace,
yet none of this in any way denies our need to be faithful and obedient
in order for God to give us the gift.
“Special” () – “… pert. to being of very special status, cho-
sen, especial…” – Bauer-Danker-Arndt-Gingrich.
Zealous for good works
Having been cleansed from sin by Jesus’ blood according to the
grace of God, we are required to be zealous of good works. Again, grace
does not teach that we may continue living in sin and let God’s grace save
us anyway. It teaches us to deny sin, live righteously, look for Jesus’ re-
turn, and be zealous of good works.
Good works are a common theme in Titus and Timothy, as well as
elsewhere in Scripture. See also Titus 2:7; 3:1,8,14; 2 Timothy 2:21;

3:16,17. Works do not earn salvation. Salvation is by grace. Nevertheless,
we must meet conditions to receive forgiveness by grace; then having
been cleansed from sin, we are obligated to work for the Lord.
When we repent of sin, we commit ourselves to work for the Lord.
This work is essential in order to remain in God’s favor. If we fail to serve
in good works, then we again become lost and worthy of eternal punish-
ment (compare for example Matthew 25:31-46).
It is not enough to eliminate sinful deeds from our lives. We must
also fill our lives with positive works of usefulness to the Lord. The Scrip-
tures, however, must be our guide regarding what constitutes good
works. It is not enough just to assume that something is good; we must
be willing to follow entirely the Scriptures in such matters, for they are
the standard of good works.
Zeal refers to burning diligence or fervency. It is not enough to have
a little interest in good works nor to just decide to do some from time to
time. We must be zealous of good works. We need a deep commitment
that leads us to seek as many ways to be useful as we can.
For other passages about zeal see Romans 12:1,2; Matthew 6:19-33;
16:24-27; 1 Corinthians 6:19,20; 15:58; 2 Corinthians 8:5; 5:14,15; Gala-
tians 2:20; Luke 14:25-33.
For other passages about good works see Matthew 5:16; John 9:4;
Acts 9:6; 10:34,35; 26:20; Romans 2:6-10; 1 Corinthians 15:58; Gala-
tians 5:6; 6:10; Ephesians 2:10; Colossians 1:10; 1 Thessalonians 1:3; He-
brews 10:24; 13:21; James 4:17; Titus 2:7; 3:1,8,14; 2 Timothy 2:21;
3:16,17.
“Zealous” () – “…1 one who is earnestly committed to a side
or cause, enthusiast, adherent, loyalist…” – Bauer-Danker-Arndt-Gin-
grich.
“Work” () – “…1) business, employment, that which any
one is occupied 1a) that which one undertakes to do, enterprise,
undertaking 2) any product whatever, any thing accomplished by
hand, art, industry, or mind 3) an act, deed, thing done: the idea
of working is emphasised in opp. to that which is less than work…”
– Grimm-Wilke-Thayer
2:15 – Speak, exhort, and reprove these things with all
authority. Let no one despise you.
Speak these things
Paul admonished Titus as an evangelist to diligently teach these
truths to others as well as practicing them himself (compare 2:1). The
work of teaching the gospel requires both rebuking sin and exhorting
people to do right.
Exhortation requires encouraging people to live righteously. People
should not just be told they are wrong. They must be urged and admon-
ished to do what is right.

“Rebuke” (NKJV, ESV, HCSB) is translated “reprove” in other ma-
jor translations. Regarding rebuking sin, see our notes and passages on
Titus 1:9-14. This is not just the work of elders (as in that passage), but
also the work of evangelists and all saints. See 2 Timothy 4:2-4.
Sin must be rebuked so that people may recognize when their con-
duct is wrong so they may repent and be saved. We tell folks they are
wrong, not because we enjoy knowing they are wrong, but because they
need an opportunity to change and become right (as discussed in 1:11-
14).
Rebuking sin does not contradict God’s grace but harmonizes with
it. When we rebuke sin, some folks become upset and tell us we should
not condemn sin but trust God’s grace to take care of it. But here God’s
word says that grace teaches us to rebuke sin. As we learned in verses 11-
14, grace requires that people deny ungodliness and worldly lusts, and
grace requires that people practice righteousness and be zealous of good
works.
Other passages regarding rebuke of sin are Revelation 3:19; Mat-
thew 5:23,24; 18:15-17; Luke 17:3,4; Galatians 6:1,2; James 5:19,20; 1
Thessalonians 5:14; Ephesians 5:11; 2 Timothy 4:2-4; 1 Timothy 5:20;
Titus 1:10-13; Proverbs 28:4.
With all authority
The authority of a teacher is simply the authority of the message.
That is, we have no right to make laws nor to bind any decisions on oth-
ers simply because we are teachers or evangelists. Evangelists do not
even possess the kind of “authority” elders have: i.e., the right to make
decisions regarding specifics in authorized activities. This is the work of
elders (see chapter 1). No passage, however, gives such authority to
teachers or evangelists.
Furthermore, no passage anywhere ever gives just one man the
right to oversee a congregation. Anyone who reaches such conclusions
based on this passage has misunderstood or misapplied the passage.
So, the authority mentioned here is simply the authority of the
word. The gospel message is authoritative and should be presented as
the authority. It instructs in righteousness, rebukes sin, and provides
every good work (2 Timothy 3:16,17). It will judge us when the Lord re-
turns (John 12:48). It can make us free from sin (John 8:32). It is the
commandment of the Lord (1 Corinthians 14:37). The authority is not in
the messenger but in the message.
Consider a courier who delivers a message from a king. Should the
message be treated as authority? Of course! But where is the source of
authority: in the messenger or in the message? Obviously, it is in the
message. The courier has no right to make rules or decisions of any kind
regarding what others should do. However, the message itself is not just
suggestions, advice, or good ideas. It is command and should be pre-
sented and viewed as such.

Let no man despise you.
Obviously, we cannot stop people from hating us if they are deter-
mined to do so. In fact, Jesus said that the world hated Him because He
testified that its works were evil (John 7:7). Impenitent sinners have al-
ways hated faithful teachers of God’s word.
So the lesson is that we should not give people just grounds to des-
pise us (compare notes on 2:8). Our conduct and speech should not con-
tradict our message, but should harmonize with it. If we fail to practice
what we preach, people can rightly call us hypocrites. If we preach error
or a message that does not agree with what God has revealed, then we
can rightly be condemned for perverting the word.
If we preach the truth in purity and live accordingly, people may still
hate us, but there will be no justification for their hatred. See also 1 Tim-
othy 4:12, where Paul likewise told Timothy to let no man despise his
youth.

Titus 3
Chapter 3 – Salvation and Good

Works
3:1-3 – Reminder of Proper Conduct

3:1,2 – Remind them to be subject to rulers and authorities,
to be obedient and ready for every good work, to speak
evil of no one, not to be contentious, but to be gentle
showing all meekness toward all men.
Paul continues giving general admonitions that should be taught to
God’s people. Faithful teachers of the word must continually affirm these
truths (verse 8; compare 2:1).
Note that people need to be “reminded” of things they may already
know. People may forget or may fail to appreciate the importance. Rep-
etition emphasizes importance and reminds us of our duty. See 2 Timo-
thy 2:14; 2 Peter 1:12-15; Jude 3-5.
Subjection to rulers
We should be reminded that we need to obey civil rulers and au-
thorities (“principalities and powers” – KJV). We must submit to every
ordinance of those who have legitimate authority. To disobey the rulers
is to disobey God who ordained civil government and commands us to
obey the law of the land.
We have no right to disobey those laws we think are “unreasonable,”
nor to pick and choose which laws we want to obey. The only exception
is that we must disobey laws that, if we obeyed them, would cause us to
disobey God (Acts 5:29).
Paul had likely just been released from prison. The civil authorities
had persecuted and imprisoned him as they had often done to God’s peo-
ple. Yet Paul continued to affirm that we should obey the rulers. If those
who suffered persecution must yet obey, why would less be required of
us?
If rulers do not do their work properly, that would not justify diso-
bedience to the laws. The Roman government was at least as corrupt as
ours and had many objectionable laws. Yet the New Testament said to

obey the rulers. Two wrongs do not make a right. If they misuse their
position, we must still obey the law.
For other passages about submission to rulers see Romans 13:1-7; 1
Peter 2:13-17; Matthew 22:15-22; 1 Timothy 2:1,2; Acts 5:29; 22:25-29;
25:10-12.
To obey; to be ready for every good work
Scripture often instructs Jesus’ disciples that we need to be obedi-
ent. We must obey to become His disciples, then we must obey to remain
faithful as disciples. This will be discussed more fully in the verses below
regarding salvation.
Many Scriptures in particular require us to practice good works.
Good works are a common theme in Titus, as well as elsewhere in Scrip-
ture. See comments and other passages listed in our notes on 2:14. See
also Titus 2:7,14; 3:8,14.
Good works do not earn salvation. Salvation is by grace. Neverthe-
less, in repenting of sin and receiving salvation through Christ, we com-
mit ourselves to work for Him, and this work is essential to remain in
God’s favor. If we fail to serve in good works, we again become lost and
worthy of eternal punishment (compare for example Matthew 25:31-46).
It is not enough to eliminate sinful deeds from our lives. We must
also fill our lives with positive works of usefulness to the Lord. The Scrip-
tures, however, must be our guide regarding what constitutes good
works. We must not simply assume that something is good and then pro-
ceed to do it. We must follow the Scriptures entirely as the only standard
of good works.
Note that we should be “ready” or willing for good works. We should
not have to be compelled or threatened to get us to do good. We should
desire to do them. See 2 Corinthians 8:12.
Speak evil of no one
Verse 2 describes a series of qualities that should contribute to
peace and proper relations among brethren. It is not clear how strongly
this relates to verse 1. Surely we should practice these qualities toward
civil rulers. But the application seems to be broader (“speak evil of no
one” and show humility “to all men”). Many other passages show that we
should practice these qualities toward all people, especially toward other
Christians.
“Speak evil” (NKJV, ASV, KJV, ESV, NRSV) is translated “malign”
(NASB), “slander” (HCSB), or “blaspheme” (MLV). This is the word from
which we get “blasphemy,” and is elsewhere used of speech that is disre-
spectful of God and holy things (compare 1 Timothy 1:19,20; 2 Timothy
3:2). But it can also refer to speaking evil of anyone. That is clearly the
meaning here, as shown by the phrase “of no one.”
We err when we defame or slander men, either by saying things that
are not true (“false accusers”) or by saying things with malicious motives

to hurt their reputation and influence (“malicious gossips”). It is possible
to say what is true but to say it with the intent of hurting other people.
See other passages and comments in our notes on 2:3.
“Speak evil () – “…to speak in a disrespectful way
that demeans, denigrates, maligns a in relation to humans slan-
der, revile, defame … b in relation to transcendent or associated
entities slander, revile, defame, speak irreverently/impi-
ously/disrespectfully of or about…” – Bauer-Danker-Arndt-Gin-
grich.
“…to speak reproachfully, rail at, revile, calumniate … Specifically,
of those who by contemptuous speech intentionally come short of the
reverence due to God or to sacred things…” – Grimm-Wilke-Thayer.
Peaceable
“Peaceable” (NKJV, NASB) is translated “not contentious” (ASV),
“avoid quarreling” (ESV, NRSV), “avoid fighting” (HCSB), “not quarrel-
some” (MLV), or “no brawlers” (KJV). This word is one of the qualifica-
tions of elders in 1 Timothy 3:3.
2 Timothy 2:23,24 – Avoid foolish questions that gender “strife,”
for we should not “quarrel” (“strive” – ASV) but be gentle, humbly cor-
recting those who are in error, hoping they will repent and escape the
snare of the devil. (The words for “strife” and “quarrel” here are different
but related to “not quarrelsome” in Titus 3:2.)
James 4:1,2 – Wars and “fights” (again, a different but related word
to Titus 3:2) occur because people pursue their own pleasures, lusts, and
coveting. The whole context describes people full of personal antago-
nism, jealousy, etc.
This does not mean one should compromise truth (see notes on Ti-
tus 1:9-14 and compare 2 Timothy 2:23,24). James 4:1,2 shows that im-
proper fighting involves personal animosity, etc. One should not disturb
the church over personal preferences or matters not essential to salva-
tion. He should not argue from a desire to exalt himself, make others
look bad, jealousy, or a grudge.
Gentle
“Gentle” is also used as a qualification of elders in 1 Timothy 3:3.
Philippians 4:5 – Let your gentleness (“forbearance” – ASV; “mod-
eration” – KJV) be known to all men.
James 3:17 – In contrast to jealousy and faction (verse 14), wisdom
from above is first pure, then peaceable, gentle, willing to yield (easy to
be entreated – ASV), full of mercy, etc.
Patient forbearance involves a sincere willingness to help people in
sin: hate the sin, but love the sinner. Let the lost know we want them to
be saved! We reject their wrong doctrines and practices, but we seek the
wellbeing, not the harm, of the guilty individual.

Try to be fair in honestly evaluating both sides of an issue. Put your-
self in the other person’s place and consider the circumstances and why
people act as they do. Consider people’s background. Get the facts of the
case. Do not jump to conclusions and condemn people’s conduct without
being sure they really have violated God’s word (John 7:24).
Sometimes, in matters of personal preference, we should give up
our own will for the good of others. Do not press our desires if the result
will be a stumbling block to others, cause division, or otherwise harm the
wellbeing of others.
See also 1 Peter 2:18; 2 Corinthians 10:1; Acts 24:4.
“Gentle” () – “…not insisting on every right of letter of law
or custom, yielding, gentle, kind, courteous, tolerant…” – Bauer-
“…1. seemly, suitable 2. equitable, fair, mild, gentle…” – Grimm-
Wilke-Thayer.
Showing all humility to all men
“Humility” (NKJV) is translated “meekness” (ASV, KJV), “consid-
eration” (NASB), or “courtesy” (ESV, NRSV).
Elsewhere this word is often translated “meekness.” “Meekness” is
the opposite of pride, but especially of self-will. A meek person is willing
to submit to the will of others. Meekness must be shown first and pri-
marily toward God. But here the meekness should be shown “to all men.”
Meekness, however, will not permit us to allow anyone to lead us to
do evil. First, one is meek toward God, then he is meek toward others.
This should lead us to submit to God’s will even when men object. So,
meekness is not weakness.
The strength to control one’s desires, so as to submit rather than
cause strife, is a fundamental form of strength that many people lack. It
is much easier to selfishly insist on our own way. The meek person gives
in for the good of the group.
This humility shows itself especially in how we respond when peo-
ple mistreat us or are in error spiritually. We must correct them humbly,
but we must correct them. Nothing here says to just hush, compromise,
or refuse to speak against error. On the contrary, as discussed in our
notes on 1:9-14, we must correct those who are in error.
Notice that we should show all meekness to all men. The word “all”
emphasizes the importance of meekness. The Lord does not expect just
some meekness with some people, but all meekness with all people.
See Numbers 12:3; Matthew 5:5; 11:28-30; Galatians 5:22,23; 6:1;
Ephesians 4:2,3; Colossians 3:12,13; 2 Timothy 2:24-26; James 3:13-18;
1:21-25; I Peter 3:1-6.
“Humility” () – “…the quality of not being overly impressed
by a sense of one's self-importance, gentleness, humility, courtesy, con-
siderateness, meekness in the older favorable sense…” – Bauer-Danker-
Arndt-Gingrich.

“Meekness” () – “gentleness, mildness, meekness” –
Grimm-Wilke-Thayer.
3:3 – We were once foolish, disobedient, deceived, serving
various lusts and pleasures, living in malice and envy,
hateful and hating one another.
This verse seems to describe why we should treat others as verse 2
described. We should be peaceable, gentle, and meek (verse 2) remem-
bering the fact that we too were once in error. Remembering our own
past will help us to understand and sympathize with those who are still
in error.
Again, as mentioned above, this in no way teaches us to compromise
with sin or keep quiet about it. But it should help us to be patient in lead-
ing others out of it.
Foolish, disobedient
Our translations consistently translate these terms as “foolish” and
“disobedient.” Those who disobey God are foolish to do so (see Titus
1:16).
The world often thinks that serving God is foolish. They think those
who do things their own way are wise and “cool.” They do not need any-
one else to tell them what to do. They can figure out for themselves how
they want to live. “It’s my life. I’ll do what I want with it.”
But the Bible says such ideas are the way of true foolishness. God is
so much wiser than we are that to disobey Him is a thorough lack of wis-
dom. Only those who are foolish would consider such a course. See Prov-
erbs 14:12; 1 Corinthians 1:18-25; Jeremiah 10:23; Isaiah 55:8,9.
“Foolish” () – “…unintelligent, foolish, dull-witted…” –
“Disobedient” () – “…impersuasible, uncompliant, contu-
macious (A.V. disobedient) …” – Grimm-Wilke-Thayer.
Deceived
Furthermore, those who live in sin are often deceived (“led astray”
– ESV, NRSV). They are convinced that their chosen course of action is
wise and acceptable. But this is false, so those who believe it to be true
are deceived. See 2 Timothy 3:13.
Deceit is the standard method of operation of false teachers (Mat-
thew 7:15-23; 2 Corinthians 11:13-15; 1 Timothy 4:1-3; 2 Timothy 4:2-4;
Titus 1:9-14; 2 Peter chapter 2).
Those who practice error do not want to admit that they are wrong
and may suffer eternal consequences. So they are easily deceived into
justifying error. They may even deceive themselves by rationalizations
dreamed up from their imaginations. And as long as they do not care
about the truth, God does not protect them from such deceit. He allows
them to be led into error (2 Thessalonians 2:10-12).

