Exegesis and Exposition of Titus 3:1-2 - Wenstrom · 2014 William E. Wenstrom, Jr. Bible Ministries 1 Exegesis and Exposition of Titus 3:1-2 Titus 3:1-Reminder of Responsibilities

2014 William E. Wenstrom, Jr. Bible Ministries

1

Exegesis and Exposition of Titus 3:1-2

Titus 3:1-Reminder of Responsibilities to Governmental Rulers-Authorities

Titus 3:1 Remind them to be subject to rulers, to authorities, to be

obedient, to be ready for every good deed. (NASB95)

This verse is composed of the following: (1) second person singular present

active imperative form of the verb hupomimnēskomai (ὑποµιµνῄσκοµαι), “Remind” (2) accusative third person masculine plural form of the intensive

personal pronoun autos (αὐτός), “them” (3) dative feminine plural form of the

noun archē (ἀρχή), “to rulers” (4) dative feminine plural form of the noun exousia

(ἐξουσία), “to authorities” (5) present passive infinitive form of the verb

hupotassomai (ὑποτάσσοµαι), “to be subject” (6) present active infinitive form of

the verb peitharcheō (πειθαρχέω), “to be obedient” (7) preposition pros (πρός),

“for” (8) accusative neuter singular form of the adjective pas (πᾶς), “every” (8)

accusative neuter singular form of the noun ergon (ἒργον), “deed” (9) accusative

neuter singular form of the adjective agathos (ἀγαθός), “good” (10) accusative

masculine plural form of the adjective hetoimos (ἕτοιµος), “ready” (11) present

active infinitive form of the verb eimi (εἰµί), “to be.”

Asyndeton

In Titus 3:1, Paul is employing the figure of “asyndeton” in order to mark a

transition from reminding of Titus of his responsibilities to God, the Cretan

Christian community as his delegate to instructing him to remind the Cretan church

of their responsibilities to governmental rulers and authorities.

Hupomimnēskomai

The verb hupomimnēskomai means “to remind” somebody of something, “to

bring something to someone’s attention.” The second person singular form of the

verb is of course a reference to Titus. Therefore, the verb indicates that Paul wants

Titus “to remind” the Cretan Christian community of their responsibilities to

governmental rulers and authorities. It denotes that he was to remind the Cretan

church to be subject to governmental rulers and authorities implying that they were

already taught to do this from the beginning of their Christian instruction.

The present imperative form of the verb hupomimnēskomai is a “customary

present imperative” whose force is for Titus to simply continue making it his habit

of reminding the Cretan church to be subject to their governmental rulers and

authorities. It is a command for action to be continued, action that may or may not


2

have already been going on. It is often a character building command to the effect

of “make this your habit,” “train yourself in this, discipline yourself.” This is the

use of the present imperative in general precepts. The present imperative of

hupomimnēskomai means, “to continue making it your habit of” reminding the

Cretan church to be subject to their governmental rulers and authorities. Therefore,

the active voice of the verb indicates Titus as the subject is to obey this command.

Autos

The intensive personal pronoun autos means “them” referring to the Cretan

Christian community as a corporate entity. It is functioning as an accusative direct

object meaning it is receiving the action of the verb hupomimnēskomai. It is also

functioning as the subject of the infinitives hupotassomai, peitharcheō and eimi

meaning it is performing the action of these three verbs.

Hupotassomai

The verb hupotassomai or hupotasso is a compound verb composed of the

preposition hupo, “under, subject to” and the verb tasso, “to arrange,” thus the

word literally means, “to arrange under.” There are no pre-Hellenic examples of

this compound verb. It is a Greek military term meaning ‘to arrange under one’s

authority,’ as a general arranges his regiments in orderly array before himself.

The word can have the following meanings: (1) Active (a) To place under (b)

To affix under (c) To subordinate (2) Passive (a) To be subject (b) The subordinate

(c) Subordinates (d) One without rights (3) Middle (a) To subject oneself (b) To be

subservient (c) To acknowledge as lord (d) To submit voluntarily.

The word frequently occurs in the middle voice and often indicates involuntary

submission or obedience. Throughout Hellenistic literature hupotasso (and its

cognates) is found in lists expressing rules on ethical standards and appropriate

levels of subordination.

Lists of duties appear in Aristotle 4th

century B.C.), Seneca (1st century A.D.)

and Plutarch (2nd

century A.D.). In addition, the middle voice is also used to

indicate involuntary submission, “to submit oneself” out of fear. It may describe

voluntary submission or obedience, but this sense occurs less often.

Submission to spiritual laws and to God is also indicated by the middle form. In

references to literary matters the word means “to attach or append.” The verb

appears often throughout the papyri with the meaning of “to append.”

Liddell and Scott list the following: (1) Place or arrange under, assign (2) Post

in the shelter of (3) Draw up behind (4) Subject (5) Subdue, make subject; to be

obedient; will submit; subordinates (6) Underlie to be implied in or associated with


3

(7) Put after, subjoin, append; follows (8) Take as a minor premise (9) Govern the

subjunctive.1

The verb hupotasso appears only 28 times in the Septuagint, of which 9 are

non-canonical. It used to translate the following Hebrew words: (1) Davar,

“speak”; hiphil: “subdue” (Ps. 18:47 [17:47]). (2) Dumiyah, “silence” (Ps. 62:1

[61:1]). (3) Damam, “be still, wait for” (Ps. 37:7 [36:7], 62:5 [61:5]). (4) Kavash,

“subjugate”; niphal: “be subdued”: (1 Ch. 22:18). (5) Pelach, “serve” (Dn. 7:27-

Aramaic). (6) Radhadh, “subdue” (Ps. 144:2 [143:2]). (7) Sim, “set, put; consider”

(Hg. 2:18 [2:19]). (8) Shith, “put” (Ps. 8:6).

The word has the same range of meanings in the Septuagint as it does in

classical writings and can have the following meanings: (1) To place under,

subordinate (2) Subordinate (3) Subjects (4) To subject (5) To overcome (6) To be

subject (7) To become subject (8) Mid. To subject oneself (9) To acknowledge

someone’s dominion or power (10) To submit (11) To surrender to God (12) To

humble oneself before him.

The verb hupotasso appears 38 times in the Greek New Testament and

frequently displays the same meanings found in the classical and Septuagint

literature and involves both voluntary and involuntary submission. The verb’s

meaning involves the concept of subordination to legitimate authority.

The New Thayer’s Greek-English Lexicon lists the following meanings for the

verb, “to arrange under, to subordinate; to subject, put in subjection mid. To

subject one self, to obey; to submit to control; to yield one’s self, to obey; to

submit to one’s control; to yield to one’s admonition or advice.2

A Greek-English Lexicon of the New Testament and Other Early Christian

Literature-Third Edition: (1) to cause to be in a submissive relationship, to subject,

to subordinate (2) to add a document at the end of another document, attach,

append, subjoin.3

Louw and Nida define the word, “to bring something under the firm control of

someone.”4

Roland Bergmeier lists the following: (1) Active, subject, subordinate, place

under (2) Passive, be subjected to, be placed under (3) Middle, submit to,

subordinate oneself to, yield to, be subject to, obey.5

The Analytical Greek Lexicon Revised lists the following: (1) To place or

arrange under; to subordinate (2) To bring under influence (3) Pass. To be

1 Greek-English Lexicon, New Edition, page 1897 2 page 645 3 Page 1042 4 Greek-English Lexicon of the New Testament Based on Semantic Domains volume 2, page 476 5 Exegetical Dictionary of the New Testament, volume 3, page 408


4

subordinated (4) To be brought under a state or influence (5) Mid. To submit one’s

self, render obedience, be submissive.6

Vine’s Expository Dictionary of Biblical Words, “Hupotasso, primarily a

military term, ‘to rank under’ (hupo, ‘under,’ tasso, ‘to arrange’), denotes (a) ‘to

put in subjection, to subject,’ (Rom. 8:20) (twice); in the following, the RV, has to

subject for KJV, ‘to put under,’ (1 Cor. 15:27) (thrice), (28) (3rd clause); (Eph.

1:22; Heb. 2:8) (4th clause); in (1 Cor. 15:28) (1st clause), for KJV ‘be subdued’;

in (Phil. 3:21), for KJV, ‘subdue’; in (Heb. 2:5), KJV, ‘hath... put in subjection’;

(b) in the middle or passive voice, to subject oneself, to obey, be subject to, (Luke

2:51; 10:17,20; Rom. 8:7; 10:3), RV, ‘did (not) subject themselves’ [KJV, ‘have

(not) submitted themselves’]; (13:1,5; 1 Cor. 14:34), RV, ‘be in subjection’ (KJV,

‘be under obedience’); (15:28) (2nd clause); (16:16) RV, ‘be in subjection’ (KJV,

‘submit, etc.’); so (Col. 3:18; Eph. 5:21), RV, ‘subjecting yourselves’ (KJV,

‘submitting, etc.’); (v. 22), RV in italics, according to the best texts; (v. 24), ‘is

subject’; (Titus 2:5,9), RV, ‘be in subjection’ (KJV, ‘be obedient’); (3:1), RV, ‘to

be in subjection’ (KJV, ‘to be subject’); (Heb. 12:9), ‘be in subjection’; (Jas. 4:7),

RV, ‘be subject’ (KJV, ‘submit yourselves’); so (1 Pet. 2:13; v. 18), RV, ‘be in

subjection’; so (3:1), KJV and RV; (v. 5), similarly; (3:22), ‘being made subject’;

(5:5), RV, ‘be subject’ (KJV, ‘submit yourselves’); in some texts in the 2nd part, as

KJV.”

In the Greek New Testament, hupotasso is used in relation to the following

subjects: (1) Christ subjection to Mary and Joseph (Lk. 2:51). (2) Demons

subjected to the disciples (Lk. 10:17, 20). (3) Creation subject to Christ (1 Cor.

15:27, 28; Eph. 1:22; Phlp. 3:21; He. 2:8; 1 Pet. 3:22). (4) Wives submitting to

their husbands (Eph. 5:22; Col. 3:18; Tit. 2:5; 1 Pet. 3:1, 5). (5) Christian labor

submit to the authority of management (Tit. 2:9; 1 Pet. 2:18). (6) Submitting to

civil authorities (Rom 13:1, 5; Tit. 3:1; 1 Pet. 2:13). (7) Believers submitting to

Pastoral authority (1 Cor. 16:16; 1 Pet. 5:5). (8) Believers submitting to God (Heb.

12:9; Jam. 4:7). (9) Jews failure to submit to the righteousness of God in Christ

(Rom. 10:3). (10) Women submissive in local assembly (1 Cor. 14:34). (11)

Believers deferring to one another (Eph. 5:21; 1 Pet. 5:5). (12) Creation subject to

a fallen state (Rom. 8:20) (13) The sin nature obedient to the Law (Rom. 8:7).

In Titus 3:1, the verb hupotasso is used with regards to the relationship between

the Cretan Christian community and governmental rulers and authorities. It denotes

that the Cretan Christian community was to submit to the authority of their

governmental rulers and authorities and which authority was delegated to the

governmental authorities and rulers by God. The word speaks of the Cretan church

6 page 419


5

being obedient to their governmental rulers and authorities as a result of being

trained in the Word of God by Titus and Paul to do so.

This verb is used in the same manner in relation to the Christian community’s

responsibilities to governmental authorities in Romans 13:1 and 1 Peter 2:13-14.

Romans 13:1 Each and every person must continue making it their habit of

voluntarily subjecting themselves to the governmental authorities because

there is, as an eternal spiritual truth, absolutely no authority except by God.

Specifically, those which at any time do exist are, as an eternal spiritual truth,

ordained by God. (Author’s translation)

1 Peter 2:13 Submit yourselves for the Lord's sake to every human

institution, whether to a king as the one in authority, 14 or to governors as

sent by him for the punishment of evildoers and the praise of those who do

right. (NASB95)

In Titus 3:1, the present tense of the verb hupotasso is a customary present used

to signal an action which regularly occurs indicating that Paul is instructing Titus

to remind the Cretan Christian community to make it their habit of being subject to

their governmental rulers and authorities.

The passive voice of the verb hupotasso is a causative or permissive passive

which implies consent or cause of the action of the verb on the part of the subject.

This would indicate that Paul wants the Cretan Christian community to cause

themselves to be subject or obedient to their governmental rulers and authorities or

in other words, this obedience was to be voluntary. It emphasizes the volitional

responsibility of the Cretan believers to subject themselves to the governing

authorities on the island of Crete. Therefore, the permissive or causative passive

voice of the verb hupotasso indicates that Cretan church was to “voluntarily”

subject themselves to the governing authorities.

The infinitive form of the verb hupotasso is a complementary infinitive

meaning it is completing the thought of the verb hupomimnēskomai and thus

identifies what Titus was to remind the Cretans about.