We were once in that condition. All of us have sinned and have tried
to rationalize our sin. Let us be patient with those who are deceived, but
let us also see the serious consequences of continuing in such a condi-
tion.
“Deceived” () – “…1 to cause to go astray from a specific way
… a lead astray, cause to wander … b mislead, deceive … 2 to proceed
without a sense of proper direction, go astray, be misled, wander about
aimlessly…” – Bauer-Danker-Arndt-Gingrich.
Serving various lusts and pleasures
The translations generally say “lusts and pleasures,” but some say
“passions and pleasures” (ESV, NRSV).
One characteristic of evil people is that they tend to do what they
want to do. They do not begin practicing evil because they are genuinely
convinced it pleases God (though they may be deceived into so thinking,
as already discussed). Usually, they choose a course of action, con-
sciously or subconsciously, because they prefer it. See Romans 6:6,12; 2
Timothy 3:6; Titus 2:12; 2 Thessalonians 2:10-12; 1 Timothy 6:9.
“Lust” refers to desire. It can be good or bad, depending on context,
but in the Bible it usually refers to evil desires. Here the context shows
that the desires referred to are definitely evil.
1 John 2:15-17 gives more details about worldly lusts, showing that
they include the lust of the flesh, the lust of the eyes, and the pride of life.
Worldly desires can tempt us in any of these ways. Natural desires are
not inherently wrong, but our will must control them in harmony with
God’s will.
People often love entertainment and enjoyment. This is the motto
of many in our generation: “fun, fun, fun” or “fun, food, and frolic.” It is
expressed in Luke 12:19 as “eat, drink, and be merry.” Or as in 1 Corin-
thians 15:32, “Let us eat and drink, for tomorrow we die.”
People love to party. We have so many forms of entertainment so
easily available. And we have so much time on our hands to enjoy them.
Much modern entertainment promotes immorality. This is true of many
TV programs, movies, music, books, the Internet, computer games, so-
cial media, etc. Other pleasures may not be sinful of themselves, but we
easily overemphasize them and neglect our service to God.
Pleasure is not necessarily sinful, just as money is not necessarily
sinful. God designed life so that we can enjoy many good things, and He
gives every truly good gift (James 1:17). But the danger is that we will let
our pleasures lead us into sin or become so wrapped up in them that we
neglect the priorities God has commanded (Matthew 6:33).
“Lust” () – “…1 a great desire for someth., desire, longing,
craving … 2 a desire for someth. forbidden or simply inordinate, crav-
ing, lust…” – Bauer-Danker-Arndt-Gingrich.
“Pleasure” () – “…1 state or condition of experiencing pleas-
ure for any reason, pleasure, delight, enjoyment, pleasantness … 2

pleasurable experience of sensation, agreeable taste…” – Bauer-
Living in malice and envy
Once again, the translations generally say “malice and envy.” Sinful
people are often characterized by malice and envy.
“Malice” refers to evil and especially evil attitudes toward others
that lead us to harm them or at least to fail to do what is good for them.
See Romans 1:29.
Many in the world do not care about the good of others. Everyone
looks out for “number one.” If others suffer, that is their problem. Some
will do anything that is to their advantage regardless of how it hurts oth-
ers. Others do not deliberately hurt others, but neither will they go out
of their way to help others. All such attitudes constitute malice.
“Envy” refers to that feeling of resentment when good things hap-
pen to others, thinking instead that we ought to receive the advantage.
This shows a selfish spirit and violates love (1 Corinthians 13:4-7).
People who follow their lusts are often envious when they see others
receive what they themselves desire. They may seek to take what others
have, or they are at least resentful and angry. They take no joy in the
blessings others receive. This is how we ourselves have lived in the past.
“Malice” () – “1 the quality or state of wickedness, baseness,
depravity, wickedness, vice … 2 a mean-spirited or vicious attitude or
disposition, malice, ill-will, malignity…” – Bauer-Danker-Arndt-Gin-
grich.
“Envy” () – “…‘envy,’ is the feeling of displeasure produced
by witnessing or hearing of the advantage or prosperity of others; this
evil sense always attaches to this word…” – Vine.
Hateful and hating one another
The translations generally say “hateful and hating one another,”
though some say “despicable” or “detesting.” Those who are malicious,
envious, and live in pleasure are also often guilty of hatred toward oth-
ers.
Hatred of others can refer either to an active desire to harm them
or to a failure to properly love them. Either way is sinful. 1 John 3:15
equates hatred with murder.
God’s word requires us to love others rather than hate them. Hatred
clearly violates the command to love. Matthew 22:37-40; Luke
6:27,28,31-33; 10:25-37; 1 Corinthians 13:1-8,13
Yet this is how those live who do not serve God. We see it all around
us. Do we also see it within our hearts?
“Hateful” () – “…loathsome, despicable…” – Bauer-
“Hate” () – “…depending on the context, this verb ranges in
mng. from ‘disfavor’ to ‘detest.’ The Eng. term ‘hate’ generally suggests

affective connotations that do not always do justice esp. to some Semitic
shame-honor oriented use … in the sense ‘hold in disfavor, be disinclined
to, have relatively little regard for’. 1 to have a strong aversion to, hate,
detest … 2 to be disinclined to, disfavor, disregard…” – Bauer-Danker-
Arndt-Gingrich.
3:4-7 – Salvation by Grace through the Washing of
Regeneration
3:4,5 – When the kindness of God our Savior and His love for
man appeared, He saved us, not based on deeds that we
have done in righteousness, but according to His mercy,
by the washing of regeneration and renewing of the Holy
Spirit.
Having described the wickedness of unconverted people, Paul then
describes what God has done to enable them to overcome this evil.
But when the kindness and the love of God our Savior to-
ward man appeared
Because of our sins, we were lost without hope until God chose to
act for our good. His kindness and love toward man appeared. 2:11 states
that His grace that brings salvation has appeared to all men.
When and in what form did this kindness and love “appear”? Clearly
the focus is on Jesus’ sacrificial death. God expressed through Christ His
kindness that saves us – Ephesians 2:7. He showed His love by sending
Christ to die for our sins – John 3:16; Romans 5:3-5; 1 John 4:9,10.
We receive many blessings as a result of God’s kindness and love.
But the context refers to those blessings by which we are saved (verse 5)
from our evils (verse 3). God’s kindness and love regarding salvation ap-
pear or are revealed to each of us as we study and learn God’s word.
But the gospel message focuses on the sacrifice of Christ. This is the
solution God offered to save us from the evil that Paul has just described
that we all have experienced.
Not by works of righteousness which we have done, but
according to His mercy He saved us
This section is closely parallel to Ephesians 2:4-10. Our problem of
sin is solved by the grace of God, according to His mercy.
Mercy is closely related to grace (see 1:4). Grace is the favor of God
extended to those who do not deserve it. Mercy is compassion for sinful
man which is associated with God’s grace. As such, man must have
mercy from God or we will have no hope of salvation: 1 Peter 1:3; Ephe-
sians 2:4.
We have all sinned (Romans 3:23). As a result, we deserved to be
punished (Romans 6:23). But God’s love for us led Him to show mercy
and favor which we do not deserve. So, we are saved by grace.

Some conclude that “not by works” means there is nothing man
can do to receive eternal life, so obedience is not necessary.
This is not what is stated. Nothing here or elsewhere proves that we
can receive salvation by God’s grace without meeting conditions. Grace
can surely be conditional without ceasing to be grace (see our notes on
2:11-14).
Many passages state conditions people must meet in order to re-
ceive the blessings of God’s grace: See Romans 1:16; Acts 11:14; 1 Corin-
thians 16:22; Romans 8:24; 10:9,10; 2 Corinthians 7:10; Hebrews 5:9;
Mark 16:16; Matthew 10:22; Acts 2:47. We must take all the Bible says
(Acts 3:22,23; 20:20,27; Revelation 22:18,19; Matthew 4:4,7).
What is meant here is that nothing people do can earn salvation so
we can boast or brag about it (compare Romans 3:27; 1 Corinthians 1:29;
Ephesians 2:9). This is the sense in which salvation is “not of works …
which we have done.” Righteousness cannot be merited by works we
have done, nor can our works obtain righteousness apart from God’s
mercy and grace.
The only way anyone could become righteous strictly according to
his own works would be to live a whole life without sinning. Galatians
3:10 – For as many as are of the works of the law are under the curse; for
it is written, “Cursed is everyone who does not continue in all things
which are written in the book of the law, to do them.”
But we all commit sins (Romans 3:23; 1 John 1:8,10). Having com-
mitted sins, we ought to be punished. There is no way we can ever then
earn salvation by the deeds we do without the grace of God and the death
of Jesus.
This is why we could never be saved by a system of works, like the
Old Testament, which defined guilt but could not of itself give lasting
forgiveness for sin (Hebrews 10:1-4). God’s grace in Christ, however,
made possible salvation for people who have sinned because He sent His
Son to die as the sacrifice for our sins. We can be forgiven and saved only
through His blood.
None of this, however, denies that there are things we must do to
receive this forgiveness. Paul is not here saying we are saved by “faith
alone” without works of obedience to the gospel conditions of for-
giveness. The message here is simply that, having been sinners, nothing
we could do of ourselves could ever earn salvation. Nor could it ever re-
sult in salvation had God not determined by His grace to offer us for-
giveness.
God’s grace operates according to God’s will, and that will is re-
vealed in the gospel. The gospel teaches that salvation is based on grace,
not on our sinless perfection. But it also shows that we must turn from
sin and become obedient in order to receive God’s forgiveness.

This is one of the many “not…but” passages of Scripture. Such ex-
pressions do not totally negate everything in the “not” part, but they em-
phasize the importance of things in the “but” part. Examples are John
6:27; 12:44; 1 Corinthians 1:17; 15:10; 1 Peter 3:3,4; Mark 9:37; Matthew
10:20; Acts 5:4; 1 Thessalonians 4:8; Genesis 45:8; 2 Timothy 1:9.
In this passage, the works we have done are “not” the means of
righteousness or salvation (as discussed above), but that does not mean
we can receive salvation or righteousness while doing nothing. Rather,
the second expression emphasizes that we must have God’s mercy. With-
out the mercy of God, our works would mean nothing.
Further, the Bible describes different kinds of works.
There are works of the flesh or sin (Galatians 5:19-21; Romans

13:12-14). Obviously, these do not save.
There are works of the law or works whereby one earns or de-
serves salvation. This is the kind of works Paul refers to here; these
works do not save because man cannot earn salvation. See again Gala-
tians 3:10 – “Cursed is everyone who does not continue in all things
which are written in the book of the law, to do them.” See also Galatians
2:16; 3:11; Romans 3:20,28; 4:2-16; 11:6; Acts 13:39; 2 Timothy 1:9;
Ephesians 2:9.
But there is another kind of works: works of obedience to the
gospel as conditions for receiving forgiveness by God’s grace through
Jesus’ blood. These also do not deserve salvation. Their purpose is to
admit we deserve punishment, but to call upon God’s mercy to save us.
This obedience is required to receive salvation as proved by all the pas-
sages listed above.
Specifically, many verses teach that obedience is essential. See Mat-
thew 7:21-27; 22:36-39; John 14:15,21-24; Acts 10:34,35; Romans 2:6-
10; 6:17,18; Hebrews 5:9; 10:39; 11:8,30; Galatians 5:6; 2 Thessalonians
1:8,9; James 2:14-26; 1 Peter 1:22,23; 1 John 5:3; 2:3-6.

If obedience to commands is not necessary to salvation, then love,
repentance, confession, and even faith itself are not necessary since all
of these are commands – see Matthew 22:37-39; Acts 17:30; Romans
10:9,10; 1 John 3:23; John 6:28,29.
Even more specifically, the obedience that is necessary to receive
forgiveness includes baptism as shown in Mark 16:15,16; Acts 2:38;
22:16; Romans 6:3,4; Galatians 3:26,27; 1 Peter 3:21.
That baptism is necessary for salvation is stated expressly in the
very next phrase in the passage at hand (see below). To claim that this
passage makes baptism unnecessary is to make the passage contradict
itself!
Through the washing of regeneration
“Regeneration” of a sinner means rebirth and refers to the spiritual
new birth or being born again. As a result, we are cleansed from our sins
and given a spiritual new start in life. We are like a new man who no
longer has any of his old sins. See John 1:12,13; 3:1-7; 1 Peter 1:22-25;
Romans 6:3,5; 2 Corinthians 5:17; Galatians 3:26,27.
The “washing of regeneration” can refer only to water baptism.
Baptism is a washing. Physically we are washed in water, but spiritually
our sins are washed away by Jesus’ blood. See Acts 22:16; 8:35-39; He-
brews 10:22; Ephesians 5:26; 1 Peter 3:21.
Further, baptism is often shown to be essential to the new birth. See
John 3:3,5; Romans 6:3-5; Galatians 3:26,27.
So, the “washing of regeneration” must refer to water baptism.
There is absolutely nothing else in the overall teaching of Scripture that
comes close to fitting such a description like baptism does.
So this verse is not denying that baptism is essential to salvation.

Rather it is affirming it. God saved us according to His mercy through
baptism!

Furthermore, this verse is affirming, not denying, that baptism is a
necessary part of mercy. There is no conflict between believing we are
saved by mercy and believing that baptism is necessary. The idea that
such a conflict exists is a false theory taught by false teachers. Men say
mercy means God must save us without baptism, but God’s word says
His mercy saves us through baptism.
Furthermore, when verses such as this one say we are not saved by
works, they cannot possibly mean that baptism is not necessary. For
the very passage that denies we are saved “by works” then proceeds to
affirm that we are saved through baptism!
All human denials of the necessity of baptism are thoroughly dis-
proved by this verse. This verse discusses all the concepts that are often
used to deny baptism, but then the verse proceeds to say that we are
saved “through” baptism.
“Regeneration” () – “…1 state of being renewed, w. fo-
cus on a cosmic experience, renewal … 2 experience of a complete
change of life, rebirth of a redeemed person…” – Bauer-Danker-Arndt-
Gingrich.
And renewing of the Holy Spirit
The concept of renewal, as connected to salvation in the New Tes-
tament, involves two aspects.
First, there is the new birth itself, by which a person is cleansed of
sin and given a new relationship with God. This is described above in
discussing “regeneration.”
Following this cleansing of sin, however, there must come a refor-
mation of life. This change requires a renewing of the mind: new ways of
thinking (Romans 12:2; Ephesians 4:23). This in turn must lead to new
ways of living.
This new life is so different from the former way of life that it is
called a new man as contrasted to the old man. So, the new relationship
at conversion must lead to a new lifestyle resulting from new thought
patterns. See Ephesians 4:20-24; Romans 6:3-23; Colossians 3:9,10.
In what sense does the renewing come from the Holy Spirit? The
Spirit revealed the word: the message of the gospel that guides and mo-
tivates the needed change. Many passages connect the Spirit and/or the
word to the new birth and/or to the change in life that follows. Note a
few:
Before baptism one must learn and believe the word which is the
seed by which we are born again (1 Peter 1:23). The power of life is in
the seed. The Holy Spirit revealed the word and caused it to be taught so
people might learn it and be saved (2 Peter 1:21; Ephesians 3:3-5; John
14:26; 16:13; 1 Corinthians 2:10-13).
So, one is “born of water and the Spirit” (John 3:5) when one learns
and believes the gospel message, as revealed by the Spirit, and then
obeys that message by being baptized. Note:

John 3:5 – Be born of water and the Spirit.
Mark 16:15,16 – Preach the gospel. He who believes and is bap-
tized will be saved.
Acts 2:41 – Those who gladly received the word were baptized.
Acts 8:12 – People who believed the gospel were baptized.
Acts 8:35-39; 16:32,33; 18:8 – Other examples in which the word
was preached and people were baptized.
Ephesians 5:26 – Jesus cleansed the church by the washing of
water with the word. Note especially the parallel between this passage
and Titus 3:5. (Compare 1 Corinthians 12:13.)
So, the gospel message leads us to be born again and then teaches
us further to change our lives to please God (Matthew 28:18-20). The
word is the “sword of the Spirit” (Ephesians 6:17). It is the tool or means
the Spirit uses to accomplish His work.
So, the change that follows conversion is also a renewing of (from
or by means of) the Holy Spirit in that the Holy Spirit leads and guides
us through the word, just as the Spirit leads or guides us into conversion.
3:6,7 – He poured out richly on us through Jesus, that we
might be justified by grace and be made heirs according
to the hope of eternal life.
Whom He poured out on us abundantly through Jesus
Christ our Savior
The Holy Spirit, by whom we are renewed (verse 5), was poured out
abundantly. All people, having been saved, receive the Holy Spirit in the
sense of fellowship with Him. So, we are said to have the Spirit dwelling
in us following conversion. This would seem to fit the fact Paul uses “us,”
which appears in previous verses to refer to saved people in general. See
1 Corinthians 3:16; 6:19; Romans 5:5; 8:9; Acts 2:38; 5:32; James 4:5;
Ephesians 5:18.
However, the indwelling of the Holy Spirit is not, to my knowledge,
called a “pouring out” of the Spirit. This expression seems to refer rather
to miraculous gifts of the Spirit. See Acts 2:1-4,17,33; 10:44,45 (compare
11:15-17).
If this is the meaning, this would fit with verse 5 in that the Spirit,
having been poured out on inspired men (like Paul) would give them the
power to speak His message. That message is the means the Spirit uses
to lead us to be renewed as per verse 5.
This was done “through Jesus Christ” in that Christ is the One who
sent the Spirit to guide the inspired men. See John 14:16; 15:26; etc.
Patton, however, expresses yet another view. He says that the Holy
Spirit is poured out on all who have been saved as in verse 5. However,
“the Holy Spirit” is used symbolically to refer to the blessings that come
through the Holy Spirit. For examples of similar usage, he refers to Luke
16:29; Acts 8:5; and Luke 11:13. This would mean that through Christ we

abundantly receive the blessings offered by the Holy Spirit through the
Scriptures.
None of these views does violence to Bible teaching.
Having been justified by His grace we should become
heirs according to the hope of eternal life.
As a result of the grace that God has extended toward us (verse 5),
we are justified from our sins and become heirs of the hope of eternal
life.
Grace was discussed at length in 2:11-14 (see notes there). It is the
unmerited favor God shows toward us, which led Him to offer us salva-
tion.
Justification is the process by which man is declared to be just or
righteous before God even though we have sinned. The word for justify
is a form of the word for righteousness, so one who has been justified
then stands right before God. This occurs by forgiveness through the
blood of Jesus, through the washing of regeneration (verse 5).
The result is that we are heirs according to the hope of eternal life.
The hope of eternal life was discussed at length in 1:2 (see notes there).
This is an inheritance in the sense that it is a gift given by our spiritual
Father only to those who are His spiritual children, members of His fam-
ily, the church. See Matthew 25:34; Mark 10:17; Romans 8:17; 1 Peter
1:3,4.
3:8-11 – Avoiding Foolish Strifes and Divisive Men
3:8,9 – This statement is trustworthy and should be
confidently affirmed so those who believe God may be
careful to maintain good works. But foolish
controversies and genealogies and strifes and disputes
about the law should be avoided because they are
unprofitable and vain.
Maintaining good works
“This saying” refers to the things Paul has just taught about justifi-
cation. “These things” are faithful or trustworthy: you can rely upon
them to be true. Preachers like Titus should remind believers in God
about these things so they will be careful to maintain good works. This,
along with the other instructions Paul has been giving, are good and
profitable teachings that Titus needed to present diligently.
Good works are discussed in several places in Titus. See our notes
on 2:14; 3:1,14. Clearly, we need to pursue them. Pleasing God requires
more than just removing wickedness from our lives. We must also prac-
tice what is good and pure. In fact, we must be “careful” to do so. It will
not happen by chance. It requires deliberate choice and hard work.
It follows that God’s people need to be reminded constantly about
this. We should never tire of speaking or hearing about subjects like this.

We need continual reminders to encourage us to live the kind of proper
lives that God requires.
Avoiding foolish disputes and strife
Reminding people to maintain good works is good and profitable.
However, in contrast, Paul then admonished Titus to avoid foolish dis-
putes, genealogies, contentions, and strivings about the law. These
things, we are told, are unprofitable and useless.
This problem has been discussed repeatedly in 1 and 2 Timothy and
Titus. Again and again, Paul has warned these young preachers to watch
out for those who cause strife, division, disputation, and contentions
about matters for which Christians should not strive. See 1 Timothy 1:3-
7,18- 20; 4:1-7; 6:3-5,20,21; 2 Timothy 2:14-18,23-26; 4:2-4; Titus 1:10-
16; 3:9-11.
This is not to say that Christians should never strive for anything.
We must earnestly contend for the true faith (Jude 3, etc.). Jesus and
His apostles were continually involved in controversy and conflict with
people in error. The meaning is that we must not strive and contend for
error or cause conflict over things that do not matter.
We can understand the meaning especially from the warnings in Ti-
tus 1:9-14. That context discussed people who taught things they should
not have taught and thereby subverted whole households. Specifically,
they were insubordinate (not submitting to the gospel teaching) and
taught commands of men who turn from the truth. They included those
of the circumcision (Jews) who taught Jewish fables.
This can be a problem in two specific ways. First, people can cause
contention by teaching false doctrine. For example, the Judaizers com-
monly caused strife by teaching that the old law is still in effect. They
insisted that all Christians, including Gentiles, must keep the Old Testa-
ment law, circumcision, etc. Paul had repeatedly opposed such as false
teaching. So, the passage here would teach us not to contend for such
errors, but to contend only for the truth.
Second, one may be guilty of causing strife and division over issues
that are irrelevant to people’s salvation. This would include the “geneal-
ogies” and similar aspects of the law as mentioned here. Jews claimed
genealogies and ancestry were very important (Matthew 3:9).
Such things had been important under the Old Testament. Priests,
for example, had to prove they were descendants of Aaron. But under
the New Testament, such matters are completely irrelevant since it no
longer matters whether one is Jew or Gentile, let alone a person’s tribe.
The gospel is for all, so no racial or national distinctions matter now. See
Galatians 3:28. Compare 1 Timothy 1:4 and 2 Timothy 2:23 (see both
contexts).
Such controversies should be avoided as irrelevant. Paul says they
are unprofitable and useless. But if people press them, then such people
must be dealt with as in verse 10.

3:10,11 – Reject a divisive man after a first and second
admonition, knowing that such a man is perverted and
sins, being self-condemned.
Divisive (a heretic)
Note the meaning of this word
“Divisive” (NKJV, LEB, MEB, HCSB) is translated “heretic” (KJV),
“factious” (ASV, NASB, MLB), one who “stirs up division” (ESV), “causes
divisions” (NRSV), “sectarian” (MLV).
The word is defined, “schismatic, factious, a follower of false doc-
trine” (Grimm-Wilke-Thayer). Vine says regarding “heresy”: “…an opin-
ion, especially a self-willed opinion, which is substituted for submission
to the power of truth, and leads to division and the formation of sects…”
Verse 9 shows that this refers to the kind of people Paul has dis-
cussed repeatedly in 1 and 2 Timothy and Titus: people who hold to hu-
man doctrines that differ from Scripture yet people press them to the
point of serious strife, contention, disputation, and even division among
God’s people. See 1 Timothy 1:3-7,18- 20; 4:1-7; 6:3-5,20,21; 2 Timothy
2:14-18,23-26; 4:2-4; Titus 1:10-16; 3:9-11. Note that four of these pas-
sages state or imply that such people should be chastised – 1 Timothy
1:20; 6:5 KJV; 2 Timothy 3:5; Titus 3:10.
Note other passages that use forms of the word for “heretic” (“di-
visive”).
In 2 Peter 2:1-3 false teachers are guilty of heresy. They lead many
to follow their destructive ways, exploiting them by deceptive words. So
false teaching constitutes “heresy.” And people who follow the false
teacher may be deceived and so may not realize they are in error.
In 1 Corinthians 11:19 Paul uses the word (“factions” – NKJV) to
refer to those who cause strife and division by perverting the worship or
work of the church. The context refers to bringing feasting into church
worship or church work. Instead, those who are hungry should eat at
home (apart from the work of the church – verses 22,34). So, perverting
the worship and work of the church is one form of heresy/faction.
Galatians 5:19-21 says those who are guilty of factions or heresy
commit a work of the flesh and will not inherit the kingdom of heaven.
A form of this word is also translated “sect” in Acts 5:17; 15:5;
24:5,14; 26:5; 28:22. So, anyone who leaves a faithful church of God’s
people and joins or starts a “sect” is, by definition, guilty of “heresy” or
divisiveness” as described in Titus 3:10.
So, people are guilty of “heresy” or “divisiveness” if they teach false
doctrine, including perverting the worship and work of the church, and
especially if they stir up strife and alienation in the church. This includes
people who separate themselves from a faithful church to go into error,
including if they – form or join a group that teaches and practices error.
And remember that those who follow such teachers share in their evil
deeds (2 John 9-11). All such people are described in Titus 3:10.

Some folks say that, if people leave a faithful church to go into error,
we should just let them go but take no disciplinary action. Perhaps their
departure from the faith leads them to no longer attend church meet-
ings, so they separate themselves physically as well as spiritually from
the congregation.
Or, because of their false views, such people may no longer claim to
be members of the congregation. They may even inform the church they
no longer want to be part of the group. They may join themselves to some
false group, whether a denomination or an apostate “church of Christ.”
Some say those folks have left us, so there is nothing we can do. “Just let
them go. God will take care of it, so just leave it between them and God.”
But the passage commands us to reject those who are divisive (her-
etics). As we have shown, division and heresy often involve people leav-
ing the church because of their error. This passage would include those
who physically leave the congregation because of their divisive false
views. Leaving to join a “sect” specifically fits the definition.
“Divisive” () – “…pert. to causing divisions, factious, divi-
sion-making…” – Bauer-Danker-Arndt-Gingrich.
“…2. schismatic, factious, a follower of false doctrine…” – Grimm-
Wilke-Thayer.
“…in Christianity it was used always for ‘adherent of a heresy’…” –
Theological Dictionary of the New Testament
Regarding the related noun:
“Heresy” () – “…1 a group that holds tenets distinctive
to it, sect, party, school, faction … w. negative connotation, dis-
sension, a faction … 2 that which distinguishes a group's thinking,
opinion, dogma …” – Bauer-Danker-Arndt-Gingrich.
“…2. …choosing, choice, 3. that which is chosen, a chosen
course of thought and action; hence one's chosen opinion, tenet;
according to the context, an opinion varying from the true exposi-
tion of the Christian faith (heresy) … 4. a body of men separating
themselves from others and following their own tenets (a sect or
party…) 5. dissensions arising from diversity of opinions and
aims…” – Grimm-Wilke-Thayer.
“… (a) ‘a choosing, choice’ …; then, ‘that which is chosen,’ and
hence, ‘an opinion,’ especially a self-willed opinion, which is sub-
stituted for submission to the power of truth, and leads to division
and the formation of sects …; such erroneous opinions are fre-
quently the outcome of personal preference or the prospect of ad-
vantage” – Vine
First and second admonition
Many passages show that Christians who are guilty of sin, including
false doctrine and causing division, should be rebuked or warned (ad-
monished) for their error.

Galatians 6:1 – If a man is overtaken in any trespass, you who are
spiritual restore such a one.
Ephesians 5:11 – And have no fellowship with the unfruitful works
of darkness, but rather expose (reprove) them.
1 Thessalonians 5:14 – Warn those who are unruly.
1 Timothy 1:3 – Charge some that they teach no other doc-
trine.
2 Timothy 4:1-5 – We must preach the word and rebuke error, be-
cause some will not endure sound doctrine. They will turn away from the
truth and turn aside to fables and heap up teachers that will preach ac-
cording to their own desires.
Titus 1:13,14 – Elders should give sharp rebukes so people may
be sound in the faith, not giving heed to fables and commands of men
who turn from the faith.
Hebrews 3:13,14 – Exhort one another lest we be hardened by
the deceit of sin. We partake of Christ if we hold our confidence steadfast
to the end.
James 5:19,20 – If anyone wanders from the truth, and someone
turns him back, he turns a sinner from the error of his way and
saves a soul from death.
Jude 1:3 – Contend earnestly for the faith which was once for
all delivered to the saints.
Revelation 3:19 – As many as I love, I rebuke and chasten.
Therefore be zealous and repent.
1 Timothy 5:20 – When sin is known in the congregation, a private
rebuke is inadequate and does not fulfill the requirements of Scripture.
Public rebuke is necessary, so other people will hear and fear.
“First and second” does not mean exactly two admonitions, just as
Jesus’ statement to forgive seventy times seven does not mean exactly
four hundred ninety. It says “after a first and second admonition”: that
would mean at least two. But how much time is spent will depend on the
person’s attitude.
This teaches as follows: (1) The man must be rebuked. We must not
ignore the problems he is causing but must teach him his error. Nor do
we just reject him without giving him the opportunity to learn the truth.
(2) He should be given more than just one opportunity to learn. We
should be patient and continue teaching as long as he shows a teachable
attitude. (3) The teaching opportunity does not continue without limit
but must reach a conclusion where he repents or is disciplined when it
is clear he will not repent.
The final form of discipline is taken only when it is clear that the
preliminary steps will not work. We disassociate only from sinners who
have demonstrated they are stubbornly rebellious and impenitent.

Reject
If, however, rebuking people for sin does not lead them to repent-
ance, we must move on to action that gives them chastisement or a pen-
alty for their conduct. We must “reject” them. This is translated “reject”
(NKJV, KJV, NASB, LEB, MEV, HCSB), “refuse” (ASV) or “have nothing
more to do with him” (ESV, MLB, NRSV), “renounce” (MLV), or “shun,
avoid” (Grimm-Wilke-Thayer).
The meaning is the same as in all the other passages about church
discipline (see below). The church must make clear to the sinner and to
all members that the person is in sin, and that all members must disas-
sociate themselves from him spiritually and socially.
Many other passages teach that we must discipline those who go
into error. The passages that are especially similar to this one are Ro-
mans 16:17 and 1 Timothy 1:3-11,19,20, both of which deal with false
teaching, causing division, and causing occasions of stumbling. See also
1 Corinthians 5; 2 Thessalonians 3:6,14,15; Matthew 18:15-17; Romans
16:17,18; 2 Corinthians 2:6-11; 2 John 9-11; Hebrews 12:15; 1 Corinthians
15:33.
Why should we do these things?
(1) To obey God’s command. A church that allows a member to stray
from the faith and does not rebuke him is a church that has disobeyed
God’s command.
(2) To urge the sinner to repent. Rebuking sin is not an act of hatred
or ill will. Rather, it is done to save the sinner’s soul. Those who object
to such rebuke are the ones who are not showing proper love for the sin-
ner.
(3) To maintain the purity of the church and warn the members so
they will “hear and fear” and will not imitate the sinner. When a church
will not rebuke and discipline known sin in the congregation, it is simply
asking for sin to increase!
(4) To maintain the good reputation of the church.
“Reject” () – “…b decline, refuse, avoid, reject …α. w.
acc. of pers. reject, refuse someone or refuse to do someth. to someone
… β.w. acc. of thing reject, avoid …” – Bauer-Danker-Arndt-Gingrich.
“…b. equivalent to to refuse, decline … c. equivalent to to shun,
avoid…” – Grimm-Wilke-Thayer.
Such a person is warped and sinning, being self-con-
demned.
This is God’s inspired description of the people mentioned in verses
9,10. In His view, they are warped, they sin, and they are self-con-
demned.
“Warped” (NKJV, ESV) is translated “subverted” (KJV) or “per-
verted” (ASV, NASB, LEB, MEV, MLB, NRSV, HCSB, MLV). This means

that their beliefs and conduct do not harmonize with God’s will but fol-
low a perverted standard of right and wrong.
“Self-condemned” is translated similarly in all our standard trans-
lations. This does not necessarily mean the person admits they are
wrong, but they are condemned because of their own conduct. It is not
the decree of the church nor the opinions of others that makes them
stand condemned; rather, they stand condemned because of what they
themselves have done. They are responsible for their conduct and cannot
shift the blame to others.
Note that, by chastising the sinner, the church does not place them
into a condemned state. The conduct described here is sinful of itself. So
those who participate in it are already warped or perverted and stand
condemned by their own conduct. The church simply recognizes their
condition, affirms the truth about their conduct, and chastises them ac-
cordingly.
“Warped” () – “to cause to turn aside from what is con-
sidered true or morally proper, turn aside, pervert…” – Bauer-Danker-
Arndt-Gingrich.
“…1. to turn or twist out, tear up … 2. to turn inside out, invert; trop-
ically, to change for the worse, pervert, corrupt…” – Grimm-Wilke-
Thayer.
3:12-15 – Concluding Thoughts
3:12,13 – When Paul would send Artemas or Tychicus to him,
Titus should diligently come to him at Nicopolis, where
he had decided to spend the winter. He should set
forward Zenas and Apollos on their journey so they
would have no lack.
As he usually does in his letters, Paul closes with personal thoughts
regarding various people.
Meeting at Nicopolis
Paul hoped to send Artemas or Tychicus to Titus. When the man
arrived, Paul wanted Titus to go to meet him at Nicopolis, where Paul
hoped to spend the winter.
Artemas is mentioned nowhere else in Scripture, so nothing else is
known about him.
Tychicus was one of the messengers of the churches in Acts 20:4,
who carried funds to help the needy saints in Jerusalem. He was also one
of Paul’s traveling companions, whom Paul often used as a messenger
(Ephesians 6:21; Colossians 4:7; 2 Timothy 4:12).
There were at least two cities named Nicopolis at that time. One was
in western Greece across the Aegean from Italy (see a map). Another
was in Asia, but far to the east. Most likely Paul here refers to the one in
Greece.

If it is correct that Paul wrote this letter from prison in Rome, he
apparently had confidence that he would be released. He hoped to travel
some distance from Rome and meet Titus in Nicopolis to spend the win-
ter there.
Sending Zenas and Apollos
Paul also urged Titus to make haste to send Zenas the lawyer and
Apollos on their journey.
Nothing more is known about Zenas.
Apollos was a zealous, eloquent man, who had been corrected by
Aquila and Priscilla in Ephesus (Acts 18:24ff). He later preached in Cor-
inth (Acts 18:27-19:1) and is mentioned several times in 1 Corinthians.
The account does not say exactly where Zenas and Apollos were to
go. Perhaps Paul wanted them to come to him for some reason.
When men, such as preachers, traveled for the cause of Christ,
Christians and churches along the way provided for their needs (3 John
5-8). This was often done for Paul and his traveling companions. Titus
was to be sure this was done for these men, so they could accomplish
their journey hastily.
3:14,15 – Our people should learn to maintain good works for
necessary uses so that they would not be unfruitful. All
who were with Paul sent greetings to Titus and requested
that he give greetings to those with him.
One final time Paul urges the need for Christians to maintain good
works (see 2:14; 3:1,8). Clearly this was an important part of Paul’s mes-
sage to Titus and therefore of the message Titus should preach to Chris-
tians.
Good works keep us from being unfruitful – i.e., they make us fruit-
ful. Then as now, trees were planted in orchards to produce fruit. A tree
without fruit was useless and would be cut down. So Jesus saved us, not
simply so we can enjoy salvation, but so we will work for Him. The work
we do is like the fruit produced by the trees. Without it, we are worthless
to the Lord and will be destroyed (compare John 15:1-10).
Furthermore, work leads to urgent needs being met. I am not sure
whether or not Paul here referred to any specific needs. In the physical
realm, people must work else they should not eat (2 Thessalonians 3:10).
Likewise, in the spiritual realm, we must work for the Lord in order to
please Him and receive eternal life (1 Corinthians 15:58).
Also, our financial contributions help provide for preachers and for
needy members. Our work of teaching helps souls learn the truth and be
saved. God expects us to be active workers.
Paul closes, as he usually does, by sending greetings from those with
him to the one addressed in the letter. And he sends his greetings to oth-
ers who are with Titus. These he describes as the ones who love him in
the faith.