Peitharcheō

The verb peitharcheō means “to obey” since it pertains to submitting to

legitimate authority by obeying. Here the verb is used of course in reference to the

Cretan Christian community “obeying” their governmental rulers and authorities.

The present tense of the verb peitharcheō is a customary present used to signal

an action which regularly occurs indicating that Paul is instructing Titus to remind

the Cretan Christian community to make it their habit of being obedient to their

governmental rulers and authorities.


6

The active voice is a simple active voice indicating that the Cretan Christian

community as the subject is to make it their habit of obeying their governmental

rulers and authorities.

The infinitive form of this verb could be interpreted as a complementary

infinitive meaning it is completing the thought of the verb hupotasso and thus

identifies what Titus was to remind the Cretans about. He was to remind them to

be obedient to their governmental rulers and authorities.

Some interpret it as an epexegetical infinitive meaning it is clarifying or

explaining the verb hupotasso. However, this type of infinitive and the appositional

infinitive are used to qualify a noun or an adjective but here we have the verb

hupotasso.

The infinitive form of this verb peitharcheō is an infinitive of means which is

very rare in the New Testament and usually occurs as the object of the preposition

en and is articular. However, it can appear without this construction. As an

infinitive of means, the verb would be describing how or the way in which the

Cretan Christian community were to make it their habit of voluntarily subjecting

themselves to the governmental rulers and authorities. They were to do so by

obeying them. It is defining what Paul means by subjecting oneself to the

governmental rulers and authorities. This appears to be his emphasis.

Archē

The noun archē appears in classical Greek from Homer onwards. The word

functions both in an ordinary sense and in a philosophical sense. It is an important

term in Greek philosophy. The noun archē always signifies “primacy,” whether in

time, “beginning,” or in rank, “power, dominion, office.” Arche in philosophical

discussions denoted the much sought after origin and cause of the physical

universe. The word can have the following meanings: (1) beginning, start (2)

starting point, original beginning (3) the first cause (4) power, authority, rule.

Archē developed a special meaning in Greek philosophy. Philosophers debated

about a precise “starting point” of the universe. It denotes the point at which

something new begins in time, the end of which can be seen from the first.

Temporally, it denotes “beginning” in the exact sense or in other words the

place in a temporal sequence at which something new, which is also finite,

commences. When one spoke of the beginning (archē), the end (telos) was also in

view. Since the beginning comes out of the infinite, so the end will also lose itself

in it. It is the starting point, the cause, the first cause of all that is, the basic

principle of all, e.g. for Thales, water; for Anaximander, infinity; for Anaximenes,

air. Gradually, archē developed its meaning from the underlying cause to the


7

underlying laws, which determine the development and progress of the cosmos.

Philo consistently used the word to denote non-eternity.

Philosophically, the term archē is of greatest significance in cosmic physics. In

this area, it denotes original material from everything has evolved. In this sense,

however, it gradually was replaced by stoichein. It is still reserved, however, for

the fundamental laws which control the evolution of the world both in great things

and small. To the Stoics theos, “God” was identical with archē.

The Septuagint uses archē and its cognates to translate over thirty Hebrew

terms. In the Septuagint, archē usually denotes temporal beginning. It is used for

“dominion, power, position of power, official posts, leading position, person who

exercises influence.” When arche and its cognates were used in the Septuagint to

translate Hebrew concepts into Greek language, it naturally resulted in an

exchange between the Hebrew and the Greek. Semitic concepts were attached to

Greek words. This became especially important in the New Testament’s

understanding.

New Testament writers used a language which carried the thoughts of two

different worldviews. Archē acquired a broad usage in the Septuagint when it was

used as a translation for otherwise unrelated words which fell in very different

contexts. It is used to translate the Hebrew terms `olam and qedhem. Both of these

words have different nuances in different contexts. Olam involves the Hebraic

concept of eternity. At certain times, qedhem indicates that which is “from the

beginning (in time) as well as the “first” in rank or worth.

Archē appears in reference to rule or authority in the Satan’s military hierarchy

who control and influence the cosmic system in Daniel 7:27. Paul adopted this

word’s usage in his writings regarding spiritual combat with the kingdom of

darkness.

The noun archē appears 55 times in the Greek New Testament. When the New

Testament uses the archē word group, it implies, as does secular Greek, a certain

priority, both of time and of standing and prestige. In other words, the New

Testament employs the concepts in much the same way as secular Greek. This

word group is used to denote a first point in time and to indicate an area of

authority.

The New International Dictionary of New Testament Theology lists the

following meanings for the noun arche: (1) beginning, commencement (2) absolute

beginning (3) first cause (4) power, authorities, rulers (5) angelic power.7

Theological Dictionary of the New Testament: (1) beginning (2) power.8

The New Thayer’s Greek Lexicon: (1) beginning, origin (2) the person or thing

that commences, the first person or thing in a series, the leader (3) that by which

7 volume 1, pages 166-167 8 volume 1, pages 481-482


8

anything begins to be, the origin, active cause (4) the extremity of a thing (5) the

first place, principality, rule, magistracy.9


Literature: (1) beginning (2) concrete, plural corners of a sheet (3) beginning, at

first, from the beginning, at the beginning (4) beginning, origin in the absolute

sense (5) figurative of persons (6) the first cause (7) ruler, authority, the officials

(8) rule, office, domain, sphere of influence.10

Greek-English Lexicon of the New Testament Based on Semantic Domains

(volume 2): (1) to initiate an action, process, or state of being – ‘to begin, to

commence, beginning’ (page 655). (2) a point of time at the beginning of a

duration – ‘beginning, to begin’ (page 637). (3) one who or that which constitutes

an initial cause – ‘the first cause, origin’ (page 779). (4) the sphere of one’s

authority or rule – ‘sphere of authority, limit of one’s rule’ (page 478). (5) one who

rules or governs – ‘ruler, governor’ (page 478). (6) a supernatural power having

some particular role in controlling the destiny and activities of human beings –

‘power, authority, lordship, ruler, wicked force’ (pages 147-148). (7) elementary

and preliminary aspects of defining the nature of something – ‘elementary aspect,

simple truth’ (page 588). (8) the corner of a two-dimensional object, such as sheet

of cloth – ‘corner’ (page 704).

In Titus 3:1, the noun archē means “rulers” since it pertains to human

governmental rulers or leaders. Therefore, Paul wants Titus to remind the Cretan

Christian community to make it their habit of voluntarily subject themselves by

obeying their governmental rulers or civil leaders in government.

The noun archē is functioning as a dative direct object meaning it is receiving

the action of the verbs hupotasso and peitharcheō. The word is put in the dative

rather than accusative case since Paul is emphasizing the proper relationship that

must exist between the Cretan Christian community and their governmental leaders

or rulers.

Exousia

In classical Greek, the noun exousia appears in different type of literature. It

could denote authority to rule, one bearing such authority, the sphere controlled by

this authority, and the power to do something. It is closely related to dunamis,

“power” but differs by its intent of the delegation of authority rather than the

capability of the inherent power of dunamis.

Exousia appears in the fifth century B.C. in the writings of Thucydides and was

used by Antiphon Orator meaning “an ability to do something” as long as there

9 pages 76-77 10 pages 111-112


9

were no hindrances (Kittel, 2:562). The word generally denotes the right to act

according to legal or moral standards. Thus it is often used in an official sense to

describe the authority of a king.

The word has a derived meaning “authoritative position” and in the plural

“authorities.” It appears over fifty times in the Septuagint where it retains the idea

of “authority.” The noun exousia is used in the Septuagint for God’s power in the

sense of His absolute sovereignty. Josephus and Philo used the word in this manner

as well.

Exousia appears 103 times in the Greek New Testament where both the

classical and Septuagint meanings are retained. The word denotes “delegated

authority, authoritative position, and office of state, official power, head of state.”


Literature-Third edition lists the following definitions for the noun exousia: (1) a

state of control over something, freedom of choice, right (2) potential or resource

to command, control or govern, capability, might, power (3) the right to control or

command, authority, absolute power, warrant (4) Power exercised by rulers or

others in high position by virtue of their office, ruling power, official power (5)

bearer of ruling authority (a) human authorities officials, government (b) of

transcendent rulers and functionaries (6) the sphere in which power is exercised,

domain (7) means of exercising power, 1 Cor. 11:10. (Pages 352-353)

The New Thayer’s Greek-English Lexicon: (1) power of choice, liberty of

doing as one pleases; leave or permission (2) physical and mental power; the

ability or strength with which one is endued, which he either possesses or exercises

(3) the power of authority (influence) and of right; delegated authority (4) the

power of rule or government (the power of him whose will and commands must be

submitted to by others and obeyed; authority (Page 225).

Greek-English Lexicon of the New Testament Based on Semantic Domains lists

the following definitions for the noun exousia: (1) the right to control or govern

over – ‘authority to rule, right to control’ (volume 2, page 476). (2) the domain or

sphere over which one has authority to control or rule – ‘jurisdiction’ (volume 2,

page 476). (3) a means or instrument by which authority is marked or symbolized –

‘symbol of authority, symbol of subjection to authority’ (volume 2, page 476). (4)

one who has the authority to rule or govern – ‘an authority, ruler’ (volume 2, page

477). (5) a state of control over someone or something – ‘control’ (volume 2, page

473). (6) the power to do something with or without an added implication of

authority – ‘power’ (volume 2, page 681). (7) a supernatural power having some

particular role in controlling the destiny and activities of human beings – ‘power,

authority, lordship, ruler, wicked force’ (volume 2, pages 147-148). (8) the right to

judge on the basis of having the potential to evaluate – ‘right, freedom of choice,

freedom of action, power to evaluate’ (volume 2, page 365).


10

The Analytical Greek Lexicon Revised, “power, ability, faculty; efficiency,

energy; liberty license; authority, rule, dominion, jurisdiction; authorities,

potentates, powers; right, authority, full power; privilege, prerogative; a veil”

(Page 146).

The noun exousia is used of the temporary authority of the fallen angels and

Satan (Luke 4:6; 22:43; Acts 26;18; Ephesians 2:2; 3:10; 6:12; Colossians 1:13,

16; 2:10, 15). When used in relation to the Satanic order of battle the word is

always listed after the noun arche, “rulers” (Col. 1:16; 2:10, 15; Eph. 1:21; 3:10).

Exousia is used of the delegated authority that the apostles and disciples of

Jesus Christ received from Him (Luke 10:19; Acts 8:19; 2 Corinthians 10:8;

13:10). It is used often of the authority of the Lord Jesus Christ to heal, forgive

sins, to judge, to rule over men and angels, both elect and non-elect and the church

and raise Himself from the dead (Matthew 7:29; 9:8; 10:1; 21:23, 24, 27; 28:18;

Mark 1:22, 27; 2:10; 3:15; 6:7; 11:28, 29, 33; Luke 4:32, 36; 5:24; 9:1; 12:5; 20:2,

8; John 1:12; 5:27; 10:18; 17:2; Jude 25; Revelation 12:10;

The noun is used of the authority in the millennium that Christ will delegate to

the overcomers (Revelation 2:26). It is used in relation to the fourth seal judgment

during the last three and a half years of the Tribulation period and refers to the

power of the ashen horse rider to kill through war, famine and pestilence a fourth

of mankind (Revelation 6:8).

Exousia is used of the power of the fallen angels to torment the unsaved for five

months during the last three and a half years of the tribulation (Revelation 9:3, 10,

19). It speaks of the power of the two witnesses during the Tribulation (Revelation

11:6).

The word is used of the authority and power of the Antichrist over the human

race during the Tribulation period (Revelation 13:2, 4, 5, 7; 17:13) as well as the

power and authority of the false prophet (Revelation 13:12). The noun is used of

the power and authority to rule that will be delegated to the ten kings help to

compose the Revived Form of the Roman Empire during the Tribulation

(Revelation 17:12). It is used of the power of an elect angel (Revelation 14:18;

18:1).

The word is used of the Father’s authority (Acts 1:7; Romans 9:21; Revelation

16:9). Exousia is used also in relation to the power of the second death, which

refers to eternal condemnation or in other words, the perpetuation of real spiritual

death in the eternal lake of fire (Revelation 20:6). It is used of the right of access

that believers from all dispensations will have to the tree of life in eternal state

(Revelation 22:14).

The noun speaks of the authority a person has over their own soul in 1

Corinthians 7:37. It speaks of freedom or liberty in 1 Corinthians 8:9, 9:4, 5, 6 and


11

2 Thessalonians 3:9. The noun is used of the authority assumed by the false

teachers among the Judaizers (1 Corinthians 9:12).

Exousia means “control” in Acts 5:4. It means “authority” in 1 Corinthians

11:10 where it is used of the women’s long hair, which is symbolic of the fact that

she is under the authority of her husband. The word is used of human

governmental authorities (Matthew 8:9; Luke 7:8; 12:11; 20:20; 23:7; John 19:10;

Acts 9:14; 26:10, 12; Romans 13:1, 2, 3; 1 Corinthians 15:24; Titus 3:1; 1 Peter

3:22). In Romans 9:21, the word is in a Pauline analogy where the potter’s

“authority” over the clay, which he molds into a vessel and is analogous to God’s

authority over Israel.

In Romans 13:1, the word is used in the plural and means “authorities” and

refers to the civil governmental authorities in Rome who were delegated authority

and power by God as His servants to govern the affairs of men and to exercise

justice against law breakers. The word speaks of the power or right to govern and

to exercise authority over the citizens of the Roman Empire.

As in Romans 13:1, the noun exousia in Titus 3:1 is in the plural and means

“authorities” and refers to the civil governmental authorities on the island of Crete

and in the Roman Empire who were delegated authority and power by God as His

servants to govern the affairs of men and to exercise justice against law breakers.

The word speaks of the power or right to govern and to exercise authority over the

citizens of the Roman Empire.

This word exousia is synonymous with the noun archē since it is functioning as

a dative of simple apposition meaning it is appositive to the latter which is

functioning as a dative direct object. The noun exousia is a clarification of the noun

archē. Therefore, the two words are not distinguishing different levels of authority

but are both speaking of all civil governmental authority.

This is indicated by the fact that if Paul was distinguishing levels of authority

here, he would have employed the conjunction καὶ between the two words which

he doesn’t. Now, most later witnesses (D2 0278 Maj lat sy) have καί after ἀρχαῖς,

though the earliest and best witnesses (א A C D* F G Ψ 33 104 1739 1881) do not

have the conjunction.

Also, interestingly, in Romans 13:1-3 where Paul addresses the responsibilities

of the Roman believers to the Roman civil authorities, archē and exousia are used

synonymously for governmental authorities which would indicate that in the

apostle’s mind in Titus 3:1 both words speak of the governmental authorities at

various levels in the government of the Roman Empire.

Therefore, in Titus 3:1, Paul is clarifying for Titus and the Cretan Christian

community that when he talks about them obeying governmental rulers, he does

not mean only those in the highest echelons of the government but all those in

positions of authority in the Roman Empire. In other words, they should obey not


12

only the Roman Emperor but all those under his authority serving him throughout

the Empire.

Eimi

The verb eimi means, “to exist in a particular state or condition” and is

employed with the adjective hetoimos (ἕτοιµος), “ready.” Therefore, the verb

denotes existing in the state of being ready. Paul wanted Titus to remind the Cretan

Christian community to make it their habit of being ready for every good work.

In Titus 3:1, the present tense of the verb eimi is a customary used to signal an

ongoing state indicating that Paul is instructing Titus to remind the Cretan

Christian community to exist in the state of being ready for every good work.

The active voice is a “stative” indicating that the subject exists in the state

indicated by the verb eimi. Therefore, the “stative” active voice indicates that the

Cretan Christian community was “to exist in the state of being” ready for every

good work.

The infinitive form of the verb eimi is a complementary infinitive meaning it is

completing the thought of the verb hupomimnēskomai and thus identifies what else

Titus was to remind the Cretans about.

Hetoimos

The adjective hetoimos means “ready, prepared” since it pertains to a state of

readiness or preparedness. It describes someone who is prepared mentally or

physically to perform an action. Thus Paul wants the Cretan Christian community

to exist in the state of being prepared or readiness to perform good works.

This word is functioning as an accusative predicate adjective meaning is stands

in predicate relation to the accusative intensive personal pronoun autos, “them”

and is making an assertion about this pronoun. Thus it is making the assertion that

the Cretan Christian community was to exist in the state of being ready or prepared

to perform good works.

Ergon

The noun ergon is in the singular and means “work, action” referring to an

action which is produced by the power of the Holy Spirit in accordance with the

Father’s will as a result of obedience to the Word of God. It speaks of a Christian

performing in an action while they are experiencing fellowship with God. It refers

to an action which is produced by the Holy Spirit when a Christian exercises faith

in the Word of God, which results in obedience to the will of the Father, which is


13

revealed by the Spirit in the Word of God. It speaks of the work or action that the

Holy Spirit performed through the Christian as a result of their obedience to the

Lord Jesus Christ’s command to love one another as He loved.

The noun ergon is modified by the adjective pas which means “any kind of”

since it pertains to everything belonging, in kind, to the class designated by the

noun. It speaks of every kind of action or work which is divine in quality and

character or in other words produced by the Holy Spirit as a result of obedience to

the Father’s will which is revealed by the Spirit in the Word of God. Therefore,

Paul is saying that the Cretan Christian community is to be existing in the state of

readiness for any kind of good deed or action or work.

The noun ergon is also the object of the preposition pros which means “for”

since it is functioning as a marker of purpose indicating the purpose of the Cretan

Christian community being ready or prepared. They were to be ready “for” any

kind of good deed, action or work.

Agathos

The adjective agathos appears throughout Greek literature, both classical and

Hellenistic. It came to be associated with that which was perfect or excellent and

with that which distinguished itself by its value or worth. The Attic authors and

philosophers commonly used kalos or agathos to explain the total summary of the

qualities, which an Attic man of honor displayed. It was used in a substantive sense

meaning to do what is “good.”

Although there is at times some semantic overlap with kalos, there are some

different nuances between the two. First of all, kalos suggests aesthetic beauty,

usefulness, fitness while agathos acquires philosophical and ethical connotations.

The word assumes a predominately religious meaning in the Septuagint where it

denotes the “goodness” of God as demonstrated by His deliverance of Israel from

the Egyptians (Exodus 18:9; Numbers 10:32; Hosea 8:3).

Agathos was used to identify God and to describe His creation and works in the

Septuagint and Greek New Testament and expresses the significance or excellence

of a person or thing. In the Greek New Testament, the adjective means, “what is

intrinsically valuable, what is intrinsically good, inherently good in quality but

with the idea of good which is also profitable, useful, benefiting others,

benevolent.” It is used in the New Testament primarily of that which is divine in

quality and character and is beneficial to others.


Literature-Third Edition lists the following definitions: (1) pertaining to meeting a

relatively high standard of quality of things (2) pertaining to meeting a high

standard of worth and merit (Pages 3-4).


14

Greek-English Lexicon of the New Testament Based on Semantic Domains list

the following meanings for the noun: (1) positive moral qualities of the most

general nature – ‘good, goodness, good act’ (88.1). (2) pertaining to having the

proper characteristics or performing the expected function in a fully satisfactory

way – ‘good, nice, pleasant’ (65.20). (3) pertaining to being generous, with the

implication of its relationship to goodness – ‘generous’ (57.110). (4) (occurring

only in the plural): possessions which provide material benefits, usually used with

reference to movable or storable possessions rather than real estate – ‘goods,

possessions’ (57.33).

The adjective agathos in Titus 3:1 is modifying the noun ergon, “work” and

means “divine good in quality and character” and describes this action as good in

the sense that it is divine in quality and character because it is in accordance with

the Father’s will. It is in accordance with the Father’s will because it is the direct

result of a person being influenced by the Spirit. This word describes this work or

action as being intrinsically valuable, intrinsically good, inherently good in quality

but with the idea of good which is also profitable, useful, benefiting others,

benevolent because it is based upon and motivated by the teaching of the Spirit in

the Word of God. It describes this work or action as being intrinsically valuable,

intrinsically good, inherently good in quality but with the idea of good which is

also profitable, useful, benefiting others.

Translation of Titus 3:1

Titus 3:1 Continue to make it your habit of reminding them to make it

their habit of voluntarily subjecting themselves to governmental rulers, or in

other words, governmental authorities by making it their habit of being

obedient, to be ready for any kind of act which is divine good in quality and

character.

Exposition of Titus 3:1

Thus, far in this epistle, Paul has been addressing matters within the church

whether it is listing the qualifications for those who aspire to the office of overseer,

addressing the problems with apostate pastor-teachers or defining the duties of

older and younger men and women and slaves in the Christian community. Now,

Titus 3:1-8, the apostle addresses the Christian’s duty outside the Christian

community. So he goes from being concerned about the conduct of Christians in

relation to each other to be being concerned about their conduct in relation to the

non-Christian.


15

The apostle Paul in Titus 3:1 discusses the responsibility of the Cretan Christian

community in relation to the governmental or civil authorities. He instructs Titus to

continue making it his habit of reminding the Cretan Christian community to make

it their habit of voluntarily subjecting themselves to governmental rulers or in other

words, the governmental authorities. They were to do so by making it their habit of

being obedient to these authorities. Being subject to governmental authorities is

directly connected to being obedient to them since being obedient to them

constitutes being subject to them.

Connected to this, Titus was to continue reminding them to be ready for any

kind of act which is divine good in quality and character. Paul makes clear that

every Christian in the Cretan Christian has a duty to submit to the governmental

authorities by rendering them obedience. Obedience was not an option. It was

mandatory regardless of whether or not they liked or disliked the one in authority.

The fact that Paul is telling Titus to remind the Cretan believers of their

responsibilities in relation to the civil authorities implies that they were taught

these responsibilities in the past by Paul and Titus. Paul was very concerned that

no one would think and speak badly of the gospel and thus the apostolic teaching.

He did not want the Cretan church to become involved in civil disobedience except

when justified. Unjustified civil disobedience he knew would bring the apostolic

teaching of the gospel into disrepute.

J. Hampton Keathley III writes “Here the apostle simply summarizes three key

responsibilities—submission, obedience, and preparation—that promote good

government and aid the work of governmental officials as keepers of law and

order, which is their God-ordained task. But being faithful to these duties to

government is often difficult because, being sinful men and also part of Satan’s

world system, rulers are very often corrupt and unjust and fail to accomplish God’s

purpose for government. It is easy, then, for Christians to fall into the pattern of the

world and to malign and complain and act in rebellion against the government or to

find excuses and seek ways to get around government’s authority or their duties to

government.11

Christians were often looked on with suspicion in the Roman Empire because

their conduct was so different and they met in private meetings for worship (see 1

Peter 2:11–25; 3:13–4:5). It was important that they be good citizens without

compromising the faith. Their pagan neighbors might disobey the law but

Christians must submit to the authority of the state (see Rom. 13). “Ready to every

good work” (Titus 3:1) means “cooperating in those matters that involve the whole

11 Keathley III, J. Hampton, The Letter to Titus: An Exegetical and Devotional Commentary, page 69; Biblical Studies Press, 2000;

www.bible.org


16

community.” Our heavenly citizenship (Phil. 3:20) does not absolve us from

responsibilities as citizens on earth.12

The Cretan Christian community was to render obedience to not only the

Emperor but also to all those serving the Emperor in the Roman Empire. In our day

and age in America, this would mean from the President down to the local or town

governmental leaders and local police. Obeying governmental authorities would

involve obeying the laws of the land. It would also include paying one’s taxes and

conducting oneself in public in an orderly manner. Christians in America should be

obeying and showing respect for every local, state and governmental official since

Paul in Romans 13:1-7 teaches that they all are God’s servants whether these

officials recognize it or not. Paul is teaching in Titus 3:1 that all Christians should

be law-abiding citizens and not anarchists or those who speak evil of their leaders

and complain about them.

The Latin equivalent of the nouns archē and exousia was imperium, which

referred to the right to rule or govern. There were three elements to the Roman

constitution under the Republic: (1) Officials (magistratus) (2) People (comitia) (3)

Senate (senatus). The Emperor with his consortium administered the government

during the Roman Empire beginning with Augustus. An official was called in the

Latin magistratus denoting the governing office.

In Roman terminology, the magistrate included all political officials, from the

consuls down. The government of the Republic consisted of the following

magistracies: (1) Consulership consisting of two men who conducted foreign and

military affairs. (2) Praetor: (a) Praetor urbanus (city praetor) administered justice

among Roman citizens. (b) Praetor peregrinos (alien praetor) administered justice

among citizens and aliens and among aliens.

Aedilis kept state archives, supervised streets, buildings, bridges and aqueducts,

maintained order in the public market place. Quaestor, the lowest of the

magistracies and was usually sought by young men who aspired to political office

and was found in two categories: (1) Quaestores paricidii: investigators of

murders, detectives. (2) Financial quaestors.

Censor consisted of two men elected every five years who administered a

census of Roman citizens. Dictator was elected in times of emergency whose

authority was greater than the consuls. Tribunes of the Plebs consisted of patricians

elected by the plebians who were not subject to the coercion of holders of the

imperium.

The government of the Roman Empire or the Principate, which the apostle Paul

and our Lord subjected themselves to, was centered upon the Emperor himself with

his consistorium of high military, civil and ecclesiastical dignitaries. The Praefecti

12 Wiersbe, W. W. (1996). The Bible exposition commentary (Vol. 2, p. 267). Wheaton, IL: Victor Books.


17

praetorio, which means, “commander of the Praetorian Guard” was the emperor’s

right hand man and chief military officer over the emperor’s imperial guard.