Finally, he prays for God’s grace to continue to be with Titus and
those with him. In this way Paul closed the letter in his typical way, even
as he had opened it (1:4)

Addenda Regarding
Elders’ Family
Qualifications
List of Passages Using the Word

“Faithful”
Below is a list of every New Testament passage that describes peo-

ple using the Greek word that is translated “faithful” () in Titus
1:6 (KJV). The word is sometimes translated “believing” (or some form
of that word). (I have not listed the many instances in which the word is
used to refer to the faithfulness of God, Christ, or God’s Word.) This
word is an adjective, and there is a related verb (believe) and a related
noun (faith), but these may not always mean the same as the adjective.
Matthew 24:45 Who then is a faithful and wise servant, whom his
lord hath made ruler over his household, to give them meat in due sea-
son?
Matthew 25:21 His lord said unto him, Well done, [thou] good and
faithful servant: thou hast been faithful over a few things, I will make
thee ruler over many things: enter thou into the joy of thy lord.
Matthew 25:23 His lord said unto him, Well done, good and faithful
servant; thou hast been faithful over a few things, I will make thee ruler
over many things: enter thou into the joy of thy lord.
Luke 12:42 And the Lord said, Who then is that faithful and wise
steward, whom [his] lord shall make ruler over his household, to give
[them their] portion of meat in due season?
Luke 16:10 He that is faithful in that which is least is faithful also in
much: and he that is unjust in the least is unjust also in much.
Luke 16:11 If therefore ye have not been faithful in the unrighteous
mammon, who will commit to your trust the true [riches]?
Luke 16:12 And if ye have not been faithful in that which is another
man’s, who shall give you that which is your own?
Luke 19:17 And he said unto him, Well, thou good servant: because
thou hast been faithful in a very little, have thou authority over ten cities.

John 20:27 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.
Acts 10:45 And they of the circumcision which believed were aston-
ished, as many as came with Peter, because that on the Gentiles also was
poured out the gift of the Holy Ghost.
Acts 16:1 Then came he to Derbe and Lystra: and, behold, a certain
disciple was there, named Timotheus, the son of a certain woman, which
was a Jewess, and believed; but his father [was] a Greek:
Acts 16:15 And when she was baptized, and her household, she be-
sought [us], saying, If ye have judged me to be faithful to the Lord, come
into my house, and abide [there]. And she constrained us.
1 Corinthians 4:2 Moreover it is required in stewards, that a man be
… faithful.
1 Corinthians 4:17 For this cause have I sent unto you Timotheus,
who is my beloved son, and faithful in the Lord, who shall bring you into
remembrance of my ways which be in Christ, as I teach every where in
every church.
1 Corinthians 7:25 Now concerning virgins I have no commandment
of the Lord: yet I give my judgment, as one that hath obtained mercy of
the Lord to be faithful.
2 Corinthians 6:15 And what concord hath Christ with Belial? or
what part hath he that believeth with an infidel?
Galatians 3:9 … they which be of faith are blessed with faithful Abra-
ham.
Ephesians 1:1 Paul, an apostle of Jesus Christ by the will of God, to
the saints which are at Ephesus, and to the faithful in Christ Jesus:
Colossians 1:2 To the saints and faithful brethren in Christ which
are at Colossians: Grace [be] unto you, and peace, from God our Father
and the Lord Jesus Christ.
Colossians 1:7 As ye also learned of Epaphras our dear fellows-
ervant, who is for you a faithful minister of Christ;
Colossians 4:7 All my state shall Tychicus declare unto you, [who is]
a beloved brother, and a faithful minister and fellowservant in the Lord:
Colossians 4:9 With Onesimus, a faithful and beloved brother, who
is [one] of you. They shall make known unto you all things which [are
done] here.
1 Timothy 1:12 And I thank Christ Jesus our Lord, who hath enabled
me, for that he counted me faithful, putting me into the ministry;
1 Timothy 3:11 Even so [must their] wives [be] grave, not slanderers,
sober, faithful in all things.
1 Timothy 4:3 Forbidding to marry, [and commanding] to abstain
from meats, which God hath created to be received with thanksgiving of
them which believe and know the truth.

1 Timothy 4:10 For therefore we both labour and suffer reproach,
because we trust in the living God, who is the Saviour of all men, spe-
cially of those that believe.
1 Timothy 4:12 Let no man despise thy youth; but be thou an exam-
ple of the believers, in word, in conversation, in charity, in spirit, in faith,
in purity.
1 Timothy 5:16 If any man or woman that believeth have widows, let
them relieve them, and let not the church be charged; that it may relieve
them that are widows indeed.
1 Timothy 6:2 And they that have believing masters, let them not
despise [them], because they are brethren; but rather do [them] service,
because they are faithful and beloved, partakers of the benefit. These
things teach and exhort.
2 Timothy 2:2 And the things that thou hast heard of me among
many witnesses, the same commit thou to faithful men, who shall be able
to teach others also.
Titus 1:6 If any be blameless, the husband of one wife, having faith-
ful children not accused of riot or unruly.
Hebrews 3:2 Who was faithful to him that appointed him, as also
Moses [was faithful] in all his house.
Hebrews 3:5 And Moses verily [was] faithful in all his house, as a
servant, for a testimony of those things which were to be spoken after;
1 Peter 5:12 By Silvanus, a faithful brother unto you, as I suppose, I
have written briefly, exhorting, and testifying that this is the true grace
of God wherein ye stand.
3 John 1:5 Beloved, thou doest faithfully whatsoever thou doest to
the brethren, and to strangers;
Revelation 2:10 Fear none of those things which thou shalt suffer:
behold, the devil shall cast [some] of you into prison, that ye may be
tried; and ye shall have tribulation ten days: be thou faithful unto death,
and I will give thee a crown of life.
Revelation 2:13 I know thy works, and where thou dwellest, [even]
where Satan’s seat [is]: and thou holdest fast my name, and hast not de-
nied my faith, even in those days wherein Antipas [was] my faithful mar-
tyr, who was slain among you, where Satan dwelleth.
Revelation 17:14 These shall make war with the Lamb, and the
Lamb shall overcome them: for he is Lord of lords, and King of kings:
and they that are with him [are] called, and chosen, and faithful.
Note that all cases involve faithfulness to God. The only possible ex-
ception is that some of the parables involve faithfulness to an earthly
master, but the point of even these cases is to teach us to be faithful to
God.

Only One Child
If a man has only one child and the child is a Christian, does he
qualify, or must he have more than one child? Does the plural “children”
include the singular “child”?
This is a difficult question, but that does not weaken our conclu-
sions regarding other positions we have discussed. It is possible to con-
clusively prove some points even though we are uncertain about others.
Sometimes we can only say, “I know what would be safe, and I know
what I believe I should do, even if I can’t conclusively prove everyone
else must do the same.”
Evidence in Favor of Plural Children
(1) Both passages regarding an elder’s children say each “man” (sin-
gular) must be a “husband” (singular) having “children” (plural) – 1 Tim-
othy 3:4; Titus 1:6. The normal, natural meaning of such language is that
each elder must have more than one child. We should view Bible terms
as having their normal meaning unless some conclusive evidence proves
otherwise.
(2) Regarding the plurality of elders in each church, we argued that
the passages say each “church” (singular) must have “elders” (plural).
We concluded that a congregation with just one elder would be unscrip-
tural. Why not reason the same with each elder and his children (plural)?
If we conclude that a man with only one child can fit the qualifica-
tion of “children,” have we not significantly weakened our argument that
every congregation should have more than one elder? How do we re-
spond to someone who would say that a church may have just one elder
in the same way that an elder may have just one child?
(3) The purpose of considering the children is to see if the man has
proved his ability as a leader and teacher (1 Timothy 3:4,5). Since chil-
dren are different, having several children proves a man can lead differ-
ent kinds of people. (This point involves an element of human reasoning,
whereas the previous points are strictly based on the text.)
Evidence Offered for Only One Child
Several efforts are made to try to demonstrate that the plural “chil-
dren” has a broad enough usage to include a man who has only one child.
Weak or faulty arguments
Frequently people make weak or faulty arguments by suggesting ex-
amples that are not really parallel to the language in the qualifications of
elders. Here are examples.

Plural children with plural parents
Sometimes people cite examples in which “children” plural would
include a parent with one child. But in many such cases the fathers or
parents are also plural. Some examples include:
Ephesians 6:1 – Children, obey your parents in the Lord, for this is
right.
1 Timothy 3:12 – Let deacons be the husbands of one wife, ruling
their children and their own houses well. (See also 1 Corinthians 7:14.)
Some people say these passages would include parents who have
only one child. But the parents are plural; so if each one had only one
child, the result would obviously be plural children. Such language is not
parallel to the qualifications of elders which require each man (singu-
lar) to have “children” (plural), like each church (singular) is re-
quired to have elders (plural).
The very context of 1 Timothy 3 illustrates the point. Verses 10,11
say that “deacons” (plural) have “wives” (plural) and houses (plural), yet
we know each man has only one wife and one house. The same would
apply to the deacons’ children, which shows that a man with only one
child would qualify as deacon. The result would be deacons (plural) with
children (plural).
Language that differs from the language used for the elder’s chil-
dren is faulty evidence.
Negative of “children”
People sometimes suggest that passages referring to “no children”
would include a man who has no child (singular). The common example
is:
Matthew 22:24 – Moses said that if a man dies, having no children,
his brother shall marry his wife and raise up offspring for his brother.
See the parallels in Mark 12:19; Luke 20:28-31.
The mistake here is that the negative “no children” would naturally
be equivalent to “no child.” To say that a man has “no children” is the
same as saying that he has “zero children” which is equivalent to no
child.
Furthermore, this argument is based on a statement made by the
Sadducees who were defending false doctrine. Should our defense of
truth be based on statements made by false teachers? But the Old Testa-
ment passage which these teachers cited uses different language.
Deuteronomy 25:5 – If brothers dwell together, and one of them
dies and has no son, the widow of the dead man … (etc.)
The language of inspired Scripture says a man has “no son.” The
Pharisees did not properly cite the passage. This language is not parallel
to one man being required to have “children” (plural) as used in the qual-
ifications of elders.

Compound verbs
Some examples used to claim that plural “children” includes the sin-
gular are really compound words that are neither singular nor plural.
Examples are:
1 Timothy 5:10 – well reported for good works: if she has brought
up children …
1 Timothy 5:14 – Therefore I desire that the younger widows marry,
bear children…
Some claim these cases would apply whether a woman had one child
or more than one. But the original word in each case differs from the
word used for “children” in the qualifications of elders. They are com-
pound words that are neither singular nor plural. In fact, the words are
verbs which means they agree in number with the subject of the sen-
tence, so they tell nothing about the number of offspring involved.
(1 Timothy 2:15 uses a compound noun generally translated
“childbearing” but occasionally “bearing of children.” This illustrates
that the original significance is neither singular nor plural.)
Genesis 21:7
After years of barrenness, Sarah gave birth to Isaac and then she
said, “Who would have said to Abraham that Sarah would nurse chil-
dren? For I have borne him a son in his old age.”
Sarah gave birth to a son (singular) but said that she nursed “chil-
dren” (plural), so some say the plural here stands for the singular. This
argument may be more convincing than the previous ones, but there are
still several weaknesses.
* The Septuagint Greek translation has “child” (singular).
* Since Isaac was the son through which God would fulfill His prom-
ise regarding Abraham’s future generations, Sarah may have referred,
not just to Isaac, but to the subsequent “children” that would be born
through him. So, in nursing Isaac, she was in effect nursing future gen-
erations (children). This would be similar to Hebrews 7:9,10 where,
when Abraham paid tithes to Melchizedek, his descendants the Levites
are said to have paid tithes to Melchizedek.
* Women who gave birth to a child would sometimes then nurse
other women’s children as well as their own. And caring for other peo-
ple’s children is sometimes referred to as nursing them. See Exodus 2:7-
9; compare Ruth 4:16. So Sarah may have meant that, having given birth
to her own child, she was now able to serve as a nurse for children (plu-
ral).
In any case, this is likely an unusual use of the language. To use it
to establish the usual meaning of the language seems weak evidence. Ra-
ther, it would make better sense to use the normal meaning of the word
when considering the qualifications of officers.

Evidence that is more convincing
However, there are other passages where the use of a plural word
would more convincingly include the singular. Consider these cases:
1 Timothy 5:4 – If any widow (singular) has “children” (plural) they
should relieve her. As far as I can tell, this language is grammatically
parallel to 1 Timothy 3:4 and Titus 1:6. But if she has only one child, is
that child not obligated to relieve the widowed mother? Surely everyone
should agree the plural here includes the singular.
Mark 10:29 – Jesus said, “Assuredly, I say to you, there is no one
who has left house or brothers or sisters or father or mother or wife or
children or lands, for My sake and the gospel's …” (See the parallel in
Luke 18:29 and the similar usage in Luke 14:26)
Here one person (singular) is blessed for having left house or father
or mother or wife (singular) or brothers or sisters or children or lands
(plural) for the sake of Christ. But would a person not likewise be blessed
for having left only one child or one brother or one sister or one land?
Here are several plural words, including the word “children,” used to in-
clude the singular.
1 Timothy 5:16 – If any believing man or woman has widows, let
them relieve them, and do not let the church be burdened, that it may
relieve those who are really widows. Here a man or woman (singular)
who has “widows” (plural) should relieve them. (And likewise, the sin-
gular church relieves plural “widows.”) But surely this would include a
man or woman (or church) who should relieve just one widow, so here
the plural “widows” includes the singular.
Romans 16:17 – …note those who cause divisions and offenses, con-
trary to the doctrine which you learned, and avoid them. What if only
one man causes division, etc. Does the passage still apply? Doesn’t the
plural include the singular?
Titus 3:9 – But avoid foolish controversies and genealogies and
strivings and disputes about the Law, for they are unprofitable and
worthless. What if it is just one controversy or dispute? The plural in-
cludes the singular.
These examples show that the plural can sometimes include the sin-
gular, including contexts similar to the qualifications of elders. However,
proving that a word can mean something is not the same as proving that
it does mean that in every instance or in a given context. Though excep-
tions may exist, the plural “children” generally means more than one. Is
there sufficient evidence to conclude that the plural does include the sin-
gular in the qualifications of elders?
See the quotation below from Bullinger.
Appointing elders who have a plurality of believing children is safe
and unquestionable. But let no one force a view to the dividing of a con-
gregation (either way) unless he can conclusively prove his view.

Bullinger on synecdoche:
“13. The Plural Number is put for the singular
“…As when Sarah said: ‘Sarah should have given children suck?’
Here, though the plural is used, it is used of her only son: as she goes on
to say: ‘for I have born him a son in his old age.’ Gen. 21:7.
“Gen. 46:7.— ‘His daughters’: i.e., his one daughter ‘Dinah.’ See
verses 15, 17. [other similar examples given regarding sons] …
“2 Chron. 24:25.— ‘For the blood of the sons of Jehoiada the priest’:
i.e., Zechariah his son. See verses 20, 21.
“Mark 1:2. John 6:45. Acts 7:42.—The word ‘prophets’ is put for the
singular, because in only one prophet is the prophecy ‘written’ (Mal.
3:1). …”
Child Who Falls Away after Leaving

Home
What if a man’s children were faithful Christians, but one or more

fell away after leaving home? Is he qualified?
Some assume that “faithful” in Titus 1:6 means only when the child
is still in the man’s house like 1 Timothy 3:4,5. Children who fall away
after leaving home do not affect a man’s qualifications because they are
not under his authority. (Some compare this to a member who moves to
another congregation; if he then becomes unfaithful, this is not the re-
sponsibility of the elders of the previous congregation.)
Would we appoint a man whose child fell away after leaving
home?
If a man’s child falls away while he is serving as an elder, some say
he may continue to serve. But if such a man was being considered for
appointment to the eldership, they would oppose his appointment. This
is inconsistent. If an unfaithful child means a man is not qualified to be
appointed, then it still means he is unqualified if it happens after he
has been appointed, so he should resign.
What if one or more children become faithful after leaving
home?
If a father’s qualifications are not affected by a child who becomes
unfaithful after leaving home, to be consistent we must conclude that
his qualifications are not affected by a child who becomes faithful after
leaving home. The faithfulness or unfaithfulness of a child after it leaves
home either affects the father’s qualifications or it does not. We cannot
have it both ways.

If a father is not responsible for the conduct of his children after
they leave home, then his qualification must be entirely determined on
the conduct of the children while they are at home. By this reasoning, all
the children must be baptized and faithful before leaving home. If one or
more becomes faithful after they leave home, the father would still be
unqualified. Yet I know of no one who will accept this consequence.
This demonstrates that people understand that the conduct of a
child after he leaves home does reflect on the training given by the fa-
ther.
What if all a man’s children fall away after leaving home?
The conduct of grown children either affects their father’s qualifica-
tion for the eldership or it does not. If their conduct does not affect his
qualification, then all his children could fall away and he would still be
qualified. Likewise, if all a man’s children become faithful after leaving
home, he would still be unqualified.
The result would be that a man who has zero faithful children could
qualify (because they fell away after leaving home), but a man whose
children are all faithful is not qualified (because they became faithful
after leaving home)!
Is this really what the qualifications require?
Titus 1:6 requires that children not only be faithful but also
not accused of riot or unruly.
“Not accused of riot or unruly” gives additional information to
“faithful children.” Is a man’s qualification as an elder really not affected
by the fact one or more children become guilty of riot or unruly after they
left home? What if one or more grown children become guilty of drug
addiction, prostitution, stealing, or even murder?
Yet if we agree that such conduct would affect the qualification of
the father, then are we not agreeing that the conduct of his children after
they leave home does affect his qualification?
Titus 1:6 gives additional information to 1 Timothy 3:4,5.
There is no reason to limit it to while the children are at
home.
We agree that 1 Timothy 3:4 is talking about children while still un-
der the father’s rule. But Titus 1:6 gives new information not given in 1
Timothy 3.
If all we had was 1 Timothy 3, we would not know the children must
be faithful Christians. Submission to the father would be sufficient.
But we know the children must be Christians because Titus 1:6 gives ad-
ditional information to that given in 1 Timothy 3:4. This shows that
Titus 1 is adding new material not found in 1 Timothy 3.
But the material Titus adds is not restricted to the time when the
children are living in the elder's household. It simply says the children

must be faithful, not accused of riot or unruly. This additional infor-
mation is nowhere in that passage limited to while the child is
at home. To limit it when God does not is to add man-made limits on
what God says.
To illustrate, 1 Timothy 3 requires an elder to be "apt to teach." But
Titus 1 adds that he must be "able to convict the gainsayer." Convicting
the gainsayer requires additional teaching ability beyond “apt to teach,”
just as "faithful children" requires additional evidence regarding train-
ing children beyond having children in subjection at home.
Many other examples can be given of passages of Scripture that pro-
vide information in addition to what is provided in other passages. For
example, 2 Corinthians 9:6,7 says we should give cheerfully, not grudg-
ingly. But 1 Corinthians 16:1,2 adds that we must do this on the first day
of the week. One passage adds information not found in the other.
We likewise use this approach when we study becoming a Christian,
worshiping God, church organization and work, etc. No one passage
gives all the information we need about how to become a Christian or
about how to worship God or about church organization. So we properly
take what is found in the various Scriptures on the subject and put it
together.
Likewise, in addition to 1 Timothy 3, Titus 1:6 adds that children
must be faithful, not accused of riot or unruly. But this requirement is
nowhere restricted to while the children are still at home.
Proverbs 22:6 and other passages show that the life of a child
after he leaves home continues to reflect the father’s
training.
To say the elder may continue to serve when he has an unfaithful
child ignores the teaching of Proverbs 22:6 and similar passages. It may
be true that Proverbs 22:6 has exceptions, but it surely does state a gen-
eral rule. The rule is that proper training at home will cause a child to
live as he should when he is old.
If we say that the conduct of a man’s children after they leave home
has no effect on his qualification as an elder, then we contradict the Bible
teaching that the child’s life after he leaves home does reflect his home
training. In fact, the greatest proof of parents’ work comes af-
ter the children leave home!
Elders watch for members as long as they are part of their flock (1
Peter 5:1-3). If a member leaves to become a member elsewhere, the el-
ders of the previous congregation, as elders, have no obligation to that
member at all. The member is now part of a different flock and is obli-
gated to different shepherds.
But when children leave home, the parent-child relationship con-
tinues, and obligations continue, though in a somewhat different way.
The child does not become subject to a different set of parents, like the
member who moves away now submits to different elders.