The Praepositus sacri cubiculi means, “chief of the imperial household.” The

magister officiorum means, “master of the offices” and directed the administration

apparatus of the Empire. The comes sacrarum largitionum, which means, “count

of imperial liberalities” supervised the payments of bonuses to soldiers and

officials.

Comes rerum privatarum, “count of the private patrimony” administered the

imperial domain. Quaestor sacri palatii, “quaestor of the imperial palace” handled

legislation. The provinces in the Roman Empire were governed by a proconsul. He

held imperium or authority in place of the Consul during the Republic. He was the

head of a senatorial province during the Empire. According to custom, a proconsul

held his post for 1year and then surrendered his authority to a successor and

departed within thirty days of his expired term. He was, in official capacities,

accompanied by six lictors, twelve if he had once served as consul.

A proconsul in the Republic commanded any legions in his province, while an

imperial proconsul had no units available to him. His powers were called imperium

proconsulares, which in principle gave him control over the territory under his

command, with two major restrictions. The imperium proconsulare of one

proconsul could not be greater than that of any other unless the Emperor provided

him with a special status called imperium maius.

Secondly, all authority of the imperium ended when the official crossed the

pomerium, or the sacred boundary of Rome. Any official visiting Rome was

subject to the laws and magistrates of the city. The cities were governed by the

praefectus urbi or urban prefect, prefect of the city.

Under Augustus, they were to be a leading citizen of the city who would govern

Rome not just when the consuls were away but at all times. He would decide all

cases of law that fell within the jurisdiction of the city, up to the 100th milestone

from Rome. He was responsible for maintaining order with the urban cohorts

(police). They possessed imperium which means that they ordered the death

penalty for criminals and those who rebelled against the laws of the empire.

There were two categories of power and authority which an official under the

Roman constitution held: (1) Potestas (2) Imperium. The three highest officials in

the Republic, the dictator, consul and praetor possessed not only potestas but also

imperium. The Emperor wielded imperium in the Empire.

Hans Julius Wolff notes this power called imperium in his book Roman Law,

An Historical Introduction, he writes, “This power originated and was properly at

home in the military sphere where it meant the absolute power of the commander

in chief to issue and enforce orders, a power which existed with respect to the

soldiers under his command as well as to the population in the area of military


18

operations. It involved the authority to take any measure of coercion the

commander saw fit to take, including corporal and even capital punishment. In the

Roman conception of the state, the command of the army was the primary function

of the highest magistrates, and from this function, in which the magistrate’s power

found its fullest expression, the Romans derived the nature of his office and

authority in general. The concept of imperium was the pivot of all Roman

constitutional thinking. It is possible but not certain that it was brought to them by

the Estruscans. As an awe-inspiring sign of their power, magistrates vested with

imperium appeared in public accompanied by their lictors, who carried the fasces-

i.e., a bundle of rods surrounding an ax (like the sign on the American dime)”

(page 28).

An archon in the apostle Paul’s day was a government official of the Roman

Empire who possessed imperium. Imperium extended to matters of life and death,

law, military command and all decisions of policy. The individual with imperium

had supreme and absolute power.

The first kings of Rome held imperium but during the days of the Republic

elected officials possessed it. Consuls, praetors and specially chosen officers could

be granted the imperium for a set period of time, normally one year or the time

necessary for the completion of a particular task such as Pompey’s military

commission in 67 B.C.

The dictator Sulla withheld such privileges. In 27 B.C., Augustus reformed this

system in such a way that he ultimately gained control over the entire Roman

Empire when he worked out an agreement with the Senate to divide the Empire

between imperial and senatorial provinces. He retained control as proconsul of

those regions on the frontier that required legions, extending his imperium outside

of Rome and within as well.

In 23 B.C., when Augustus resigned his consulship, he was allowed to maintain

this in perpetuity. He also gained control over the imperial provinces and the

imperial administration. The imperium was voted to Augustus for five years in 18

and 13 B.C. and for ten in 27 and 8 B.C. and in three and 13 A.D. Subsequent

emperors also gained imperium upon ascending the throne.

There were two categories of imperium: (1) Imperium maius was the power and

authority wielded by the Emperor himself. (2) Imperium proconsulares was the

power and authority held by a proconsul.

Augustus was voted the imperium maius in 23 B.C. as part of his settlement

with the Senate over the division of the Roman Empire. Augustus’ maius extended

over every province under imperial jurisdiction. He shared the imperium maius

with Marcus Agrippa in 18 B.C. and again in 13 B.C.

An archon in the Roman Empire who possessed imperium had the power and

authority to issue the death penalty, capital punishment to convicted criminals.


19

This is the power Paul speaks of in Romans 13:1 and Titus 3:1 when he uses the

Greek noun exousia, “authorities.” The archon, “rulers” in Romans 13:3 refers to

those government authorities who possessed the power and authority (imperium) to

administer the sentence of capital punishment to citizens or non-citizens in the

Roman Empire.

The lictors performed the execution of these convicted criminals. They walked

ahead of a magistrate in a single column, bearing the fasces. Their very presence

called for attention and respect. They protected personages and carried out their

instructions. When a sentence was passed, the lictor was often called upon to use

the axe part of the fasces to decapitate a convicted criminal.

We are to recognize the hand of God in the appointment of those who govern

us, and we are to be obedient to them. We are to be law-abiding citizens. We may

be very unhappy with certain government actions and may pray that in his mercy

God will one day give us better leaders. But for his own purposes he has placed

them over us and it is our duty as Christians to live in conformity with their laws.13

The Bible does teach that there are certain circumstances in which the Christian

is justified in disobeying the governmental authorities. This is called “civil

disobedience,” or better “justified civil disobedience,” which is the performance of

an intentional act that is prohibited by the civil authorities or a refusal to perform

an act that is required by the civil authority (The Evangelical Dictionary of

Theology, Second Edition, page 263).

Christians are commanded to obey the Lord their God (Deuteronomy 13:4;

Jeremiah 7:23; John 14:15) and they are also called upon to obey the governing

authorities (Romans 13:1-7; 1 Peter 2:13-17; Titus 3:1). However, civil

disobedience becomes an issue for the Christian when these two claims upon the

Christian come into conflict meaning when God commands us to do something

like proclaim the gospel and teach the Word of God and the civil authorities

prohibit this. The solution to this conflict is that the Christian is to obey God. This

is illustrated in Acts 5:27-32 when the apostles were commanded by the Jewish

authorities to not proclaim the gospel of Jesus Christ and Peter told them “we must

obey God rather than men.”

In Exodus 1, the Hebrew midwives disobeyed Pharaoh of Egypt’s command to

murder infant boys who were born to the Israelite women since murder is against

the law of God (Genesis 9:5-6). There was a similar situation in contemporary

history where German Christians under Hitler’s Nazi regime rightly refused to

hand over Jews to be murdered for the same reason why the Hebrew midwives

refused to murder Jewish boys since murder is against the law of God.

13 Campbell, D. (2007). Opening up Titus (p. 90). Leominster: Day One Publications.


20

Just as Daniel chapter 3 records Shadrach, Meshach and Abednego practicing

justified civil disobedience by defying Nebuchadnezzar’s order to worship a gold

statute of himself, so Daniel chapter 6 records Daniel doing the same by defying

Darius’ edict.

The Lord’s dealing with Korah’s rebellion against Moses’ authority is an

example of the seriousness with which God takes rebellion to governing authorities

when there is no justification (Numbers 16:3, 13, 30, 32-35, 41, 49). Another

example is the Lord’s dealing with the sister of Moses, Miriam, who rebelled

against her brother’s authority (Numbers 12).

Jude 5-9 reveals that even Michael the elect angel respects the authority of

Satan who exercises temporary authority over the earth. Now, if Michael the elect

angel respects the authority of the author of evil, Satan himself, how much more

should Christians obey the governmental authorities in their own nation, no matter

how corrupt or evil?

Richard Halverson the former chaplain of the United States Senate wrote, “To

be sure, men will abuse and misuse the institution of the State just as man because

of sin has abused and misused every other institution in history including the

Church of Jesus Christ, but this does not mean that the institution is bad or that it

should be forsaken. It simply means that men are sinners and rebels in God’s

world, and this is the way they behave with good institutions. As a matter of fact, it

is because of this very sin that there must be human government to maintain order

in history until the final and ultimate rule of Jesus Christ is established. Human

government is better than anarchy, and the Christian must recognize the ‘divine

right’ of the State.” (Halverson, R: Prologue to Prison: Cowman Publishers, 1964)

The Scriptures teach that there are several categories of authority: (1) Christ’s

Authority (Phlp. 2:8; Jn. 5:26-27; Col. 1:15-17; 2:10; Eph. 1:22) (2) Biblical

Authority (2 Tim. 3:16-17; 2 Pet. 1:20-21). (3) Angelic Authority (Eph. 6:12; Col.

1:16). (4) Apostolic Authority (Luke 9:1; 2 Cor. 10:8). (5) Pastoral Authority (1

Pet. 5:1-3; Heb. 13:17). (6) Spousal Authority (Eph. 5:22; Col. 3:18). (7) Parental

Authority (Deut. 21:18-21; Prov. 1:7-9; Eph. 6:1-3; Col. 3:20). (8) Governmental

Authority (Rm. 13:1-7; Titus 3:1; 1 Pet. 2:13).

If these four divine institutions (volition, marriage, parents, government) are

undermined by the refusal to submit to these systems of authority then all of

society will crumble. If your free will is taken away from you, you will have lost

your freedom to make your own decisions in life. If the man's authority in the

marriage is taken away, marriage will fall apart and both men and women will lose

their protection which marriage provides for them. If the parent's authority over the

children is taken away, the children are left unprotected and are in danger. If the

authority of the government is not respected and if the government stops, the


21

individuals in that nation are left unprotected and are in great danger of another

nation invading and taking away their freedom.

A disrespect of authority will lead to loss of freedom in society and will lead to

danger and people will live in fear. Human government has been established by

God in order to protect the freedom, the privacy, the property and the lives of

individuals in a nation. The murder of an individual is a violation of a person’s

volition, divine institution number one. Human government has been established

by God in order to practice capital punishment as a means of punishing the

criminal. The individual is to respect the laws of human government.

Genesis 9:5-6 records for us the establishment of the fourth and final divine

institution.

Genesis 9:5 “Surely I will require your lifeblood; from every beast I will

require it. And from every man, from every man's brother I will require the

life of man. 6 Whoever sheds man's blood, by man his blood shall be shed, for

in the image of God He made man.” (NASB95) The Word of God prohibits murder according to Exodus 20:13 and is one of the

sins that God hates according to Proverbs 6:16-19 and according to Genesis 9:6 is

to be punished through capital punishment.

“I will require” is the verb darash, which is a judicial term used with reference

to both men and animals and expresses the fact God seeks “restitution” for murder

by the execution of the murderer or the animal who has taken a human life.

As a result of the total depravity of mankind, God instituted capital punishment

in order to protect both animal and human life and to curb violence and be a

deterrent to crime. The reason why this provision is given is found in the phrase

“for in the image of God, He (the Lord) made (`asah, “modeled”) (the soul of)

man.”

The emphasis of this stipulation recorded in Genesis 9:5-6 does “not” refer to

vengeance but rather justice and the careful recognition of the sacredness of the

divine image in man, though marred by sin.

Murder is a shocking affront to God and a terrible crime against one’s fellow

man. Before the Flood the lack of capital punishment led to blood vendettas (Gen.

4) and without instinctive fear, the animals corrupted their behavior.

Genesis 9:5-6 records the institution of human government where God

delegated authority to mankind as His agents in exacting retribution by capital

punishment upon those who take a human life indicating as well that this is not a

personal matter but a social obligation. Before the Flood, there was no formal

arrangement of human government and thus no formal punishment of crime or of

crime prevention, even for the capital crime of murder, as evident in the individual

histories of Cain and Lamech (Genesis 4).


22

The absence of human government and the total depravity of mankind led to a

universal state of violence and anarchy, which resulted in the judgment of the

Flood. God established capital punishment and thereby human government in order

to prevent the conditions of the antediluvian period from developing again.

Numbers 35:30-34, Deuteronomy 17:6-7 and 19:15 teach that capital

punishment “cannot” take place unless there are two or more witnesses to the

crime and that they all agree in their testimony after being individually

interviewed. Capital punishment is taught in the Old Testament (Ex. 21:12, 15-17;

22:2, 18-20; Num. 35:6-34; Deut. 19:1-13; 24:7) and in the New Testament (Rom.

13:1-7; 1 Pet. 2:13). The fact that capital punishment was instituted does “not”

mean that there is never to be an exception to the punishment of execution for the

crime of murder.

With God, justice may be tempered with mercy, in response to repentance. For

example, David was guilty of the capital crimes of murder and adultery in the case

of Uriah and Bathsheba respectively and God forgave David when he confessed

his sin and thus David instead of dying by stoning or the sword as he deserved,

“died in a good old age, full of days, riches and honor” (1 Chron. 29:28). Also, the

woman caught in the act of adultery was guilty by the Mosaic Law of a crime

punishable by death (Lev. 20:10; Deut. 22:22) and the Lord Jesus seeing her heart

of repentance, was moved to forgive her and to see that she was set free (Jn. 8:3-

11). In like manner, a judge or a governor is warranted in taking such mitigating

factors as may exist in a given situation into consideration in determining a

sentence, legal penalty of capital punishment.

The essential point is that man was delegated authority and responsibility of

human government by God and that this responsibility first entails the recognition

of the sacredness of human life and that man is created in the image of God and the

recognition of capital punishment as the just and legal penalty for murder. It is

clear that the authority for capital punishment implies also the authority to

establish laws governing human activities and personal relationships, which if

unregulated would lead to murder, robbery, adultery, thus this instruction to Noah

is the fundamental basis for all human legal and governmental institutions.

Human government was designed by God to protect the freedom of the

individual, both believers and unbelievers as well. It was instituted by God and was

designed for the protection of the freedom of individuals. Capital punishment was

to be employed by nations as a protection for the freedom of its citizens and was

designed by God as an instrument of justice. It was designed to be a deterrent in a

nation.

If the human race, which is enslaved to the sin nature, does not have restraints

put on it, it will destroy itself. The government has the responsibility to practice

capital punishment in order to protect the freedom its citizens. The force of what


23

Paul writes in Romans 13:1-7 is greatly increased as a result of understanding that

Nero was ruling Rome at the time. The force of his request in 1 Timothy 2:1-2 is

also greatly increased if we realize he requested in this passage that the Ephesian

church intercede in prayer to the Father on behalf of kings and all those in

authority and Nero was the Emperor.

Civil disobedience is not the invention of the modern age. The Bible records

approximately a dozen examples of legitimate civil disobedience. Most examples

occur when a government specifically commands individuals to disobey God, so

that civil disobedience is at the same time religious obedience. In such cases, God

commends those who suffer consequences at the hands of the government for the

sake of righteousness, and he usually rescues them. One cluster of examples occurs

when a ruler either prohibits the worship of God or commands the worship of some

other god. The story of Shadrach, Meshach and Abednego (see Daniel) illustrates

three godly men’s response to the Babylonian king Nebuchadnezzar’s decree that

the ‘peoples, nations, and languages … fall down and worship the golden image’

that Nebuchadnezzar had erected (Dan 3:5 NRSV). Because such a command

contradicts the first commandment forbidding idolatry, these men refuse to bow

down. When confronted by the king with their disobedience, they claim to be

obeying a higher authority that overrides that of the king (Dan 3:16). Although

God saves them from their punishment, they acknowledge that whatever the

outcome of their punishment, they fear God more than they fear men (vv. 17–18).

God’s rescue of these men fully commends their action as a legitimate case of civil

disobedience. A similar case occurs when Darius, the Persian ruler, forbids prayer

to any god but the king for thirty days (Dan 6). The issue behind this case is

faithfulness to God, and Daniel refuses to be unfaithful despite the government’s

decree (Dan 6:5). He not only continues to pray three times a day as he has done

before, but he makes no attempt to disguise his actions. Accordingly he is thrown

into the lions’ den as punishment. Once again, however, God demonstrates to

Daniel’s persecutors that God’s law is higher by delivering him from death in the

den. In the NT the most significant challenge to God’s commandments occurs

when the Jewish leaders command the disciples “not to speak or teach at all in the

name of Jesus” (Acts 4:18 NRSV). However, having the command from Christ to

proclaim the gospel to all nations (Mt 28:19–20), the apostles refuse. Peter replies

to their command, ‘We must obey God rather than men’ (Acts 5:29 RSV). From

then on the church is persecuted with flogging, imprisonment and death for their

refusal to comply with the government’s decree. Other cases involve people who

disobey government injunctions that do not directly demand that they disobey God

but that do involve their tacit compliance in unrighteous practices. In the events

leading up to the exodus, the Hebrew midwives help the Hebrew women to deliver

their children and hide them despite Pharaoh’s decree to put all the newborn males


24

to death (Ex 1:15–22). God commends these midwives for their fear of him,

blessing them with households of their own. In similar manner Moses’ mother

disobeys the king’s edict to destroy Hebrew males (Ex 2:1–10). Soon after this,

Moses himself participates in civil disobedience, leading the children of Israel out

of Egypt against Pharaoh’s will. He begins his career of civil resistance when he

kills an Egyptian taskmaster who has beaten a Hebrew slave (Ex 2:11–12), his first

recorded act of choosing to share ill-treatment with the people of God (Heb 11:24–

25). Because God commanded him to lead the people out of Egypt, by God’s

direction he assaults Pharaoh and his people with a series of plagues that persuade

the king to finally release the people (Ex 6–12). However, soon after he has let

them go, Pharaoh pursues them with the intent to reenslave them. Moses is God’s

agent in the miraculous defeat of the Egyptian army by the sea (Ex 14). Although

he had ostensibly negotiated with Pharaoh for his people’s release, Moses is in fact

instrumental in forcing Pharaoh to release the people, an act he performs at God’s

command. In another act of civil disobedience, Rahab the Canaanite hides the

Hebrew spies from her city leaders (Josh 2). Rahab fears the God who has given

her land to these people, and she desires to fight on the side of Yahweh (Josh 2:9–

13). Thus she hides the spies who come to her and lies to the king of Jericho,

saying that they have already left the city (Josh 2:5). God commends her act,

claiming that her faith and obedience saved her from death at the Israelites’ hands

(Heb 11:31). Some of the prophets also disobey their kings at God’s command or

in response to God’s condemnation of their rule. King Ahab attempts several times

to kill Elijah because of his message. Elijah announces a great drought on the land

and is then forced to hide from Ahab’s wrath (1 Kings 17). In addition, Elijah

humiliates and slays the prophets of Baal, who the king supports, and then flees to

Sinai (1 Kings 18). Obadiah similarly disobeys the king to obey God. When

Jezebel attempts to kill all of God’s prophets, Obadiah hides a hundred of them in

caves and provides them with food (1 Kings 18:4). God praises him for this act,

declaring that “Obadiah feared the LORD greatly” (1 Kings 18:3). The NT also

endorses stories of people protecting those who are persecuted by the government.

The three wisemen worship the infant Jesus and disobey Herod’s command to

inform him about the newborn king (Mt 2:7–12). When the Jews and King Aretas

attempt to capture and put the newly converted Paul to death, several of his

disciples hide him and then helped him escape by letting him down in a basket

through one of the city wall’s openings (Acts 9:20–31; 2 Cor 11:32–33). Finally,

even Jesus refuses to submit to the religious authorities of his time. Although he

has no complaint against the Roman civil authority, he consistently challenges the

authority of the Jewish leaders. He heals a man on the Sabbath and overturns the

tables of the moneychangers and vendors in the temple (Mt 12; 21). Although he

commands submission to the governing authorities, Jesus demonstrates that his


25

own authority is greater than that of the ruling priests because his authority comes

from God. Thus he shows that in some cases in which God’s authority conflicts

with that of a government, civil disobedience is necessary.14

In 1 Timothy 2:1-8, Paul urgently requests that corporate prayer be made by the

Ephesians on behalf of all those in authority.

1 Timothy 2:1 Therefore, based upon my previous statements, I first of all

urgently request specific detailed requests, reverential prayers, intercessory

prayers, thanksgivings be regularly offered up on behalf of all people.

(Author’s translation) The adverb protos, “first” emphasizes the urgency and priority of prayer for all

men to be exposed to the gospel of Jesus Christ based upon Paul’s statements in 1

Timothy 1:12-17. The emphasis is not on prayer in general but rather the content of

the prayer in the sense that the Ephesians are to pray for all men to be exposed to

the gospel of Jesus Christ. It stresses that of all that Paul will be commanding of

the Ephesians, the command to pray for all men to be exposed to the gospel of

Jesus Christ to receive eternal life is the most important.

Though the other commands and prohibitions in this epistle are directly related

to promoting the spiritual growth of the members of the body of Christ in Ephesus

and are critical for the spiritual growth of the church, these are not more important.

Rather, the salvation of lost sinners is the most important. Spiritual growth is

important but not as important as saving the sinner from eternal condemnation

since the sinner is not saved from eternal condemnation then they can never grow

up spiritually. This is why Paul mentions first in 1 Timothy 2:4 that God desires all

men to be saved and then he says that the Father desires that they come to an

epignosis, “experiential” knowledge of the truth, which can only take until one is

first saved.

The adjective pas, “all” refers to the rest of the commands and prohibitions that

appear in 1 Timothy. The word is a partitive genitive meaning that the word

denotes whole of which the adverb protos is a part. This indicates that this urgent

request to pray for all men to be exposed to the gospel of Jesus Christ in order to

be saved, which is the Father’s will is, the most important of all the commands and

prohibitions that are mentioned throughout this epistle.

“Specific detailed requests” is the noun deesis which refers to intercessory

prayer and specifically to specific detailed requests offered up to the Father by the

Ephesians on behalf of all people to be exposed to the gospel of Jesus Christ for

eternal salvation. It denotes an urgent of the Father by the Ephesians in prayer for

sinful humanity who are in need of eternal salvation.

14 Ryken, L., Wilhoit, J., Longman, T., Duriez, C., Penney, D., & Reid, D. G. (2000). Dictionary of biblical imagery (electronic ed.) (154–155).

Downers Grove, IL: InterVarsity Press


26

“Reverential prayers” is the pronoun proseuche, which refers to intercessory

prayer offered up to the Father on behalf of all people but from the perspective that

it is an expression of worshipping God and dependence upon Him. It denotes

entering into the presence of the Father in order to offer up intercessory prayer for

all people but as an act of worship and dependence upon Him to save sinners.

When the believer offers up intercessions on behalf of the unbeliever, He is

acknowledging to the Father his total and absolute dependence upon Him to meet

this need of the unbeliever and is thus worshipping Him. Proseuche emphasizes

the worshipful attitude of the believer who depends upon God to meet his needs

through prayer and specifically the need to save the unbeliever through faith in His

Son Jesus Christ.

“Intercessory prayers” is the noun enteuxis, which refers to intercessory

prayer or in other words, prayer on behalf of another, which is in our context is for

all people to be exposed to the gospel of Jesus Christ in order to delivered from

eternal condemnation and receive eternal life. This word expresses urgency and

boldness (Trench).

These three words look at intercessory prayer for the unsaved from different

perspectives. Deesis looks at intercessory prayer for all people from the

perspective in the sense that it should involve specific detail requests. Proseuche

looks at these intercessory prayers from the perspective that they are an expression

of worshipping the Father and are an expression of dependence upon Him to save

the sinner. Lastly, enteuxis looks at these prayers from the perspective that they are

intercessory or on behalf of others.

“Thanksgivings” is the noun eucharistia which refers to the Ephesians

thanking the Father for all people since the entire human race was created in the

image of God even though that image has been marred by sin.

“Be regularly offered up on behalf of all people” indicates that Paul wants

the Ephesians to “regularly” or “make it a habit of” offering up intercessory prayer

to the Father for all of unregenerate humanity since the Father desires all of

unregenerate humanity to be saved. All of unregenerate humanity are to benefit

from the intercessory prayers of the Ephesians.

In 1 Timothy 2:2, Paul specifies on whose behalf he wants the Ephesians to

intercede in prayer to the Father. In verse 1, he simply requests corporate

intercessory prayer in a general sense meaning that he wants the Ephesians to

intercede in prayer for all people. But here in verse 2, he is specific in the sense

that he identifies specific individuals in Roman society on whose behalf he wants

them to intercede in prayer to the Father.

1 Timothy 2:2 on behalf of kings as well as each and every one of those

individuals who are in authority in order that we may continue to live a


27

peaceful and tranquil life with absolute godliness as well as dignity. (Author’s

translation) “On behalf of kings” refers to all those individuals who are governmental

leaders. It not only refers to the Roman Emperor Nero but all those who governed

the provinces that were under his authority. So Paul is not only calling the

Ephesians to intercede in prayer for Nero but also those rulers who governed the

various provinces of the Empire under his authority. He wants the Ephesians to

pray that these rulers would be exposed to the gospel for their salvation. Also, he

wants them to pray for these rulers in order to protect them from the attacks of

Satan and the kingdom of darkness. Therefore, Paul is urgently requesting that the

Ephesians intercede in prayer to the Father “on behalf of” the Roman

governmental rulers. These rulers are to benefit from the intercessory prayers of

the Ephesians.