The child still has the same parents he always had, and he is still
obligated to honor and respect them as his parents (Ephesians 6:2).
Parents continue to be obligated to teach and warn him as their child.
So, the father continues to have a significant influence on the life of the
child, both because of his past teaching and because of his continued
teaching.
If a man has some faithful children and one or more
unfaithful, does he qualify?
If a man has some faithful children but one or more are unfaithful,
some folks approach the subject this way: If someone asks, “Does he
have faithful children?” the answer is “yes” because some of them are
faithful. So, he meets the requirement and may serve as elder. But con-
sider:
To say the man has faithful children is only a partial truth.
The requirements for the eldership require the whole truth.
Casual conversation sometimes may not require complete infor-
mation. But when we are considering requirements for the most im-
portant leadership role in the church, we need complete information and
complete truth, not partial truth.
To illustrate, suppose a man has two children with black hair and
one child with red hair. In a casual backyard conversation, a neighbor
may ask, “Do you have children with black hair?” To answer “yes” may
not be unreasonable since a technically complete answer may not be ex-
pected (though even in this case Christians may feel responsible to men-
tion the red-head).
But suppose the same man is on the witness stand in a court trial
and someone’s guilt or innocence depends on his testimony. Then the
judge asks, “Do you have children with black hair?” In this case, the an-
swer requires the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth. An
answer of “yes” is only partial truth. He has black-haired children but he
also has a red-haired child, and complete truth requires him to say so.
In the same way, deciding a man’s fitness for the eldership requires
complete truth, not partial truth. If a man has one or more unfaithful
children, to say he meets the requirement of having faithful children
would not be the whole truth.
When considering qualifications for a job, especially one with seri-
ous responsibilities, a candidate must completely meet the require-
ments, not just partially meet them. Consider another illustration.
Suppose a man is interviewing for a job as a pilot for a major airline.
He is asked, “Have you flown passenger airplanes safely?” In truth he
has flown several flights safely, but he also completely wrecked one
plane. If he simply answers “yes,” has he given a truthful answer consid-
ering the intent of the question?

Consider examples showing that the language of the re-
quirement implies all the children should be faithful.
We have listed earlier a number of examples. Let us repeat them
and add others.
1 Timothy 5:10 – A widow indeed, to be cared for by the church,
must be one who “has brought up children.” Of the children that she had,
how many must she have brought up: some or all?
Ephesians 6:4 – Fathers should bring their children up in the train-
ing and admonition of the Lord. How many of his children must a father
bring up in order to meet the requirement: some or all?
Deuteronomy 1:16 – Moses commanded the judges to judge right-
eously between their brethren and not show partiality. How many of the
cases between their brethren should they judge righteously without par-
tiality: some or all? If they judged some righteously but not all, would
they be obeying the command?
Now consider examples that specifically use the word for faithful or
believing:
Titus 1:9 – To serve as elder one must be “holding fast the faithful
word as he has been taught.” How much of the faithful word must he
hold fast in order to qualify? If he holds fast to two thirds of it but not
the other third, does he meet the requirement?
Galatians 3:9 – Those who are of faith are blessed with faithful
Abraham. According to the verse, how many people of faith are blessed
with Abraham: all of them or just some of them?
Ephesians 1:1; Colossians 1:2 – Paul wrote to the faithful in Christ
Jesus. How many of the faithful did he intend to address: all of them or
just some of them?
1 Timothy 4:3 – Forbidding to marry, and commanding to abstain
from meats, which God hath created to be received with thanksgiving of
them which believe and know the truth. Did God create these things to
be received with thanksgiving by all those who believe the truth or just
some of them?
1 Timothy 5:16 – If any believing man or woman has widows, let
them relieve them, and do not let the church be burdened, that it may
relieve those who are really widows. Of the widows that a believer has,
how many must he/she relieve: some or all? Of the widows that are really
widows, how many should the church relieve: some or all?
Revelation 2:10 – Be thou faithful unto death, and I will give thee a
crown of life. How many of the saints in Smyrna was the Lord instructing
to be faithful: all of them are just some of them? How many of the faithful
would receive the crown of life: all of them or just some of them?
Revelation 17:14 – Those who are with the Lamb are called, and cho-
sen, and faithful. How many of those with the lamb were faithful: all of
them are just some of them?

Titus 1:6 – …if a man is … having faithful children not accused of
dissipation or insubordination. In light of these numerous other exam-
ples, especially using the word for faithful, how many of the man’s chil-
dren should be faithful: all of them or just some of them? If we say a man
has faithful children when some of his children are unfaithful, have we
told the whole truth or just a partial truth?
In these cases, the word “all” may not be specifically mentioned but
it is clearly implied by the context and the intent of the passage. Like-
wise, the intent of Titus 1:6 implies that all a man’s children must be
faithful in order to qualify.
Does 1 Timothy 3:11 require all the wives to be faithful?
Titus 1:6 requires that a man be “having faithful children not ac-
cused of dissipation or insubordination.”
1 Timothy 3:11 requires that the wives must be “faithful in all
things.” (The word “their” was added by translators).
If Titus 1:6 does not require that all a man’s children be faithful,
then by the same reasoning 1 Timothy 3:11 would not require that all the
elders’ wives be faithful. If Titus 1:6 means a man can qualify when some
of his children are faithful even if some have fallen away, then by the
same reasoning 1 Timothy 3:11 would mean that an eldership is accepta-
ble as long as some of the wives are faithful even if some are unfaithful.
The end result of such reasoning is that a church may have an elder-
ship in which the elders have some children that have completely fallen
away from the faith and some of the wives are unfaithful provided that
the church makes the decision (based purely on human judgment) that
each one is really a good man but the unruly family members are not his
fault.
On the other hand, if we accept the clear implication of 1 Timothy
3:11 that all the wives should be faithful, even though the word “all” is
not used, then by the same reasoning we should understand that Titus
1:6 means all an elder’s children should be faithful Christians.
Does 1 Timothy 3:4 require all the children at home to be
in subjection?
Titus 1:6 requires that a man be “having faithful children not ac-
cused of dissipation or insubordination.”
1 Timothy 3:4 requires one who rules his own house well, having
children who are in submission with all reverence. (The word “his” chil-
dren was added by the translators.)
If Titus 1:6 does not require that all a man’s children be faithful,
then by the same reasoning 1 Timothy 3:4 would not require that all his
children be in submission even while at home. If Titus 1:6 means a man
can qualify when some of his children are faithful even if some have
fallen away, then by the same reasoning 1 Timothy 3:4 would mean that

a man can qualify as long as some of his children at home are in submis-
sion even if some are rebellious and unruly.
The end result of such reasoning is that a church may have an elder-
ship in which the elders have some children that have completely fallen
away from the faith, some that never did become Christians at all, or
even some children at home who are unruly and rebellious, as long as
each man has two or more children who are faithful Christians and pro-
vided that the church makes the decision (based purely on human judg-
ment) that each one is really a good man but the unruly children are not
his fault.
On the other hand, if we accept the clear implication of 1 Timothy
3:4 that all the man’s children at home should be in submission, even
though the word “all” is not used, then by the same reasoning we should
understand that Titus 1:6 means all his children should be faithful Chris-
tians.
“Not accused of dissipation or insubordination” empha-
sizes that the man has no unruly children.
This expression adds something to the requirement. It is not just
another way of saying the same thing. The effect is to specifically elimi-
nate the case where a man has a child guilty of dissipation or insubordi-
nation. Consider again our earlier examples:
Consider the man with two children with black hair and one with
red. Suppose someone asks, “Do you have children with black hair, no
red-heads?” This question is more specific than simply, “Do you have
children with black hair?” The requirement of no red hair specifically
eliminates a redhaired child. To answer “yes” in this case would be an
outright falsehood.
Suppose the man applying for the job as pilot is asked, “Have you
flown passenger airplanes safely and no wrecks?” This is more specific
than just, “Have you flown passenger airplanes safely?” He is specifically
being required to have had no wrecks. Now if he answers “yes,” he has
flat out lied.
Likewise, the requirement “having faithful children not accused of
dissipation or insubordination” requires more than just having some
children who are faithful. The wording requires that none of the man’s
children be guilty of dissipation or insubordination. This gives addi-
tional information showing that it is not enough to just have some chil-
dren who are faithful: all must be faithful and none accused of dissipa-
tion or insubordination.

God Has Unfaithful Children
Some claim that God has children who become unfaithful (Isaiah
1:2; Genesis 3; the nation of Israel; Judas Iscariot, etc.). But God is not
disqualified from being God just because one of His children falls away.
Should we require elders to do a better job than God does? So, some
claim that an elder may continue to serve if his child becomes unfaithful.
It is dangerous to use an illustration to prove a point when
the Bible nowhere uses the illustration that way.
No illustration is completely parallel. Many errors have been taught
by using Bible illustrations in ways that the Bible never uses them.
Although God is sometimes compared to a father, yet there are
many differences between the role of earthly fathers and the role of God.
Where does the Bible say the elders may have unfaithful children since
God does? Where does the Bible say God must have faithful children in
order to serve as God?
If every man on earth became unfaithful, God would still be
God – Romans 3:4.
At times most or nearly all of God’s children have gone into apostasy
(see the context of Isaiah 1:2). Because of Israel’s sins, only two men of
the older generation entered Canaan. But may we appoint a man as an
elder or allow him to continue serving when only a tiny portion of his
children are faithful?
This shows that God’s role as God should not be compared to the
qualification of elders.
No Scripture states that God must have faithful children in
order to qualify to serve as God.
God serves as God because He is the all-wise, all-powerful, right-
eous Creator, regardless of how people act. But the Bible says that a man
must have faithful children in order to serve as an elder. Say what you
will, the Bible gives a qualification for elders that is simply not a qualifi-
cation of God. Explain it as you will, the cases are simply not the same.
Jesus’ relation to the church is also compared to a man’s
relationship with His wife (Ephesians 5:22ff).
If the church becomes unfaithful does that disqualify Christ as the
head of the church? If not, shall we argue that a man may serve as an
elder even if his wife becomes unfaithful (compare 1 Timothy 3:11)?
The parallels are exact. Jesus is still Lord even if the church goes
into apostasy just as God is still God even if men are unfaithful. So, we
may as well argue that a man may serve as an elder with an unfaithful
wife as to argue that a man may serve as an elder with an unfaithful
child.

God’s relationship with His people differs from the father-
child relationship.
God does not spend 18-20 years personally living in the physical
presence in the same house, personally teaching, admonishing, direct-
ing, and disciplining each human being as earthly fathers do with their
children. Nor did Jesus do such with Judas.
This is not a reflection on God as a teacher. It simply proves that the
case of a father with his children is different from that of God with people
or Jesus with Judas.
The fact remains that Proverbs 22:6 teaches a general truth
that properly trained children will follow in the way they
were trained, even when they become old.
This applies, not just when they are at home under their father’s
authority, but “when they are old.” I know of no such promise regarding
God’s relationship with any human. While there may be exceptions to
Proverbs 22, it is still a general truth and as such tells us something
about a man’s training of his children, even after they grow up.
If God’s children fall away, then they fall away while they are
still subject to His authority (in His house)!
The whole argument we are considering is based on the claim that
the father is not responsible for a child when it leaves home. But when a
child of God falls away, it falls away while still subject to the Father’s
authority and a member of His family!
If this argument proves anything at all, it proves that a man is still
qualified to serve as an elder if his children rebel and become unfaithful
even while they are at home subject to his authority! Yet no true Bible
believer makes that claim. This point alone proves that the argument we
are considering is false and invalid.
We consider the elder’s children because fallible humans
need a standard by which to determine whether another
human is qualified to serve in an office.
We are seeking to determine whether or not positive evidence exists
that demonstrates a man possesses the needed qualities to do the job. If
this evidence is doubtful or inconclusive, he should not be appointed and
should not serve.
But no one needs to examine God’s children to know whether or
not God qualifies to be God. We do not sit in judgment on God’s quali-
fications, but we do make judgments about the qualifications of elders.
As fallible humans, we cannot read hearts and do not know all the
facts of a man’s personal life. So we need visible evidence on which to
make a decision. This requires that a man’s children be faithful, not ac-
cused of dissipation or insubordination.

Family Qualifications of
Experienced Elders
Some believe that, if an elder serves well but then loses a family
qualification (such as a child falling away), he may continue to serve be-
cause his past conduct demonstrates his ability to serve. Such a lack of
qualification might be a reason not to appoint a man who is not already
an elder; but if one has served well as an elder, he may continue to
serve.
So, some think the family qualifications are intended to show his
ability to rule before we appoint him (1 Timothy 3:4,5); but after he has
already proved his ability to “rule well” as an elder, we may overlook the
error of his children. For simplicity, let us call this the “tenure rule.”
How many of the elder’s children may fall away but he may
still serve?
Suppose several of a man’s children fall away, maybe even a major-
ity or even all of them. Could such a man continue to serve based on the
tenure rule? Where do we draw the line according to the Scriptures?
If we let a man continue to serve with one or two unfaithful children,
how can we insist that he step down if more or all his children fall away?
Either the children still matter or they do not. If they still matter, how
can we overlook the 1 or 2 unfaithful children? If they do not matter, why
not overlook all unfaithful children?
What if the elder’s children fall away while still living at
home?
Suppose one or more or even all the children become unfaithful
while still living at home. What then? Someone says, “His children must
be in subjection when they live at home.” But according to the “tenure
rule,” that matters only before we appoint him. According to the argu-
ment, after X years of ruling well, we no longer need the children as proof
of his ability.
The Scriptures say his children must be faithful, not accused of riot
or unruly, and it also says he must rule his family well and have his chil-
dren in subjection. If we may overlook children who fall away after leav-
ing home, why not overlook those who fall away while still at home?
In fact, 1 Timothy 3:4,5 is used as evidence that the children do not
matter after the elder has ruled well for X years. But this passage dis-
cusses the children still in a man’s house. The logical consequence
must be that the children still at home are the ones that do not matter!
Yet people want to apply the reasoning to the grown children who left
home, but not apply it to the children who are under consideration in
the very passage which is used to make the argument!

What if an elder’s wife becomes unfaithful?
Suppose a man “serves well” as an elder for X years, then his wife
becomes unfaithful. What then? Someone says, “But the wives must be
faithful in all things” (1 Timothy 3:11). Yes, but if we may overlook the
unfaithfulness of the children, why not overlook the unfaithfulness of the
wife by the same reasoning?
1 Timothy 3:4,5 says the man must “rule well” over his “house.” That
includes his wife. According to the “tenure rule,” if an elder has served
well for X years, then we no longer need the evidence of his household
to know he can rule well. So the “tenure rule” would mean a man may
continue to serve with a wife who has fallen away.
In short, if we apply the “tenure rule” consistently, we could have a
man whose wife and children are all unfaithful, so he is the only faithful
Christian in his entire family, yet he may continue to serve as an elder
because of past years of service. If we really believe the “tenure rule” is
valid, how could we object?
Where does the Bible state how many years an elder must
serve before we can overlook the family qualifications?
In order to establish “tenure,” so we can overlook the unfaithfulness
of his family, must a man serve 20 years? 10 years? 5 years? 1 year? Six
months? At what point do we know he has served long enough that he
may continue to serve even if he loses a God-given qualification?
The fact that Scripture does not answer this demonstrates that it is
not a matter of length of time in service. At any time a man is in office,
he must possess all the qualifications just as he is required to possess
them in order to be appointed to begin with.
Where does the Bible state how long the child must be away
from home before we can overlook his unfaithfulness?
I have known of children who fell away almost immediately after
leaving home. In some cases there were signs of spiritual problems even
before the child left home. Does that not reflect on the training he re-
ceived at home?
If so, then what if he falls away a few months after leaving home?
One year? Five years? Ten years? Twenty years? At what point can we
prove that the father may continue to serve despite an unfaithful child?
And most important, how do we prove the conclusion by Scripture?
Where does the Bible state how “well” an elder must serve
before we can overlook the family qualifications?
Suppose the quality of an elder’s work has been borderline: there
were no specific grounds to object to him, but he has not done an espe-
cially good job. Would we oppose putting that man out of office if he
loses the family qualifications? In short, is this really a matter of God-
given qualifications or a matter of our own subjective human standard?