“Each and every one of those individuals who are in authority” refers to

those individuals in the Roman government who formed the Emperor’s

consortium, which would include the Praefect of the Praetorian Guard as well as

magistrates and proconsuls in the various cities and provinces in the Empire. Thus,

Paul is urgently requesting that the Ephesians intercede in prayer on behalf of all

those who exist in a state of holding a position of authority in the Roman

government.

The clause “in order that we may continue to live a peaceful and tranquil

life” presents the purpose for Paul’s request that the Ephesians offer up

intercessory prayer for kings and all in authority. This purpose clause refers to the

lifestyle of those belonging to the Christian church who are sons of God and in

union with Christ. Thus, Paul is requesting intercessory prayer from the Ephesians

for all those in authority in order that they may conduct their lives in a tranquil and

peaceful manner. Historically, at the time of writing the Christian community was

living relatively peaceful and quiet manner relation to the Roman government and

Paul wants this to continue by means of the intercessory prayers of the Ephesians.

This purpose clause refers to the activities and affairs and daily functions of

everyday human life in the Christian community. It speaks of the tranquil and

peaceful coexistence or conditions with respect to the Roman government and the

Christian community. It also speaks of the quietness of soul as a result of the

peaceful political situation in the Roman Empire or the peaceful coexistence

between the Roman government and the Christian community. The Christian

community is to pray for the Roman government in order that they might provide

them with freedom to proclaim the gospel throughout the empire unhindered.

“With absolute godliness as well as dignity” refers to the manner in which the

Ephesian Christians were to conduct themselves in relation to Roman society.


28

“Godliness” is the worship of God through one’s conduct that is based upon

knowledge of and faith in the Word of God resulting in obedience to God’s Word,

which reveals His character, ways and will. The attitude of the Christian must be

based upon knowledge of and faith in God’s Word. This will result in conduct that

is in obedience to God and therefore honors God and is an act of worshipping Him.

It refers to proper Christian attitude and conduct that is produced by the Holy

Spirit as a result of exercising faith in the Word of God resulting in obedience to

the Word of God. Therefore, the word speaks of the Christian experiencing their

sanctification and their deliverance from the sin nature, Satan and his cosmic

system. It is thinking according to God’s Word and conducting one’s life according

to God’s Word, which reveals God’s will, character and nature and ways.

It denotes by the power of the Holy Spirit the Christian is conforming their

thinking and conduct according to the Father’s will, which is revealed by the Holy

Spirit in the Word of God. It means that the Christian is conforming their attitude

and conduct to the will of the Father as a result of faith in the Spirit’s teaching in

the Word of God resulting in obedience to the Father’s will.

The Christian’s faith in the Word of God appropriates the power of the Holy

Spirit resulting in conformity of their attitude and conduct to the will of the Father,

which is revealed by the Spirit in the Word of God. This constitutes worshipping

God.

“Dignity” refers to conduct that is worthy of honor, reverence and respect by

others. Therefore, the term speaks of the Christian’s conduct as worthy of honor,

reverence and respect by the community in which the Christian lives. It refers to

the way Christians project themselves in the communities that they live and work

in. Thus, it is related to the Christian’s royal ambassadorship.

“Absolute” indicates that Paul wants the Ephesians to perfectly embody

godliness and dignity in their communities before the unsaved and in relation to the

civil authorities.

In verse 3, the apostle Paul points out to the Ephesians that it is according to the

Father’s will that they intercede in prayer for the entire human race.

1 Timothy 2:3 This is, as an eternal spiritual truth noble as well as

pleasingly acceptable in the judgment of God the Father, our Savior.

(Author’s translation) This verse teaches that the intercessory prayers of the Ephesians on behalf of all

people is according to the Father’s will. The immediate demonstrative pronoun

houtos, “this” refers to Paul’s urgent request in verse 1 that the Ephesians

intercede in prayer to the Father on behalf of all people. This is indicated by Paul’s

statement in verse 4 where he teaches that the Father desires all people to be saved

and to come to an experiential knowledge of the truth. His statement in verse 5 is

further indication since he teaches that there is one God and one intermediary


29

between God and the human race, namely Jesus Christ. Then, in verse 6, the

apostle teaches that Jesus Christ gave Himself as a ransom for the entire human

race.

“Noble” is the adjective kalos indicating that from the Father’s perspective, the

intercessory prayers of the Ephesians on behalf of all of sinful humanity possesses

an outstanding quality and great importance, which is superior to all others. Here it

describes the intercessory prayers of the Ephesians on behalf of the entire human

race that is enslaved to sin and Satan as of the utmost importance to the Father

since He desires all men to be saved and come to an experiential knowledge of the

truth. The word speaks of the intercessory prayers of the Ephesians on behalf of the

human race as of the utmost importance or the most important thing that they could

do in life.

“Pleasingly acceptable” is the adjective apodektos which indicates that the

intercessory prayers of the Ephesians on behalf of the entire human race is

“pleasing in view of its being acceptable” to the Father since He desires all men to

be saved and come to an experiential knowledge of the truth.

The noun theos, “God the Father” refers to the Father and not the Son since

Paul is speaking in the context of urgently requesting that the Ephesians pray for

all people and the Scriptures teach that all prayer by the Christian is to be

addressed to the Father and not Jesus Christ, His Son (Luke 11:1-2).

“Savior” is the noun soter emphasizing that God the Father is the member of

the Trinity who initiated salvation and is its source. He is the Savior or Deliverer of

the human race in a seven-fold sense: (1) Deliverer or Savior from personal sins.

(2) Deliverer or Savior from old sin nature (3) Deliverer or Savior from Satan and

his cosmic system. (4) Deliverer or Savior from spiritual and physical death (5)

Deliverer or Savior from eternal condemnation. (6) Deliverer or Savior from self.

(7) Deliverer or Savior from condemnation from the Law.

The Father is the Christian’s deliverer in all these areas and not just the Lord

Jesus Christ since it was according to the Father’s plan in eternity past that the Son

was sent into the world to save sinners in the first place (See John 3:16-18;

Ephesians 1:1-14). The Son carried out or executed the Father’s plan to save sinful

mankind. So we can see that Paul is teaching or reminding the Ephesians that

interceding in prayer for all people is according to the Father’s will.

The apostle Paul in 1 Timothy 2:4 teaches that it is according to the Father’s

will that the Ephesians intercede in prayer for the entire human race because He

desires all men to be saved and come to an experiential knowledge of the truth.

1 Timothy 2:4 who, as an eternal spiritual truth desires each and every

member of the human race to be saved as well as to enter into knowing

experientially the truth. (Author’s translation)


30

“Who, as an eternal spiritual truth desires each and every member of the

human raced to be saved” is a relative pronoun clause that is connected to verse

3, which itself is connected to verse 1. It reveals that the reason why intercessory

prayer for each and every member of the human race is noble and pleasingly

acceptable to the Father is that He desires each and every member of the human

race to be saved.

The expression πάντας ἀνθρώπους, “each and every member of the human

race” in verse 4 is picked up from verse 1 where it mean the same thing. Thus, as

we noted in verse 1 Paul taught that it is the Father’s will that the Ephesians

intercede in prayer for all people or each and every member of the human race.

Now in verse 4 he teaches that the Father wants the Ephesians to do this because it

is His will that each and every member of the human race be saved and to come to

an experiential knowledge of the truth. This expression refers to “common” or

“universal grace.” God the Holy Spirit, in common or universal grace, makes the

Gospel understandable to unbelievers, so that they may make a decision to either

accept or reject Jesus Christ as Savior.

When Paul says that the Father desires each and every member of the human

race to be saved does not imply that all will be saved automatically. Rather, he is

simply teaching that the Father desires this to be the case and made it possible by

making salvation possible for everyone through the gospel of His Son Jesus Christ.

The offer salvation is made possible to every member of the human race because

the Father’s Son Jesus Christ died on the cross for each and every member of the

human race. The fact that the sinner has to make a volitional decision in relation to

this offer is clearly taught by Paul in Romans 3:21-5:1 and many other passages

such as Ephesians 2:8-9, Galatians 2:16 and John 3:16-17 just to name a few.

“To be saved” speaks of the act of the Father delivering each and every

member of the human race without exception from personal sin, the sin nature,

Satan, his cosmic system, condemnation from the Law, spiritual and physical death

and eternal condemnation through faith in His Son Jesus Christ.

This statement in 1 Timothy 2:4 teaches the “unlimited” atonement and refutes

those who adhere to a “limited” atonement. The latter is a false doctrine that is

actually an attack instigated by Satan upon the integrity of God. The “limited”

atonement doctrine contends that Christ died for only the elect or in other words,

believers whereas the “unlimited” atonement contends that Christ died for “all”

men, all-inclusive, without exception and thus “without racial, sexual or social

distinction.” This doctrine states that Jesus Christ died for every sin committed by

every single member of the human race-past, present and future (John 1:29; Rom.

5:6-8; 1 Tim. 4:10; Titus 2:11; 1 John 2:2).

“As well as to enter into knowing experientially the truth” presents an

additional desire of the Father with respect to each and every member of the


31

human race. It indicates that in addition to desiring each and every member of the

human race to be saved, God the Father desires all of them to come to an

experiential knowledge of the truth.

This statement speaks of the Christian after his conversion personally

encountering through the process of fellowship the truth, i.e. the mind of Christ as

it is revealed by the Holy Spirit in the pages of Scripture and prayer and being

affected by this encounter with the mind of Christ. Fellowship with God is

experienced by obeying the Father’s will as it is revealed by the Holy Spirit in the

Word of God. This encounter results in the gaining of practical spiritual wisdom

and more of the character of Christ.

“The truth” refers to the revelation of the Father’s character, ways and will.

Therefore, the word refers to the truth of God in an objective sense as a body of

knowledge containing the revelation of God’s character and nature, His ways and

His will for His children. Therefore, truth is used with respect to the Christian’s

post-conversion experience. So in addition to the Father desiring all men to be

saved He also desires that after becoming Christians, they come to an experiential

knowledge of the truth, i.e. the Word of God.

The Father wants each of His children to personally encounter through the

process of fellowship the mind of Christ as it is revealed by the Holy Spirit in the

pages of Scripture and prayer and to be affected by this encounter with the mind of

Christ. Fellowship with God is experienced by obeying the Father’s will as it is

revealed by the Holy Spirit in the Word of God. This encounter results in the

gaining of practical spiritual wisdom and more of the character of Christ.

Thus, when Paul says that the Father desires that people come to an experiential

knowledge of the truth after conversion, he is rebuking certain pastors in Ephesus,

who he does not identify except for Alexander and Hymenaeus, for not

communicating his gospel. His gospel would produce in the church an experiential

knowledge of the truth.

The apostle Paul in verse 5 teaches that there is one God and intermediary

between God and the human race, namely the man Christ Jesus.

1 Timothy 2:5 For you see there does exist, as an eternal spiritual truth

only one God. Also, there does exist, as an eternal spiritual truth only one

intermediary between God the Father and the human race, a human being

namely Christ, who is Jesus. (Author’s translation) The apostle Paul in verses 5 and 6 presents additional reasons why the

Ephesians should intercede in prayer for each and every member of the human

race. In verse 4, we noted that they should do so because it is the Father’s will that

each member of the human race be saved and to enter into knowing the truth

experientially. The second reason that Paul presents in 5a is that there is one God.

In other words, they should pray for all people “because” the entire human race is


32

under the authority of God in the sense that He is their Creator, Judge and Savior.

The third reason follows in 5b-6, namely they should intercede in prayer for each

and every member of the human race “because” there is one intermediary between

God and the human race, the man Christ Jesus. In other words, they should pray

for the entire human race “because” the incarnate Son of God, Jesus Christ is the

intermediary between a holy God and sinful humanity who gave Himself as a

ransom for the entire human race.

Therefore, Paul is teaching the Ephesians that interceding in prayer for each and

every member of the human race is not only in accordance with the Father’s will

but also in accordance with the fact that God is the creator of all people and the

judge of all people and the Savior of all people. In addition intercessory prayer for

all men is in accordance with the purpose of Jesus Christ’s substitutionary spiritual

and physical deaths on the cross. These substitutionary deaths have made Him the

intermediary between a holy God and sinful humanity.

“There does exist, as an eternal spiritual truth only one God” is designed to

refute those pastors in Ephesus who were following the teaching of the Judaizers

who were of the conviction that only Israel was worthy of the kingdom of God.

They excluded the Gentiles from the kingdom of God. These pastors who he does

not identify (except for Alexander and Hymenaeus) sought to be teachers of the

Law and were occupied with Jewish myths and useless genealogies of the Old

Testament and were misinterpreting these genealogies and misusing the Ten

Commandments.

The apostle is arguing in 1 Timothy 2:1-7 much as he did in Romans 3:29-30

that the offer of salvation is presented by God through the gospel to both Jews and

Gentiles since God is the Creator, Judge and Savior of both groups. This would

refute the sectarian spirit of the Judaizers and these pastors who followed their

teaching. He is arguing as he did in Romans that justification is not by the works of

the Law or meritorious acts based upon obedience to the Law but rather through

faith alone in Christ alone. The entire human race benefits from the gospel. If

obedience to the Law were the basis for justification, then only Israel would

benefit since they alone and not the Gentiles received the Law. However, God is

the God of both groups.

The expression “only one intermediary between God the Father and the

human race” speaks of the fact that Jesus Christ is the Father’s delegate or

representative to the entire human race while at the same time He represents the

entire human race before the Father. He can do so because He is both God and

man. Thus, this term implies that Jesus of Nazareth is God.

It also alludes to the doctrine of reconciliation, which is a peace treaty between

a holy God and sinful humanity that is the direct result of the spiritual and physical


33

deaths of Jesus Christ on the Cross since it propitiated the holiness of God that

expresses itself in righteous indignation against sin and sinners.

“A human being namely Christ, who is Jesus” teaches that the Son of God

through His sinless humanity suffered a substitutionary spiritual and physical death

on the cross in order to reconcile a holy God with sinful humanity. By emphasizing

the humanity of Christ, Paul is not saying that He is not God but rather is

emphasizing that the Son of God, through His sinless human nature reconciled the

human race to the Father through His spiritual and physical deaths on the cross.

The apostle Paul in 1 Timothy 2:6 teaches that Christ Jesus gave Himself as a

ransom for each and every member of the human race revealing the Father’s

purpose to save the entire human race at the appointed time.

1 Timothy 2:6 who gave Himself as a ransom on behalf of each and every

one as a substitute, the testimony at His appointed time. (Author’s translation) This verse continues Paul’s thought from verse 5 by teaching that Christ Jesus

gave Himself as a ransom for each and every member of the human race revealing

the Father’s purpose to save the entire human race at the Father’s appointed time.

In verses 5 and 6, Paul presents additional reasons why the Ephesians should

intercede in prayer for each and every member of the human race.

In verse 4, we noted that they should do so because it is the Father’s will that

each member of the human race be saved and to enter into knowing the truth

experientially. The second reason in 5a is that there is one God. In other words,

they should pray for all people “because” the entire human race is under the

authority of God in the sense that He is their Creator, Judge and Savior. The third

reason follows in 5b-6, namely they should intercede in prayer for each and every

member of the human race because there is one intermediary between God and the

human race, the man Christ Jesus. In other words, they should pray for the entire

human race because the incarnate Son of God, Jesus Christ is the intermediary

between a holy God and sinful humanity who gave Himself as a ransom for the

entire human race. Now, in verse 6, he teaches that Jesus Christ dedicated Himself

to the specific purpose of canceling the sin debt of each and every member of the

human race.

“Who gave Himself as a ransom” refers to the Lord Jesus Christ dedicating

Himself to the specific purpose of canceling the sin debt of the entire human race.

It denotes that the Lord dedicated Himself to the Father’s will in order to provide

the offer of salvation for the entire human race. It also indicates that the Lord

dedicated Himself to deliver the human race from the sin nature, personal sins,

spiritual and physical death, condemnation from the Law, Satan and his cosmic

system and eternal condemnation. It emphasizes the voluntary nature of Christ’s

spiritual and physical deaths on the cross. Our Lord’s spiritual and physical deaths

on the cross were “voluntary” in that He “chose” to suffer these deaths in order to


34

solve the human race’s problem with sin. He also chose to suffer in order to

accomplish the Father’s will and provide salvation for the entire human race. These

deaths were also self-sacrificial in nature in that the Lord was willing to deny self

in order to serve the Father and the human race and come to the aid of the human

race to deal with their sin problem.

The noun antilutron, “as a ransom” describes Jesus Christ’s spiritual and

physical deaths on the cross as a substitutionary ransom for the benefit of each and

every member of the human race. These unique substitutionary deaths redeemed

the entire human race out from the slave market of sin in which they were born

physically alive but spiritually dead.

“Redemption” refers to that aspect of Christ’s finished work on the Cross-that

“purchased” all of humanity out of the slave market of sin. It is appropriated

through the non-meritorious decision to believe in Jesus Christ for salvation.

Redemption is one of the three major doctrines of Soteriology: (1) Redemption:

inward (2) Reconciliation: manward (3) Propitiation: Godward.

Redemption results in the forgiveness of sins (Isa. 44:22; Eph. 1:7; Col. 1:14;

Heb. 9:12-15). It is the basis of justification (Rom. 3:24). It delivers from the curse

of the Law (Gal. 3:13; 4:4-6). Redemption is the basis for sanctification (Eph.

5:25-27). It is the basis for the eternal inheritance of the believer (Heb. 9:15).

Redemption is the basis for the strategic victory of Christ in the angelic conflict

(Col. 2:14-15; Heb. 2:14-15). Redemption of the soul in salvation leads to

redemption of the body in resurrection (Eph. 1:14). Redemption is the ultimate

status of regenerated human beings forever (Rom. 8:23; Eph. 4:30).

“Ransom” denotes that Jesus Christ is the Redeemer of the entire human race.

The Lord Jesus Christ is mankind’s Kinsman-Redeemer. The Lord is the Redeemer

of Israel (Ps. 78:35; Isa. 43:14; 44:24; 49:7; 54:5, 8; 60:16). He is redeemer of the

Church (1 Cor. 1:30; Gal. 3:13; Eph. 1:7, 14; Col. 1:14; Titus 2:14).

A Kinsman-Redeemer must be related to the one who is being redeemed and

must be able to afford the ransom price and thus fulfill its righteous demands. Our

Lord fulfilled this in His incarnation by becoming true humanity. As our Kinsman-

Redeemer, our Lord had to be like us. The second Person of the Trinity became a

man (John 1:14; 1 Tim. 3:16; Heb. 2:14; 1 John 1:1).

The Lord Jesus Christ is the one and only Redeemer of mankind and the only

sacrifice that God will accept (Matt. 20:28; Mark 10:45; 1 Tim. 2:6). He is the only

one qualified to be mankind’s Redeemer due to the fact that He is impeccable (1

Pet. 1:19).

“On behalf of each and every one as a substitute” emphasizes that Jesus

Christ’s spiritual and physical deaths were universal in that they were for the

benefit of each and every member of the human race and not just the elect. Of

course, not every one will receive eternal salvation since many will reject Jesus


35

Christ as their Savior. It not only marks each and every member of the human race-

past, present and future, as “benefited” by the spiritual and physical deaths of Jesus

Christ on the Cross but also it denotes the Lord died as their “substitute” as well.

So this prepositional phrase teaches the “unlimited” or “universal” atonement

and refutes those who adhere to a “limited” atonement. The latter is a false doctrine

that is actually an attack instigated by Satan upon the integrity of God.

The “limited” atonement doctrine contends that Christ died for only the elect or

in other words, believers whereas the “unlimited” or “universal” atonement

contends that Christ died for “all” men, all-inclusive, without exception and thus

“without racial, sexual or social distinction.”

This doctrine states that Jesus Christ died for every sin committed by every

single member of the human race-past, present and future (John 1:29; Rom. 5:6-8;

1 Tim. 4:10; Titus 2:11; 1 John 2:2).

“The testimony” refers to the voluntary, substitutionary spiritual and physical

deaths of Jesus Christ on the cross, which redeemed the entire human race out of

the slave market of sin in which all were born physically alive yet spiritually dead.

Supporting this interpretation is the dative expression καιροῖς ἰδίοις that follows

the word, which denotes a point of time. Thus, the plural form of this dative

expression is idiomatic in that it is equivalent to the singular denoting a particular

point of time.

“At His appointed time” refers to the moment in history at Calvary two

thousand years ago when Jesus Christ suffered a voluntary, substitutionary spiritual

and physical death on the cross for the entire human race.

In 1 Timothy 2:7, the apostle Paul writes that the Lord appointed him as a

herald as well as an apostle for the express purpose of proclaiming Christ’s

redemptive work on behalf of all mankind. He makes an emphatic declaration of

truthfulness that he was also appointed to be a teacher of the Gentiles by means of

doctrine, which is truth.

1 Timothy 2:7 For this express purpose I myself was appointed a herald as

well as an apostle-I am speaking the truth, I am by no means lying-teaching

the Gentiles by means of doctrine, which is truth. (Author’s translation) This statement teaches that Paul was appointed to the ministry by the Lord

Jesus for the express purpose of communicating His redemptive work on the cross

behalf of each and every member of the human race. It answers the question as to

“why’ Paul was appointed as a herald, apostle and teacher of the Gentiles. Namely,

he was appointed “in order to” proclaim Christ’s redemptive work for all mankind

or “for the purpose of” proclaiming to the entire human race Christ’s redemptive

work on their behalf.

“I myself” emphasizes a contrast between Paul and those unidentified pastors in

Ephesus who rejected His gospel and apostolic authority by adhering to the


36

teaching of the Judaizers and as a result sought to be teachers of the Law

emphasizing obedience to the Ten Commandments. Thus, this word is

emphasizing Paul’s authority to proclaim the gospel about Jesus Christ’s

redemptive work on the cross for the entire human race. It is also emphasizing his

authority as an apostle to the Gentiles and that he is a teacher of the Gentiles. This

is to refute those pastors in Ephesus who rejected his gospel and thus his authority

by adhering to the Judaizers’ teaching which excluded the Gentiles from salvation.

“Was appointed” is the verb tithemi, which is used here of the Lord Jesus

Christ appointing Paul to be a preacher of the gospel, an apostle to the Gentiles and

their teacher.

The noun kerux, “a herald” along with apostolos, “an apostle” and didaskalos,

“teaching” describe Paul’s ministry from different perspectives and are thus not

mutually exclusive and do not represent different offices. This is indicated by the

fact that everywhere in Paul’s letters to the churches he views his apostleship as

encompassing the tasks of proclaiming as a herald the gospel to the unsaved and

teaching regenerate Gentiles. Only here in 1 Timothy 2:7 and in 2 Timothy 1:11

does Paul refer to himself with all three of these terms together whereas in the

other letters he does use all three of himself (Knight, page 125).

The first speaks of Paul’s ministry as that of being a herald of Jesus Christ. The

second speaks of his ministry from the perspective that he is an authoritative

spokesman and witness of the Lord Jesus Christ. The third describes his ministry

as that of educating others through the Word of God as to the character and nature

of the Lord and His ways and will.

“A herald” speaks of Paul’s ministry in relation to the unsaved since

didaskalos is used exclusively by Paul in his writings of a gift given to the church

(1 Corinthians 12:28, 29; Ephesians 4:11). This would indicate a contrast with

kerux implying that the word is used in relation to the unsaved. Apostolos

combines the two ideas emphasizing that Paul is the Lord Jesus Christ’s

authoritative messenger to both the unsaved and the saved.

“A herald” speaks of Paul’s ministry in relation to the unsaved and means

“herald.” It denotes that he was appointed by the Lord Jesus Christ as His

messenger or envoy to proclaim the gospel to sinful humanity. It denotes that Paul

was simply a messenger of Jesus Christ who was his sovereign authority. It also

indicates that Paul’s gospel message (Romans 1:16) was absolutely essential for

the unsaved since faith in the message would save them from sin, Satan and his

cosmic system, spiritual and physical death, condemnation from the Law and

eternal condemnation.

This term also implies that Paul’s gospel message did not express his own

views but that he was a spokesman for his master, Jesus Christ. It indicates that

Paul was commissioned by the Lord to deliver the gospel message and nothing


37

else. It means that Paul stuck exactly to the words given to him by the Lord and the

orders of his master, Jesus Christ.

The word also indicates that Paul was under the protection of the Lord Jesus

Christ, his sovereign. Indeed, any action taken against Paul would bring down the

wrath of the Lord since the former is under His protection. The term speaks of the

fact that Paul was dedicated to the service of Jesus Christ.

“Apostle” refers to the office of an apostle, which was given by the Lord Jesus

Christ to only thirteen men. Paul replaced Judas Iscariot. In our passage, the term

refers to the temporary spiritual gift of apostleship that held maximum authority in

the church. This gift was given to only twelve men and existed exclusively during

the pre-canon period of the church age and is no longer existent today since all

twelve men have died and went home to be with the Lord (See Matthew 10:2-4).

“I am speaking the truth, I am by no means lying” is an emphatic declaration

of truthfulness by Paul. It emphasizes his faithfulness in fulfilling the

responsibilities that the Lord gave him with respect to the church in contrast to the

apostate pastors in Ephesus who were not faithful.

“Teaching the Gentiles by means of doctrine, which is truth” is used with

reference to regenerate Gentiles. It describes Paul’s ministry as that of educating

Gentile believers through the Word of God as to the character and nature of the

Lord and His ways and will.