The result can easily become that members simply like a man, they
think he is a good man, and they hate to see him put out of office because
of an unfaithful child. The decision easily becomes a subjective
matter of personal opinion and man-made rules not based on
Scripture at all.
Following this reasoning, what other qualifications may we
overlook because a man has served well as an elder for a
while?
How far does this go and where does it end? What Scripture tells us
where to draw the line?
The conclusion of the “tenure rule” is that the qualifications
for becoming an elder differ from the qualifications for
continuing as an elder.
We refuse to appoint one man because he has one or more children
who have left the faith. Another man also has one or more children who
have left the faith, but we allow him to serve because he was in office
when the child(ren) went into error. So, we have two different sets of
qualifications: one set for those not yet in office and a different set for
those already in office.
The Scriptures list the God-given qualifications for elders in such a
way that all of them, including the family qualifications, apply from the
beginning when a man serves and throughout the time when he serves
as an elder:
“A bishop must be [present tense] ... one who rules his own house
well [present tense], having his children in subjection [present
tense]...” (1 Timothy 3:4)
“Likewise their wives must be ... faithful in all things” [present
tense] (3:11).
“If any be … having faithful children not accused of dissipation of
insubordination. For a bishop must be…” [present tense] (Titus 1:6,7).
The passages say that an elder must be the kind of man described.
It does not limit this to when he begins to serve. It says, if he is an elder,
that is the kind of man he must be. If he is not that kind of man, then he
is not qualified regardless of how long he may or may not have served in
the office. If he loses the family qualifications, then he is no longer qual-
ified just the same as if he were to lose any other qualification, no matter
how long he has served.
Scripture simply says an elder’s children must be faithful, not ac-
cused of dissipation or insubordination. This is nowhere limited to the
time when he is appointed or for a certain length of time after a child
leaves home.
If a man has a child who is unfaithful and who can be accused of
dissipation or insubordination, the man is not qualified. To say other-
wise is to add that which is not stated in Scripture.

Compare the “tenure rule” to the view that a man need not
meet all qualifications when he is appointed but may
grow into them as he serves.
If we appoint a man who lacks some requirements hoping he will
eventually meet them, we set a lower standard at the time of appoint-
ment than we think a man should meet later.
This view is incorrect because the Scriptures say an elder must be
the kind of man described in the passages, which means that he must
possess each of the qualifications at any time when he serves as an elder.
If we say a man may be appointed without meeting the same standard
that he should meet later in the office, we follow human wisdom instead
of following the Scriptures.
But we make the same mistake in reverse if we say a man who has
served in the office for a while does not need to meet the same level of
qualifications that a man does when he is first appointed. If we say a
man’s children must be faithful when he is appointed, but he may con-
tinue to serve if a child becomes unfaithful later, then we are saying the
requirements are higher for one who is first appointed than for one who
has served for a while.
Both views are based on human wisdom, not on Scripture, and both
are mistaken for the same reason. The Scriptures say that a man who
serves an elder must be the kind of man described in 1 Timothy 3 and
Titus 1. He must have each of the qualifications at any time when he
serves in the office.
If we would not be willing to put a man into office given his present
circumstances as regards the qualifications, then a man with those same
circumstances should not continue to serve. The length of time he may
have served or how effectively he served is not relevant to the qualifica-
tions listed in Scripture. Where do the Scriptures teach otherwise than
this?
The “tenure rule” is based on human reasoning without
command, example, or necessary inference in Scripture.
Where is the Scripture that says qualifications may be overlooked
because of the length of time that a man has served in the office? To fol-
low this concept is to simply act by human wisdom rather than divine
wisdom. Regardless of how attractive it may seem by human reasoning,
it is not what the Scriptures say.
If we highly respect a man and think he has done a good job, by
human reasoning we hate to think he must step down because of a family
member. But I fear that members may allow their loyalty to a man to
overshadow their loyalty to what the Scriptures say.
This is the same problem in a different form as people who become
too loyal to a preacher, so they overlook his errors or faults. If a man does
not possess the Biblical qualifications, he may not continue in office as
an elder regardless of how much we may otherwise respect him.

As far as I can see, when we begin to set aside the family qualifica-
tions of elders, regardless of how long or how well a man has served in
the office, we become a rule unto ourselves. We have left the standard of
God’s word and have set up our own standard according to human rea-
soning. We leave ourselves with no means of Scripturally or consistently
opposing a man whose whole family are reprobates or who has also lost
other qualifications.
Sources Frequently Cited in These Notes
Ancient Christian Commentary on Scripture; InterVarsity Aca-
demic, Downers Grove, IL, 2006. WORDsearch CROSS e-book.
Bauer, Danker, Arndt, and Gingrich, A Greek-English Lexicon of
the New Testament and Other Early Christian Literature, 3rd Edition;
University of Chicago Press, Chicago, IL 2001. WORDsearch CROSS e-
book.
Bromiley, Geoffrey W., trans., Gerhard Kittel, Gerhard Friedrich,
ed. Theological Dictionary of the New Testament: Abridged in One Vol-
ume; William B. Eerdmans, Grand Rapids, MI 2003. WORDsearch
CROSS e-book.
Bullinger, Ethelbert William, Figures of Speech Used in the Bible;
Eyre & Spottiswoode; E. & J. B. Young & Co., London; New York, 1898.
ESV Archaeology Study Bible, The; Crossway, Wheaton, IL, 2017.
Horne, Thomas, Introduction to the Critical Study and Knowledge
of the Holy Scriptures, 4 volumes; T. Cadwell, Strand, London, 1828
(public domain).
Lipscomb, David, and J. W. Shepherd, A Commentary on the New
Testament Epistles: I, II Thessalonians, I, II Timothy, Titus, Philemon;
Gospel Advocate Company, Nashville, TN, 1942.
Patton, Marshall, Truth Commentaries: The Books of 1 and 2 Tim-
othy, Titus, Philemon; Guardian of Truth Foundation, Bowling Green,
KY, 2001.
Patton, William, Bible Wines or the Laws of Fermentation; The
Challenge Press, Little Rock, AR.
Philips, H.E., Scriptural Elders and Deacons; Cogdill Foundation,
Marion, IN, 1959.
Thayer, Joseph Henry, Greek-English Lexicon of the New Testa-
ment (original material prepared by Grimm and Wilke, translated, re-
vised, and enlarged by Thayer); Zondervan’s Publishing House, Grand
Rapids, MI (public domain).
Vine, W.E., Vine’s Expository Dictionary of New Testament
Words; MacDonald Publishing Co., McLean, VA.

Comments on the Book of
Philemon
Introduction to Philemon
The author
The inspired author clearly and repeatedly identifies himself as the
apostle Paul (verses 1,9,19). Timothy was with Paul and joined him in
writing.
Regarding the authenticity of the book, Horne writes:
“So early as the time of Jerome, some fastidious critics
showed an inclination to expunge this Epistle from the sacred
canon as being a private letter, and consequently of very little im-
portance to the Christian church. … Although from its brevity, and
the private nature of its subject, it was but rarely mentioned by the
primitive ecclesiastical writers, yet we know that it was alluded to,
though not cited by name, by Tertullian, and was reckoned among
Saint Paul's Epistles by Caius. It was likewise most expressly
quoted by Origen, and was pronounced to be authentic by all the
antient [sic] writers cited by Eusebius, as also by all subsequent
ecclesiastical writers; and it has always been inserted in every cat-
alogue of the books of the New Testament.”
He quotes Benson, who says:
“‘Shall an epistle, so full of useful and excellent instructions,
be rejected for its brevity? or because the occasion required that it
should be written concerning one particular person? or addressed
to a private man? Men would do well to examine it carefully before
they reject it, or speak of it so slightly.’”
Hendriksen adds, “From the beginning, however, its acceptance has
been almost universal.”
Based on such evidence as the above, Coffman concludes: “No de-
vice of Satan has been sufficient to move this precious little letter out of
the sacred canon; and it, along with the rest of the NT, may be received

with absolute certainty as genuine, inspired, Pauline and authentic in
every way.”
Things we know about Paul:
* He was present at Stephen’s death (Acts 7).
* He persecuted the church (compare 1 Timothy 1:12ff; Acts 8,9).
* He was converted as a result of Jesus’ appearance to him on the
road to Damascus. Ananias was sent to baptize him (Acts 9,22,26).
* He then preached in Damascus, then in Jerusalem, and later went
on three preaching trips, preaching even in Rome (Acts 9-26).
* He especially preached to Gentiles and worked to prove that they
need not be circumcised and obey the Old Testament to be saved (Acts
15; Galatians; Romans)
* He wrote more New Testament books than any other man.
Things we know about Timothy:
* Paul met him at Lystra on his second preaching trip (Acts 16:1,2).
* His mother was a Jewess, but his father was a Greek (Gentile)
(Acts 16:1).
* He became a believer in God through the influence of his godly
mother and grandmother (2 Timothy 1:5).
* He traveled with Paul at times on his journeys (Acts 16:3; 17:14;
18:5; 19:22; 20:4; Romans 16:21; 1 Corinthians 4:17; 16:10; 2 Corinthi-
ans 1:1,19; Philippians 1:1; 2:19; Colossians 1:1; 1 Thessalonians 1:1;
3:2,6; 2 Thessalonians 1:1; Philemon 1; Hebrews 13:23).
* Paul wrote two of his epistles to him.
* Paul viewed him as his son (1 Timothy 1:2).
Though Timothy is named in the introduction, Paul is clearly the
primary writer. He refers several times to himself as an individual (“I,”
“me,” etc.). Clearly Timothy was a companion with Paul, so he is named.
He may even have served some direct role in writing the letter, such as
being the scribe to whom Paul dictated the letter. But Paul is the main
author, and the letter is written by the Holy Spirit through Paul’s inspi-
ration.
Person addressed
The letter is addressed to Philemon (verse 1) along with others who
are apparently in his household (verse 2).
Nothing is known about this man except what is revealed in this let-
ter. He was clearly a Christian, as were others in his family, for Paul ad-
dresses the church in his house (verse 2). It is possible that Paul even
taught and converted him since Paul says that Philemon in some sense
owed his whole self to Paul (verse 19).
He was somewhat wealthy or at least not in poverty since he owned
slaves.
Paul addressed Philemon as “beloved” and a “fellow worker.” Evi-
dently Paul had a close relationship with this man.

We are not directly told where Philemon lived, but he is believed to
have lived in Colosse. This is based on the fact that Onesimus is men-
tioned in Colossians 4:9 as being “one of you.” Presumably he and Phi-
lemon would be from the same place.
Archippus, who was a member of Philemon’s household (verse 2),
was addressed as a minister in the letter to the Colossians (Colossians
4:17), assuming these two passages to refer to the same man. Also, Epa-
phras is mentioned to the Colossians as being “one of you” (4:12) and is
also mentioned in the Philemon letter (verse 23).
Nor is it directly stated where Paul and Philemon had known one
another, but likely it was when Paul preached in that area on one of his
preaching trips.
The name Philemon means “beloved.” This was appropriate as an
expression of Paul’s care for this man. Perhaps this is why Paul addresses
him in verse 1 as “beloved.”
Time and place of writing
The letter clearly states that Paul was in prison (verses 1,8). He de-
scribes himself as “aged” at the time he wrote (verse 8). We conclude
that Paul wrote the letter from Rome during his first imprisonment. The
date is assumed to be about 60-64 AD. This would have been around the
same time that Ephesians and Colossians were written. Some believe
that these three epistles were carried from Paul by the same messenger
at the same time.
Horne says:
“It appears from verses 1. 10. 13. and 23. of this Epistle, that
Saint Paul was under confinement when he wrote it; and as he ex-
presses (22.) his expectation of being shortly released, it is proba-
ble that it was written during his first imprisonment at Rome, to-
wards the end of a. d. 62, or early in 63; and was sent, together
with the Epistles to the Ephesians and Colossians, by Tychicus and
Onesimus.”
Theme
The return of Philemon’s slave Onesimus. Onesimus was evidently
a slave belonging to Philemon but had run away. He contacted Paul in
Rome, Paul converted him, and now Paul was sending Onesimus back to
his master. Paul explains what had happened and pleads for Philemon
to be merciful to his new brother in Christ.
See our notes at the end of our comments on the book for thoughts
about the Biblical teaching about slavery and about restitution.
Main sections of the book
1:1-3 – Greeting
1:4-7 - Paul’s prayer on behalf of Philemon
1:8-21 - Paul’s plea on behalf of Onesimus
1:22-25 – Concluding thoughts

Notes on Philemon
1:1-3 – Greeting
Verses 1-3 – Paul addressed the letter to Philemon, Apphia,
Archippus, and the church in his house.
Paul began by introducing himself and Timothy, and by naming the
one to whom he was addressing the letter (see our introductory notes).
Paul speaks throughout the letter with great love and respect for Phile-
mon as a worker for the Lord.
Paul was a prisoner when he wrote. As a prisoner, Paul could signif-
icantly identify with the problems faced by slaves.
Apphia, Archippus, and the church
Apphia is called a “sister” in the ASV, NASB, and RSV. Her name is
feminine, so she is assumed to be Philemon’s wife. Nothing else is known
of her.
Archippus is a masculine name and he is said to be a fellow soldier.
He is likely Philemon’s son who had also been converted and was labor-
ing for the Lord’s cause as all Christians should. As mentioned in our
introduction, a man named Archippus is described in the Colossian let-
ter as being a minister in the church there (4:17).
Observe that the letter was addressed, not just to Philemon and his
family, but also to the church. This means the whole church would know
about the relationship between Philemon and Onesimus. The circum-
stances of Onesimus and Philemon’s response to it would be known by
the whole church.
The church in Philemon’s house could mean that a congregation of
God’s people met in Philemon’s home. If so, and if Philemon did indeed
live in Colosse (see our introduction), then presumably this was the
church in Colosse. Apparently it was not uncommon in those early days
for churches to meet in the homes of members who were wealthy enough
to have room to accommodate the whole group. Churches today often do
the same when they are relatively new and small.
However, nothing here indicates that this was a rule that churches
must follow, which would forbid local churches from making other meet-
ing arrangements. The early church in Jerusalem met in a porch of the
temple (Acts 2:46; 5:12). Such arrangements would be necessary for
larger congregations. At some point the church in Jerusalem had over
five thousand male members.

Some have disputed the fact that references to churches in houses
refer to churches that meet in people’s homes. Some have claimed that
the members of a family who were Christians constituted a “church,” not
in the sense of an organized local congregation, but simply in a general
sense of a group of Christians. Patton says:
“A possible meaning, and a very likely one, is that the word
church is used in the distributive sense (cf. Acts 8:3; Galatians
1:13; and includes other members of the church and made up the
whole household of the one or ones specified, e.g., relatives, serv-
ants … One thing is certain: The organizational structure of the
church in the NT precludes several separate functional units com-
prising one metropolitan church. The only functional unit of the
church is a local church.”
He proceeds to explain that the word for “synagogue” in James 2:2,3
refers to a meeting place similar to those used by the Jews for their syn-
agogues.
Grace and peace
Paul wished for Philemon and his family that the Father and Jesus
would grant him “grace and peace.”
Grace is God’s favor which none of us deserve. It is by His unmer-
ited favor that He offers us the hope of eternal life though we do not de-
serve it since we are guilty of sin (Romans 3:23; 6:23; 5:6-9; Ephesians
2:8,9; Romans 5:1,2).
Peace is the harmonious relationship we have with God because our
sins have been forgiven. This gives us inward calm in contrast to the guilt
and fear that comes from knowing we have sinned and stand condemned
before God (Philippians 4:6,7).
1:4-7 - Paul’s Prayer on Behalf of Philemon
Verses 4-6 – Paul mentioned Philemon in his prayers,
hearing of his love and faith, praying that his fellowship
of faith may be effective in the knowledge of good.
As he usually did, Paul began his letter by expressing his prayer on
behalf of those he addressed. He gave God thanks for them, regularly
mentioning them in his prayers.
Specifically, he had heard of the love and faith they had toward Je-
sus and toward all the saints. Love for God is the greatest of God’s com-
mands for us, and loving our fellowman is the second greatest command.
Matthew 22:37-40; Luke 6:27,28,31-33; 10:25-37; 1 Corinthians 13:1-
8,13.
We are especially responsible to love other Christians. John
13:34,35; 15:12-17; Ephesians 4:2,31-5:2; Philippians 2:2,3; 1 Thessalo-
nians 3:12; 4:9,10; 2 Thessalonians 1:3; Hebrews 13:1; 1 Peter 1:22; 2:17;
3:8,9; 4:8; 1 John 2:7-11; 3:10-18,23; 4:8-5:3.

Philemon also had faith toward Jesus, which is also one of the most
basic qualities we can have. See Hebrews 10:39; 11:1,4-8,17,30; Romans
1:16; 4:19-21; 5:1,2; 10:9,10,13-17; Galatians 5:6; 2 Corinthians 5:7;
James 2:14-26; John 1:12; 3:15-18; 8:24; 20:30,31; Mark 16:15,16. Paul
was thankful that Philemon and his family practiced this love and faith.
They not only possessed love and faith, but they shared their faith.
This, he said, became effective by the acknowledgment of every good
thing which is in you in Christ Jesus. This is a difficult expression. But
to me this appears to mean that Philemon lived by his faith. His faith
affected his life as all true faith and love must do to please God.
As Philemon practiced his faith, his conduct influenced those
around him. Others could see and acknowledge the good that Philemon’s
faith accomplished. Our faith must be more than just a conviction we
hold in our hearts. It must cause us to live as God teaches. If we do, oth-
ers will see that we are people of faith and they will be influenced to prac-
tice the true faith. What effect does our faith have as others view our
lives?
Paul is praising Philemon here, but he is also leading up to the pur-
pose of his letter. By praising Philemon’s love and faith, Paul is preparing
for his request on behalf of Onesimus. He is hoping that Philemon will
respond toward Onesimus by showing the qualities of faith and love that
Paul is praising in him.
Verse 7 – Paul rejoiced that Philemon had refreshed the
hearts of the saints.
Paul then remembers the joy and comfort he had experienced in the
past as he learned of Philemon’s good works. Philemon was known for
refreshing the hearts of the brethren. So Philemon’s faith and love
(verses 4-6) led him to do good on behalf of his brethren, thereby re-
freshing the hearts of those whom he served. This in turn gave Paul joy
and comfort as he heard of it.
We are not told exactly what good Philemon had done to cause this
refreshing. Christians can do many forms of good, whether by teaching
the truth, encouraging the weak, admonishing the erring, helping the
needy, etc. Paul did not specify, but of course Philemon knew the works
in which he was involved.
Again, no doubt, Paul was not just praising Philemon. He was hop-
ing that Philemon would remember his commitment to other brethren
as Paul comes to discuss the case of Onesimus.
1:8-21 - Paul’s Plea on Behalf of Onesimus
Verses 8,9 – Though Paul had the right to give Philemon
orders, he preferred to beseech him, speaking as an aged
prisoner of Christ.
These verses begin to show that Paul had some particular concern
in mind. There was something he believed would be “fitting” (or “proper”

– NASB, or “required” – RSV) for Philemon to do. Paul believed he
would have the right to command Philemon to do it.
However, he preferred a course of loving appeal, rather than mak-
ing demands. He presented himself as an aged man and a prisoner of
Jesus. As discussed in the introduction, he wrote from prison, almost
surely in Rome. He had spent many years in the Lord’s work, suffering
many hardships for the cause of Christ. So, he appealed to Philemon to
give heed to his request out of concern and sympathy for Paul and Paul’s
love for him. He could command Philemon’s obedience, but he preferred
to appeal to Philemon and let Philemon see for himself the kind of con-
duct that should be expected.
Those who have authority over others have the right to make de-
mands. However, it is often best to begin by appealing to the good nature
of the hearers, rather than making demands. This is especially true when
the appeal is personal and when we are dealing with people whom we
know are good-hearted and want to do right.
Verses 10-12 – Paul made request on behalf of Onesimus
whom he had begotten in his bonds. He sent him back to
Philemon, though he had once been unprofitable, but was
now profitable to both Paul and Philemon.
A summary of Onesimus’ case
Paul then begins his direct appeal on behalf of Onesimus. See intro-
ductory notes regarding Onesimus.
To understand the exact nature of Paul’s appeal we must draw nec-
essary conclusions. Paul, Philemon, and Onesimus all knew the facts of
Onesimus’ case, so Paul did not need to directly state them. We do not
know the facts, however, except by deducing them from the account
here.
This would indicate that Onesimus belonged to Philemon. Had he
been free, he could have gone wherever he chose. The fact this could not
be done without Philemon’s permission shows that Onesimus belonged
to Philemon.
The only sensible conclusion from these facts is that Onesimus had
been a slave owned by Philemon. He had run away and had eventually
come into contact with Paul in Rome. There Paul taught Onesimus, who
was then converted. Since Onesimus still belonged to Philemon as his
slave, Paul was sending him back.
Nothing here tells us why Onesimus ran away. Some writers con-
clude that Philemon had mistreated Onesimus. Many masters did mis-
treat their slaves, but some slaves simply wanted freedom. Verse 18 im-
plies Onesimus may have wronged Philemon (by stealing or otherwise
defrauding him). So Onesimus’ misconduct may have led him to flee
from his master.

On the other hand, Paul implies that Philemon was a faithful Chris-
tian. He calls him a beloved fellow worker (verse 1) and commends his
faith and love (verse 5 and note verse 7). Not once does Paul fault Phile-
mon as though he had mistreated Onesimus.
Notice that Paul was willing to seek the salvation of anyone whom
he could teach, including even a runaway slave. He did not consider an-
yone to be beyond hope of salvation or unworthy of an opportunity to
obey.
One might think that such a person as Onesimus would be the least
likely to accept the gospel, knowing what would be required of him. But
Paul had the faith to teach Onesimus, and Onesimus had the honesty
and humility to accept the truth. We too should be willing to teach any
who are willing to listen to the gospel, regardless of their circumstances.
Paul’s appeal on Onesimus’ behalf
Paul said he was appealing on behalf of Onesimus whom he had be-
gotten in his chains. “Begotten” refers to being born again by the gospel
(1 Corinthians 4:14,15; James 1:18; 1 Peter 1:22-25). So Onesimus had
been converted and had become a follower of Christ. This happened
while Paul was a prisoner in Rome. So, Onesimus was begotten while
Paul was in chains.
Paul conceded that Onesimus had been unprofitable, having run
away from Philemon. However, now that he had been converted, he
would be profitable either to Paul or to Philemon. Paul had found him
so useful he wanted Onesimus to stay with him. But he also knew that,
as a Christian, Onesimus would serve Philemon diligently if he would
return. He would no longer attempt to run away or otherwise neglect his
duties.
Note that becoming a Christian makes people profitable in whatever
circumstances they face. People who belittle Jesus’ disciples are making
a serious mistake, not just spiritually, but otherwise. Christians are dili-
gent workers, so all men ought to rejoice when sinners are converted.
Paul then affirmed Onesimus was returning to Philemon. Paul
hated, in a way, to send him back, since Onesimus had become so close
to him that Paul held him in his heart. So he urged Philemon to receive
Onesimus as was fitting for one who was so dear to Paul. Since Philemon
and Paul deeply loved one another, Paul hoped that his love for Onesi-
mus would lead Philemon to also treat Onesimus kindly.
Consider the courage that Onesimus would need in order to return
to Philemon. He could have chosen, at any point in his return journey to
Philemon, to run away again. To return to the master from whom he had
escaped would be embarrassing, but the case was much worse than that.
History indicates that, according to Roman law, slaves had virtually
no rights. A master who captured a runaway slave could punish him in
nearly any way he chose including beating or even death. Onesimus was

at Philemon’s mercy, trusting in God that Philemon would obey the in-
structions of Paul in this epistle.
See our notes later about the principles of repentance and restitu-
tion in this case.
Verses 13,14 – Paul wanted to keep Onesimus to minister to
him in his imprisonment, but would not do so without
Philemon’s agreement.
Paul wanted Onesimus to stay to assist Paul as he was in prison for
the sake of the gospel. If Philemon’s servant was serving Paul, Philemon
in that sense would be doing service to Paul through Onesimus.
However, Paul would not do this without Philemon’s permission.
To have presumed to keep Onesimus without Philemon’s permission
would have made it a matter of compulsion. Good deeds ought to be
done voluntarily, so Paul would not force the choice on Philemon by
keeping Onesimus without Philemon’s approval.
Note that service to God is not acceptable when done against a per-
son’s will. We must act by choice out of love for God and for other people.
It follows that we must not compel or pressure people to do right against
their will. We must give them the choice; but as Paul does here, we must
exhort them to do good by choice. See 2 Corinthians 9:5,7; 1 Corinthians
13:1-3; 1 Peter 5:2.
Consider the application of this regarding baptism. Sometimes par-
ents or family members pressure a child or other family member to be
baptized even when that person is not necessarily ready of his own free
will.
To pressure such a one would make it a matter of compulsion,
whereas they should obey by their own choice and free will. We may in-
struct and encourage, as Paul did with Philemon, but we must remember
that the final decision should be left to the one who should act out of
their own love and devotion to God.
Verses 15,16 – The result of Onesimus’ leaving might be that
Philemon would have, not just a servant, but a brother in
the Lord, loved by both Paul and Philemon.
Paul then tried to show that the sequence of events had led ulti-
mately to Philemon’s advantage. Paul did not justify Onesimus in run-
ning away; nevertheless, in the end everyone was better off.
Onesimus had left Philemon for a time, but the result was that Phi-
lemon would have him forever. The clear meaning is that, because
Onesimus had gone to Paul, Philemon and Onesimus would both receive
eternal life and be together eternally.
Furthermore, their relationship was no longer just that of slave and
master. Now they were brothers in Christ. In Colossians 4:9 Paul also
calls Onesimus a faithful and dear brother. Onesimus was not just a slave
but beloved because of the relationship in Christ. He was beloved to

Paul, who had converted him and grown to love him. But Philemon
should also love him because they now shared both a fleshly and a spir-
itual relationship.
Conversion to Christ did not set slaves free from their masters, but
it did make them children of God, members of Christ’s church, on a com-
pletely equal spiritual standing with all others including their masters.
Slaves and their masters were brothers in Christ, neither one having any
advantage in standing before the Lord.
Colossians 3:11 – There is neither Greek nor Jew, circumcised nor
uncircumcised, barbarian, Scythian, slave nor free, but Christ is all and
in all.
Galatians 3:28 – There is neither Jew nor Greek, there is neither
slave nor free man, there is neither male nor female; for you are all one
in Christ Jesus. (1 Corinthians 12:13)
This equal status before the Lord would require great changes in
thought and conduct in the relationship between slaves and masters.
Whereas masters had authority over slaves in everyday relationships, in
spiritual relationships the slaves may lead in worship in assemblies that
included masters. Slaves could even serve as elders leading a church in-
cluding masters.
So Paul hoped that Philemon would carefully consider his new re-
lationship with Onesimus and even look at the outcome as ultimately for
his gain. He hoped Philemon will feel less inclined to punish Onesimus
and more inclined to receive him peaceably and in love.
Summary of Onesimus’ Case

1) Onesimus had been a servant (slave – NKJV, NASB, RSV) to Phi-
lemon (verse 16).
2) He had departed from Philemon (verse 15).
3) Paul had converted him (verse 10).
4) He had been unprofitable but became profitable (verse 11).
5) Paul was now sending him back (verse 12).
6) Paul preferred to keep Onesimus with him, but did not think it
would be right to do so without Philemon’s permission (verses 13,14).
Verses 17-19 – Paul called upon Philemon to receive

Onesimus as he would receive Paul himself. And he
offered to repay anything that Onesimus owed to
Philemon, though he reminded Philemon that he was
deeply in Paul’s debt.
Paul then asked Philemon to treat Onesimus like he would treat
Paul, and he offered to take Onesimus’ place in righting any wrongs done
to Philemon. If Philemon viewed Paul as his partner or close companion,
then he should treat Onesimus as if he were Paul. That is, Paul hoped
Philemon would decide about punishing Onesimus as if he was dealing

with Paul himself. This is similar in principle to the concept that the way
we treat others is the way we treat Jesus (Matthew 25:34-45).
Then he urged Philemon to put to Paul’s account any wrong that
Onesimus had done. Paul said that he was personally willing to repay
any debt involved. He wrote this with his own hand. This implies that he
often used a sort of secretary to write his letters, but in this case he him-
self wrote the message so that Philemon would see how serious he was.
Paul then reminded Philemon that, in reality, Philemon already
owed a huge debt to Paul, so much so that Philemon owed his own self
to Paul. This likely means that Paul had taught the gospel to Philemon,
leading to his salvation. So Philemon was indebted to Paul for his own
life spiritually.
Surely Philemon should be willing to do a great favor for Paul. So,
Paul was asking as a favor to him that Philemon would forgive Onesimus
of any debt or at least hold the debt against Paul instead of against Onesi-
mus.
Of course, Paul had not wronged Philemon as Onesimus had. But
Paul was offering to act much as Jesus has in our case. Jesus paid the
penalty that we owed so we could go free. This is what Paul was offering
to do for Onesimus.
Such an offer was beyond generous. It showed great love for Onesi-
mus. But furthermore, it would surely have motivated Philemon to see
his need to forgive Onesimus. If Paul was so willing to show kindness by
even accepting a debt that he did not owe, surely Philemon could be gen-
erous to Onesimus as well.
Clearly Paul hoped Philemon would just forgive Onesimus and not
hold anyone to account. This would be a godly thing to do since Onesi-
mus had been forgiven and become a Christian. Nevertheless, Paul did
not directly require this.
Paul realized that Onesimus did owe Philemon a debt that was not
washed away by conversion. Conversion granted forgiveness before God
and other Christians, but it did not eliminate obligations in life. Phile-
mon had the power to release the debt, but neither Paul nor Onesimus
had grounds to require such.
In any case, whether or not he required a penalty, Philemon should
be challenged to consider how he would act if the guilty person were
someone he really loved. He ought to love Onesimus as a brother, so he
ought to make his decision based on love as if the person who wronged
him were Paul or other dear loved one.
Verses 20,21 – So Paul urged Philemon to give Paul joy in this
matter. Paul wrote having confidence that Philemon
would go even further than Paul asked.
Paul then concluded the discussion of Onesimus’ case by urging
Philemon to refresh Paul’s heart in the Lord. He hoped to have joy when

he heard of Philemon’s decision in the matter. In short, he hoped Phile-
mon would decide based on love and mercy in Onesimus’ case, as Paul
had asked him to do.
Paul then expressed confidence that Philemon would obey, and that
he would go even beyond what Paul had requested. This further hints
that Paul hoped Philemon would simply receive Onesimus back without
punishment or repayment from anyone. However, again Paul did not di-
rectly ask for this. He knew that any such decision would have to be made
from the goodness of Philemon’s heart, and Paul had no right to demand
it.
Nevertheless, Paul expressed positive confidence in Philemon, that
he would act in a way that was good and kind in the case.
1:22-25 – Concluding Thoughts
Verses 22-25 – Paul then expressed hope that he could visit
Philemon, and sent greetings from various fellow
laborers.
Paul’s hope to visit
Paul then concludes this letter as he did many others. He says that
he hopes soon to be able to visit with Philemon and stay with him for a
while. So he asks Philemon to have a guest room or lodging (KJV, ASV,
NASB) ready for him.
This shows first of all that Paul did hope to be released from prison.
Such comments lead to the view, which is hinted at but never directly
stated in Scripture, that Paul was released for a while before he was ar-
rested again and killed.
Traveling preachers generally stayed in the homes of Christians.
Paul knew Philemon’s home was adequate to lodge guests. Christians
may own homes, but if so they should be hospitable and use those homes
for good.
Greetings from Paul’s fellow workers
With Paul at the time were various fellow workers, many of whom
Philemon evidently knew. Paul names them and sends greetings from
them to Philemon.
Epaphras was a fellow prisoner in Christ Jesus. Apparently he too
had been arrested for his stand for the truth. He is also mentioned in
Colossians 1:7; 4:13. He evidently had been a member of the church at
Colosse (he was “one of you”) and had even preached the gospel to them
or otherwise done them service (a faithful minister on their behalf). This
would also indicate that Philemon may have lived in Colosse.
Mark was another companion of Paul who sent greetings. When
Peter was released from prison in Acts 12:12, he went to the house of
Mary, the mother of John Mark, where people were praying for him.

Mark is mentioned again in Acts 12:25 where we are told that he
returned with Paul and Barnabas to Antioch from Jerusalem. Later he
started with them on their first preaching trip (13:5) but left them and
returned (13:13). This later became an occasion of disagreement be-
tween Paul and Barnabas so that they separated (15:36-40). Eventually
Mark proved his worth to Paul in the work (2 Timothy 4:11).
Mark was related to Barnabas (Colossians 4:10). He is also recog-
nized as the author of the account of Jesus’ life that wears his name. The
reference to him in Colossians 4:10 would imply that the Colossian
brethren knew Mark.
Aristarchus was also mentioned in Acts 19:29; 20:4; 27:2; and
Colossians 4:10. He was a traveling companion of Paul, originally from
Thessalonica (Acts 27:2). During the riot in Ephesus, he was arrested
(Acts 19:29). He was a messenger chosen by the Thessalonian church to
accompany those who carried their contribution to Jerusalem (Acts
20:4). He was with Paul on the journey to Rome in which they suffered
shipwreck (Acts 27:2).
Demas also is mentioned in Colossians 4:14 and 2 Timothy 4:10,11.
He was also one of Paul’s traveling companions. However, 2 Timothy 4
shows that Demas later forsook Paul because he loved the present world.
Clearly Paul was disappointed in Demas. God forbids Christians to love
the world (1 John 2:15-17; James 4:4; Romans 12:1,2). Exactly what form
this worldliness took, we are not told, except that it caused Demas to
forsake working with Paul.
Luke and Demas are each named only three places in the scrip-
tures, and each time they are named together: Colossians 4:14; Philemon
24: 2 Timothy 4:10,11. In Colossians 4:14 Luke is called the “beloved
physician.” He was clearly a medical practitioner of some sort, though
we are given no details.
Luke was the inspired author of the books of Luke and Acts. Both
Acts and Luke are addressed to “Theophilus” (“lover of God” – compare
Luke 1:1-4 to Acts 1:1). This means that, as measured by the volume of
material, he wrote about as much of the New Testament as did Paul (de-
pending on whether or not Paul wrote Hebrews).
Interestingly, every person named in this section of greetings to
Philemon was also mentioned in a similar section to the Colossians. This
strengthens the conclusion that the books were both written at the same
time and that Philemon may have lived in Colosse.
Paul concludes the book, as he often does his letters, by seeking the
grace of Christ to be with Philemon’s spirit.

Applications
Lessons about Solving Conflict

between Christians
The book of Philemon discusses the conflict between a faithful

Christian and one who had not been a Christian but had repented and
been forgiven of his sins. It describes lessons we can learn regarding re-
solving differences between Christians:
1) The two alienated parties (the one who committed sin and the
one against whom he sinned) should meet to resolve the issue. Paul sent
Onesimus to Philemon. Attempts to reconcile people are misguided if
either one refuses to meet. See Matthew 18:15-17; 5:23,24.
2) Other people may serve as mediators between the alienated par-
ties as did Paul in this case. Such people may give guidance but cannot
resolve the problem themselves. Ultimately the alienated parties must
resolve the problem. (Matthew 18:15-17; 1 Corinthians 6:1-8)
3) If both the alienated parties seek to do right, those who seek to
help them are wise to begin with a gentle and patient approach rather
than by making firm demands.
4) The one who sinned must repent, seek forgiveness from God, and
ask for forgiveness from the one against whom he sinned. (Luke 17:3,4;
Matthew 18:21-35)
5) The one against whom the sin was committed must then be will-
ing to forgive. (Luke 17:3,4)
Observations about Repentance

and Restitution
Passages about Restitution

Acts 26:20 – After forgiveness men must do works worthy of re-
pentance (Luke 3:8-14; Matthew 3:8).

Ezekiel 33:14,15 – One who was wicked must walk in the statutes
and also return what he stole. (Exodus 22:1-15; Leviticus 6:1-5; Numbers
5:5-8; 2 Samuel 12:6)
Matthew 21:28-31 – The son, who had disobeyed his father but re-
pented, did not just decide to do right next time. He went and did what
he should have done at the first.
Luke 19:8 – When Zacchaeus the publican was converted, he re-
turned taxes charged wrongfully.
Acts 19:18,19 – When people repented of magical arts, they burned
their books of magic.
Ezra 10:3,11,17,19,44 – Israelite men, who had married foreign
women, were required to repent and put away the wives. This is what
repentance requires today of people who divorced for reasons other than
fornication and remarried (9:1-10:44; Matthew 19:3-9; 1 Corinthians
7:10,11).
Matthew 14:3,4 – John said it was not lawful for Herod to have his
brother Philip’s wife. So, what would he have to do to repent? Give her
up!
Philemon 10-19 – Though Onesimus had been converted, he still
belonged to Philemon. So, Paul sent him back
(See also Genesis 20:1-14; 1 Samuel 12:3; Nehemiah 5:11-13; 2 Co-
rinthians 7:9-11; Proverbs 6:31; Acts 16:33; Ezekiel 33:15.)
Conclusions and Applications
The fruits of repentance require more than just deciding to “do right
next time” or “never do that again.” To the extent possible we must at-
tempt to correct the harmful effects others are suffering because of our
wrongs.
This can be difficult because the effects of some sins cannot be un-
done (for example, murder). But it is a Bible principle and must be ac-
complished to the extent possible.
Forgiveness does not release us from lawful obligations and
covenants which we previously entered.
Some people say baptism forgives sinful remarriages so a new con-
vert may remain with his current companion. Some cite 2 Corinthians
5:17 (“old things are passed away and all things are become new”).
This could be valid only if forgiveness (baptism) invalidates or
looses men from their original marriage contract and sanctifies their
current marriage. If so, then would it not also invalidate and loose men
from all other obligations and relationships incurred before baptism?
Consider some examples of obligations we have before
conversion.
Have all these “old things” “passed away,” so we have no further ob-
ligation?

(1) Does conversion dissolve a man’s first marriage so he has no
further obligation to his wife?
(2) Does conversion dissolve a man’s financial debt so he no
longer has to pay it?
(3) Does conversion free a man from slavery so he has no more
obligation to his master? If so, why did Paul send Onesimus back? In-
stead of being freed because he was converted, Onesimus was sent back
because he was converted!
(4) Does conversion relieve a man of obligations to his relatives
(parents, children, etc.)?
(5) Does conversion relieve a man of all obligations as a citizen of
a country so he no longer needs to pay taxes and obey the law?
(6) So, why would conversion release a man from the obligations of
his first marriage from which he unscripturally divorced and remarried?
So, conversion does not relieve us from our previous legitimate
relationships and obligations. Nor does it justify us in continuing
relationships that were sinful before baptism. On the contrary, true
conversion should lead us to fulfill legitimate obligations and
cease sinful relationships.
Just as Onesimus had to go back to his master, the principle of res-
titution requires us to make right the harm we have done.
Observations about Slavery
The Bible teaching about slavery can be difficult to understand and

apply.
Slavery is illegal in our society so Christians should obey the law.
Surely most of us rejoice that it is not permitted.
But slavery was legal in the first century and is still legal in some
places in the world. God’s word does not forbid it as such and has never
forbidden it in any age: Patriarch, Mosaic, or Gospel. God’s word does,
however, forbid the abuses that often characterize slavery.
New Testament passages about slavery include Ephesians 6:5-9;
Colossians 3:22-4:1; 1 Timothy 6:1,2; Titus 2:9,10; 1 Peter 2:18; as well
as the book of Philemon.
Note that “slave” and “bondservant” translate the same Greek word
() which is the opposite of those who were “free.” Both terms refer
to those who were owned by their master: Romans 6:18-22; 1 Corinthi-
ans 7:21,22; 12:13; Galatians 3:28; Ephesians 6:8; Colossians 3:11; Rev-
elation 6:15; 13:16.
Consider aspects of Bible teaching.

How People Became Slaves
Improper enslavement of free and innocent people.
Free and innocent people were sometimes forcibly enslaved against
their will.
Genesis 37 – Joseph’s brothers sold him as a slave out of envy and
hatred. (Psalm 105:17)
Exodus 1:10-14 – The Egyptians cruelly enslaved the Israelites.
Making slaves in this manner would be men-stealing or kidnapping
(1 Timothy 1:4-11).
Some people have been enslaved and treated as inferior because of
their race. This is respect of persons, partiality, and racism. Acts
10:15,28,34,35; James 2:1-13; 3:9; Romans 2:4-11; 1 Timothy 5:21
Evil masters sometimes sold families of slaves to different masters
separating husbands from wives and parents from children against their
will.
But people sometimes became slaves by legitimate means.
Some people chose of their own free will to become or re-
main slaves.
Leviticus 25:39-47 – Some became so impoverished that they had
no way to provide an income or obtain a job. So they sold themselves as
slaves to a master.
Genesis 47:18-25 – The godly ruler Joseph bought Egyptians and
made them the property of Pharaoh in exchange for food during the fam-
ine. The people suggested this and appreciated it!
Others voluntarily became or remained slaves because of family ties
or because they liked the master and wanted to work for him (Exodus
21:5; Deuteronomy 15:16,17).
In some such cases, people willingly became or remained slaves and
sometimes were grateful because the alternative was much worse.
Others became slaves as a punishment for crimes or sins.
This may be compared to the modern practice of imprisoning crim-
inals. They are not free, but it is the consequence of their own wrongdo-
ing. (Exodus 22:1-3; Genesis 44:17; Leviticus 25:45-46; 2 Chronicles
36:20; Joshua 9:23; Exodus 21:16; 2 Chronicles 28:8-15)
See also Ecclesiastes 2:7; Exodus 12:44; 21:2.
Proper Treatment of Slaves
Slaves have often been abused or mistreated.
Exodus 1:10-14 – The Egyptians abused the Israelites demanding
harsh labor and even killing babies (verses 15,16,22). God freed them
from this slavery – Exodus 13:3,14; Leviticus 25:55; 26:13; Deuteronomy
15:15; 24:18,22; 5:6; 6:21; 7:8; Joshua 24:17; Micah 6:4; Psalm 105:25.

Slaves in Rome could be beaten, abused, and even killed with impu-
nity.
In American slavery women were sometimes treated like slave fac-
tories, compelled to have sexual relations with men outside marriage in
order to produce more slaves.
(Nehemiah 5:4-12; Deuteronomy 23:15,16)
But God commanded masters to treat slaves well.
The Israelites should remember their slavery in Egypt and not rule
over their slaves with harshness (Leviticus 25:42,43; Deuteronomy
15:13-15; 16:12; Nehemiah 5:5,6).
Ephesians 6:5-9; Colossians 3:22-4:1; 1 Timothy 6:1,2; Titus 2:9,10;
1 Peter 2:18; Philemon – Masters had the right to expect slaves to obey
and work. They should reward or punish their slaves according to their
work. (Matthew 8:9; Luke 12:37-47; 19:17,22; Matthew 24:45-50;
25:21,30)
Slaves should be provided opportunities for rest, worship, and en-
joyment (Deuteronomy 16:11,14; 5:14; Exodus 12:44; 20:10)
Under the law, if a master was cruel to a slave, the slave would be
set free or the master would be punished – Exodus 21:26,27,9-11,20.
Exodus 21:2 – Hebrew slaves (not other nationalities) must be re-
leased in the seventh year. (This is not required under the New Testa-
ment but it illustrates that slavery can be compassionate.) (Jeremiah
34:9-16)
Colossians 4:1; Ephesians 6:9 – Masters should give bondservants
what is just and fair. They must treat slaves as they themselves would
want to be treated by their Master (Matthew 7:12). See also Luke 7:2.
1 Timothy 6:2 – Slaves who had believing masters should not des-
pise them because they are brethren, but rather serve them because they
are believers and beloved.
Slaves were often highly honored and even loved. Some were given
positions of high responsibility, even authority over an entire household
(Joseph in Potiphar’s house – Genesis 39; Abraham’s servant – Genesis
24:2). The centurion in Luke 7:1-5 had a dearly beloved servant. So some
servants were loved and cared for like family members.
Slavery to a wealthy or prestigious master often had many ad-
vantages over freedom in poverty or need.
Masters were required to provide for and protect their slaves.
“Old Testament slavery/servanthood must never be thought
of on the model of West Indian slavery of the Christian era. Mosaic
legislation extended protection to the slave and – such was the in-
stitution – had to make provision for the slave who loved his mas-
ter and would not leave slavery (Exodus 21:2ff.). Such a ‘slave’, as
a matter of social status, may have been at the bottom of life’s
heap, but in another sense he was as powerful as his master, for

should he ever have been molested, it was the master the molester
had to reckon with.” – J Alec Motyer on Isaiah 41:8,9
Spiritual Relations between Slaves and Freemen
Both slaves and freemen must be treated the same in spiritual rela-
tions.
Mark 16:15,16 – The gospel should be preached to all so all can be
saved. (Luke 24:47; 1 Timothy 2:4,6; Acts 10:34,35; 11:18; Revelation
5:9,10)
1 Corinthians 12:13 – By one Spirit we were all baptized into one
body whether slave or free.
Galatians 3:28 – We are all one in Christ Jesus. There is neither Jew
nor Greek, there is neither slave nor free man… in Christ Jesus.
Colossians 3:11 – There is neither Greek nor Jew, circumcised nor
uncircumcised, barbarian, Scythian, slave nor free, but Christ is all and
in all.
All people are saved on the same basis and serve in the church with-
out regard to free or slave. In theory, just as an employee at work could
be an elder over his employer in the church, so a slave could serve as an
elder over his master in the church.
Conclusions: Abusive Slavery vs. Benevolent Slavery
Some have argued that slavery inherently violates the New Testa-
ment or that New Testament principles, properly applied, would gradu-
ally end the practice of slavery.
Surely obeying the New Testament would end the abuses of slav-
ery. But not all slavery is the same. Just as there are different kinds of
faith, love, doctrine, works, speech, etc. – some good and some bad – so
there are different kinds of slavery. Not all kinds of slavery have the char-
acteristics often associated with slavery in the USA.
Consider:
The gospel describes Christians as slaves to Jesus as our
Master.
Romans 6:6,16-23 – We should cease being slaves of sin to become
slaves of God and righteousness.
Galatians 4:8,9; 5:1 – Service to idols or to the Old Law is compared
to slavery from which men should be set free and not return. The prob-
lem was a corrupt or inadequate master.
1 Corinthians 7:22 – For he who is called in the Lord while a slave
is the Lord's freedman. Likewise he who is called while free is Christ's
slave.
If the master-slave relationship is inherently evil so it should be
abolished, why does Jesus use it to describe our relationship with Him?
Note that Romans 6 says there is good slavery and bad slavery depend-
ing on the master and the circumstances.

True, this is an illustration and does not fit in all ways (like compar-
ing the relationship of Jesus and the church to that of husbands and
wives). And God has the right to own us because He created us. Never-
theless, this point demonstrates that slavery can be a blessing when
slaves have a benevolent master.
(2 Peter 1:1; James 1:1; Malachi 1:6; Matthew 10:24; Philippians 1:1;
Romans 1:1; Titus 1:1)
As already discussed, every aspect of slavery can be
conducted properly.
Slaves can be obtained in a legitimate and benevolent manner. It
was sometimes an act of kindness to those in poverty to provide them
with the opportunity they needed to live.
Masters can treat slaves in a kind and benevolent manner. Slavery
often benefited the slaves who received their necessities and protection.
Both masters and slaves can be Christians and treat one another
with love and respect.
So, in what way is slavery inherently wrong?
Would God instruct men how to act as slave owners if owning
slaves is sinful?
Ephesians 6:9; Colossians 4:1; and Philemon – God instructed
Christians how to act properly as masters and how to properly treat
slaves. Does God instruct people how to properly commit sin? If slave-
holders obey these passages, would they still be in sin?
1 Timothy 6:2 – Slaves should not despise believing masters be-
cause they are brethren, but rather serve them because they are believers
and beloved. (Philemon 16)
If it were sinful for Philemon to own Onesimus, why would Paul
send Onesimus back to Philemon? Why did Paul write a letter by inspi-
ration of the Holy Spirit cooperating with slavery if it was sinful?
Whether slavery was harmful or beneficial depended
entirely on the relationship between the master and the
slaves.
A good master was a blessing. Masters could love slaves and slaves
could love masters (1 Timothy 6:2; Luke 7:1-5; Philemon 16)
Stuart states this point in his commentary on Exodus. He says the
book of Exodus…
“…is not about liberation in general or about political and re-
ligious freedom in particular, but about deliverance from bad ser-
vitude to good servitude. The Israelites served Pharaoh but were
called by God to serve him instead. It was not a question of need-
ing freedom from being under the control of a national leader; it
was a question of a good, divine national (and universal) leader
rescuing his chosen people from a bad, human national leader. …

[Likewise,] sin is an enslaver. But this slavery can be escaped —
not by skill or cunning but by changing masters from sin to God.”
The perversions and abuses of slavery, as described above, are
clearly sinful. But benevolent slavery, in which people own other people
but help and treat them kindly, cannot be shown to be inherently wrong.
Whether slavery is good or bad depends on the master.
Nevertheless, from the viewpoint of the slave, 1 Corinthians 7:21,23
shows that freedom is to be preferred if one can achieve it.
Sources Frequently Cited in These Notes
Coffman, James Burton, Commentary on 1 & 2 Thessalonians 1 &
2 Timothy Titus and Philemon; Firm Foundation Publishing House,
Austin, TX, 1978.
Hendriksen, William, New Testament Commentary Exposition of
Colossians and Philemon; Baker Book House, Grand Rapids, Michigan,
1964.
Ancient Christian Commentary on Scripture; InterVarsity Aca-
demic, Downers Grove, IL, 2006. WORDsearch CROSS e-book.
Bauer, Danker, Arndt, and Gingrich, A Greek-English Lexicon of
the New Testament and Other Early Christian Literature, 3rd Edition;
University of Chicago Press, Chicago, IL 2001. WORDsearch CROSS e-
book.
Bromiley, Geoffrey W., trans., Gerhard Kittel, Gerhard Friedrich,
ed. Theological Dictionary of the New Testament: Abridged in One Vol-
ume; William B. Eerdmans, Grand Rapids, MI 2003. WORDsearch
CROSS e-book.
ESV Archaeology Study Bible, The; Crossway, Wheaton, IL, 2017.
Horne, Thomas, Introduction to the Critical Study and Knowledge
of the Holy Scriptures, 4 volumes; T. Cadwell, Strand, London, 1828
(public domain).
Lipscomb, David and J. W. Shepherd, A Commentary on the New
Testament Epistles: I, II Thessalonians, I, II Timothy, Titus, Philemon;
Gospel Advocate Company, Nashville, TN, 1942.
Patton, Marshall, Truth Commentaries: The Books of 1 and 2 Tim-
othy, Titus, Philemon; Guardian of Truth Foundation, Bowling Green,
KY, 2001.
Patton, William, Bible Wines or the Laws of Fermentation; The
Challenge Press, Little Rock, AR.
Thayer, Joseph Henry, Greek-English Lexicon of the New Testa-
ment (original material prepared by Grimm and Wilke, translated, re-
vised, and enlarged by Thayer); Zondervan’s Publishing House, Grand
Rapids, MI (public domain).
Vine, W.E., Vine’s Expository Dictionary of New Testament
Words; MacDonald Publishing Co., McLean, VA.

Printed books, booklets, and tracts available at
gospelway.com/sales
Free Bible study articles online at
gospelway.com/
Free Bible courses online at
biblestudylessons.com
Free class books at
biblestudylessons.com/classbooks
Free commentaries on Bible books at
biblestudylessons.com/commentary
Contact the author at
Free e-mail Bible study newsletter
gospelway.com/update_subscribe.php

Titus

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Titus

Uploaded by

Document Information

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Titus

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Commentary on

Titus and Philemon

© Copyright David E. Pratte, 2022

Note carefully: No teaching in any of our materials is

Front page photo

Commentary on Titus and Philemon Page #2

Page #3 Commentary on Titus and Philemon

Commentary on Titus and Philemon Page #4

Page #5 Commentary on Titus and Philemon

You can find study questions to accompany these notes at

To join our mailing list to be informed of new books or

I want to express thanks to the students in the adult Bible

Commentary on Titus and Philemon Page #6

Only the Scriptures provide an infallible, authoritatively inspired

“He who glories, let him glory in the Lord”

Page #7 Commentary on Titus and Philemon

ASV – American Standard Version

Commentary on Titus and Philemon Page #8

The author: Paul the apostle

Page #9 Commentary on Titus and Philemon

Commentary on Titus and Philemon Page #10

Page #11 Commentary on Titus and Philemon

Chapter 1 – Qualifications and

Qualifications and work of elders

1:1-9 – Qualifications of Elders

Commentary on Titus and Philemon Page #12

Page #13 Commentary on Titus and Philemon

Commentary on Titus and Philemon Page #14

Page #15 Commentary on Titus and Philemon

Commentary on Titus and Philemon Page #16

Page #17 Commentary on Titus and Philemon

(Note that much of this material is discussed also in our comments

God often teaches us the nature of something – especially some-

Commentary on Titus and Philemon Page #18

Page #19 Commentary on Titus and Philemon

Commentary on Titus and Philemon Page #20

Page #21 Commentary on Titus and Philemon

Elders should set good examples.

Commentary on Titus and Philemon Page #22

Page #23 Commentary on Titus and Philemon

Commentary on Titus and Philemon Page #24

Page #25 Commentary on Titus and Philemon

Commentary on Titus and Philemon Page #26

Page #27 Commentary on Titus and Philemon

Commentary on Titus and Philemon Page #28

Page #29 Commentary on Titus and Philemon

Commentary on Titus and Philemon Page #30

Page #31 Commentary on Titus and Philemon

Commentary on Titus and Philemon Page #32

Page #33 Commentary on Titus and Philemon

The qualifications are necessary

Commentary on Titus and Philemon Page #34

Page #35 Commentary on Titus and Philemon

Commentary on Titus and Philemon Page #36

Page #37 Commentary on Titus and Philemon

Commentary on Titus and Philemon Page #38

Page #39 Commentary on Titus and Philemon

Commentary on Titus and Philemon Page #40

Page #41 Commentary on Titus and Philemon

Commentary on Titus and Philemon Page #42