“The Gentiles” refers to the Gentile churches in the Roman Empire, which Paul

established and taught the Word of God. The word is used often by Paul in his

writings with respect to those churches that he established and taught that were

Gentile in racial background (Romans 1:5, 13; 4:17, 18; 9:24, 30; 10:19; 11:11, 12,

13; 15:9, 10, 11, 12, 16, 18, 27; 16:4, 26; Ephesians 3:1, 6, 8; Colossians 1:27).

Ethnos does not speak of heathen Gentiles since didaskalos is used by Paul of a

gift that is given to the church.

“By means of doctrine which is truth” indicates that the apostle Paul taught

the Gentile churches, which he established by means of doctrine (that which the

church believes), which is truth in contrast to certain pastors in Ephesus who were

not doing so. Paul is thus not teaching the Gentile churches with his faithfulness or

truthfulness but rather by means of doctrine, which is truth. “Doctrine” and

“truth” are synonymous for the gospel and speak of it from different perspectives.

The apostle Paul in 1 Timothy 2:8 makes a statement that is based upon an

inference from his teaching in 1 Timothy 2:1-7. In this inferential statement he

expresses his desire that the Ephesians intercede in prayer for all people in every

place, lifting up holy hands without anger and disputes.

1 Timothy 2:8 Therefore, I myself always want the men in each and every

place to make it a habit of occupying themselves with praying by making it a


38

habit of lifting up holy hands apart from anger as well as dissension.

(Author’s translation) The statement in verse 8 is the direct result of an inference from Paul’s

statements in 1 Timothy 2:1-7. Therefore, Paul desire that the Ephesians intercede

in prayer to the Father for all people is inferred from his statements in 1 Timothy

2:1-7. He is saying that based upon my statements in verses 1-7, I want you

Ephesians to intercede in prayer in every place, lifting up holy hands, without

wrath and dissension.

“I myself always want” parallels 1 Timothy 2:1 and is expressing urgency.

There is a sense of urgency that Paul wants to convey to the Ephesians since the

Father’s desire and will is that all people get saved and enter into an experiential

knowledge of the truth after conversion. It expresses an apostolic order to the

Ephesians to intercede in prayer to the Father on behalf of the entire human race. It

emphasizes Paul’s apostolic authority with his readers.

“The men” refers to the Christian men in Ephesus as opposed to the Christian

women. Paul addresses the men here and not the women since they are to lead the

church (1 Timothy 1:12; 3:2, 5; 4:11-16; 5:17). In verses 9-12, he gives specific

instruction to the Christian women in Ephesus as to how they were to conduct

themselves and their role and function in the church. Therefore, by addressing the

men specifically in Ephesus here in 1 Timothy 2:8 he wants them to lead the prayer

meetings in every home and school room that they meet in for worship services.

“In each and every place” denotes the various geographical regions

throughout the city of Ephesus and its surrounding areas where Christian men

reside. In other words it denotes any place in and around the city of Ephesus. He is

speaking directly to the Ephesians and thus he is calling for prayer for all people by

Christians throughout the world. It is emphasizing the totality of Christian men

who resided in and around the city of Ephesus.

“To make it a habit of occupying themselves with praying” refers to the

corporate intercessory prayer by the Christian men in Ephesus on behalf of the

unsaved of the human race. It teaches that the Christian men in each and every

geographical area in and around the city of Ephesus were to make it a habit of

interceding in prayer to the Father for the unsaved in their particular geographical

area. It indicates that Paul is ordering the Ephesian men to make it a habit of

occupying themselves with intercessory prayer for the unsaved in and around

Ephesus and the world. It emphasizes that corporate intercessory prayer for the

unsaved in their areas was a priority.

Some expositors have verse 8 as beginning the second paragraph even though it

mentions prayer. They believe that this verse is connected to verses 9-15, which

address the conduct of women in contrast with the men whose conduct he mentions

in verse 8. However, the grammar of verse 8 makes clear that his statement in


39

verse 8 summarizes his thoughts in the first seven verses of the chapter. In verse 8

he opens the verse with the inferential conjunction oun, which introduces a

statement that summarizes verses 1-7. Therefore, verse 8 is connected to verses 1-7

since it summarizes these verses.

But it is clear that Paul is addressing the conduct of men in verse 8, which

stands in contrast to his comments regarding the conduct of women in the church

for the rest of the chapter. Thus, verse 8 not only closes the first paragraph but it

also introduces the second because it is dealing with the conduct of men in

conjunction with the conduct of the women in the congregation.

The force of what Paul writes in Romans 13:1-7 and Titus 3:1 is greatly

increased as a result of understanding that Nero was ruling Rome at the time. The

force of his request in 1 Timothy 2:1-2 is also greatly increased if we realize he

requested in this passage that the Ephesian church intercede in prayer to the Father

on behalf of kings and all those in authority and Nero was the Emperor.

Nero reigned as emperor of Rome from 54-68 A.D. He was a tyrant who began

a tremendous persecution of Christians in Rome and was notorious for his

inhumane and cruel treatment of Christians. Nero was emperor of Rome and was

born at Antium, in December of 37 A.D. and died in 68 A.D., right after he gave

the order to execute the apostle Paul. He was the son of Agrippina the Younger and

Gnaeus Domitius Ahenbarbus.

His childhood was turbulent. His family was banished by the emperor Caius

Caligula around 39 A.D. and his father died when he was 3. Caligula confiscated

the entire family fortune, therefore, sending Nero into many years in poverty.

Agrippina raised him with the help of Domitia Lepida his aunt. His tutors were

reportedly a dancer and a barber. Agrippina was returned to Rome upon ascension

of Claudius to the throne in 41 A.D., and her estate returned to her.

In 49 A.D., following the execution of Empress Messallina, Claudius married

Agrippina and the young Nero’s position was dramatically changed. Agrippina

arranged for Nero to now have excellent tutors. He was now tutored by the famous

Seneca the Elder.

Nero was betrothed to the daughter of Claudius, Octavia, and was officially

adopted by the emperor in 50 A.D. This put him in the position as probable heir to

the throne over Claudius’ son Britannicus who was younger and had the distinct

disadvantage of having executed Messallina his mother. Henceforth the young

Lucius Domitius was known as Nero Claudius Drusus Germanicus.

Agrippina murdered Claudius in October 54 after having assured herself the

title of Augusta and her son Nero the throne. Nero, with the help of the Praefect of

the Praetorian Guard, Burrus, was accepted by the Guard and became Emperor of

Rome 54 A.D. His mother dominated the initial reign of Nero.


40

Fortunately for Nero he had the wise council of Burrus and Seneca to fall back

on which offset his mother’s influence. Agrippina was removed from the palace in

55 A.D. as Burrus and Senaca’s influence upon Nero had increased greatly.

Both, Burrus and Seneca administered the Empire successfully under Nero. But

Nero’s self-indulgent personality began to take over and he became disenchanted

with his councilors finding their influences inhibiting to his immoral lifestyle. He

murdered his mother in 59 A.D. and Burrus died in 62 A.D. reportedly from a

throat tumor, although the praefect believed he was poisoned by the Emperor.

Faenius Rufus and the ruthless and ambitious Tigellinus succeeded Burrus

indulging Nero’s excesses. Seneca had since retired as a result of losing his ally

Burrus. It is a testament to Burrus and Seneca that Roman government functioned

on the level it did during Nero’s reign.

The departure of these two men marked the beginning of one of the most

turbulent times in the history of the Empire. Nero ordered the great general

Corbulo from Greece in 67 A.D., and had him commit suicide. This was after

Corbulo regained Armenia and stabilized the East.

Nero’s megalomania found expression in despotism, immorality and artistic

obsessions. He traveled to Greece and was involved in poetry, singing, games,

painting, parties and feasts.

Nero under the influence of Tigellinus did not tolerate dissent or disagreement

in the government and had many arrested, executed and exiled during the latter

part of his reign. The Senate grew weary of him and became distrustful of him.

The fire of 64 A.D. brought the first great persecution of Christians in Rome

causing many Romans to sympathize with the unfair treatment endured by the

Christians. Nero had always greatly desired to rebuild Rome and he used the fire to

do so by reconstructing it in the Greek style. He began building a prodigious palace

called the Golden House which had it been completed would have covered a third

of Rome.

Nero was reportedly at his villa at Antium 35 miles from Rome at the time of

the fire, but many held him responsible for the fire in order to indulge his aesthetic

tastes in the city’s subsequent reconstruction. According to the Annals of the

Roman historian Tacitus and to the Nero of the Roman biographer Suetonius, Nero

in response tried to shift responsibility for the fire on the Christians, who were

popularly thought to engage in many wicked practices. Nero’s shifting of the

blame of the fire to the Christians is self-incriminating.

The Pisonian Conspiracy was formed in 65 A.D. to bring down Nero; it

involved numerous noblemen, senators and others with the ringleader being Gaius

Calpurnius Piso. The influence of Tigellinus grew as he weeded out the

conspirators and had them executed. The lists of the executed grew everyday

including Seneca, Lucan and Thrasea Paetus.


41

Nero made an ill-advised trip to Greece as the administration of the Empire fell

apart. He failed to see the danger that he was presently in and did nothing to

change his lifestyle or advisors who were giving him unwise council.

In March 68 A.D, Vindex, the governor of Gallia Lugdunensis rebelled against

Nero but was crushed by the Rhine legions. This did not stop rebellions in other

provinces from springing up throughout the empire. They demanded the removal

of Nero and when Tigellinus became ill, Nero lost his will and did not act in

quelling the increasing rebellions.

Nero committed suicide with the help of his secretary, Epaphroditus, on June 9,

68 A.D. The historian Suetonius writes that, dying, Nero uttered the words, “What

an artist dies with me.” It was during the middle of the reign of this tyrant Nero

that the apostle Paul wrote this epistle to the Romans.

Nero was a tyrant who began a tremendous persecution of Christians in Rome.

He was notorious for his inhumane and cruel treatment of Christians. Yet, Paul

issues this command in Romans 13:1 since he knew that God and not Caesar was

ultimately in control and that Caesar was under Jesus Christ’s authority and power.

If you notice in Titus 3:1, Paul not only wanted the Cretan believers to obey

their governmental leaders and all those in authority but they were to be prepared

for any kind of act which is divine good, i.e. the result of obedience to the Spirit’s

teaching in the Word of God. Therefore, since this command is used in relation to

the Christian’s responsibility in relation to civil authority, good works should not

be performed exclusively within the Christian community but should also be

performed outside of the Christian community. Paul is teaching that Christians

have a responsibility to be good citizens who help their communities in which they

live. It means they have civic responsibilities.

Titus is to remind the believers further ‘to be ready to do whatever is good’ (v.

1). ‘It is not enough,’ writes John Stott, ‘for Christians to be law-abiding (so far as

our consciences permit us); we are to be public-spirited as well’15

—ready to what

is good. If, for example, a state of emergency was declared on account of some

disaster, it would be our duty as citizens to do what we could to assist. Or if there

was just cause for our country to go to war, public-spiritedness would demand that

we assist the war effort by serving in the military or helping in some capacity on

the home-front. Caring for the environment is another instance in which Christians

should do good. It is very likely, however, that Paul has more in mind here than

simply our duty as citizens. Readiness to do whatever is good is surely to

characterize us as neighbours, friends, family members, colleagues, fellow

students, and Christian brothers. It is something for which believers should be

notable in every relation of life. We are to show in all kinds of practical ways that

15 John R.W. Stott, op cit, p. 199


42

we are genuinely concerned for people; that we have their best interests at heart;

that if it is possible to be of help to them, we are willing to help.16

“Ready to every good work” (v. 1) suggests that Christians ought to support

that which is good in the program of the government. Certainly many of the great

humanitarian reforms of the past have been led by men of Christian principles, and

we ought not to be mere spectators when it is possible for us to do good. Christians

are the salt of the earth and the light of the world; therefore we must involve

ourselves in the good causes of government, provided we do not compromise our

convictions or hinder the work of the Lord.17

By obeying Paul’s orders here in Titus 3:1, the Cretan Christian community

would stand in stark contrast to the unregenerate Cretan culture since Cretans were

notorious in the Roman Empire as those who were constantly involved in

insurrections against the government, as well as murders. They were always

rebelling against authority of all types. In fact, they hated being subjugated to the

Roman Empire.

Furthermore, by obeying Paul’s commands, the Cretan Christian community

would also stand in stark contrast with the Judaizers who Paul describes in Titus

1:16 as “worthless ones for any kind of divine good work of intrinsic quality

and character.” The unregenerate Judaizer would have no capacity to perform

actions pleasing to God and beneficial to others since they did not have the

capacity to do such as thing because they did not have the indwelling presence of

the Father, Son and Spirit as the regenerate sinner. The regenerate Judaizer would

have the capacity to perform works pleasing to God and beneficial to their

community since they possess the indwelling of the Trinity. However, despite this

they could not perform works pleasing to God and beneficial to others because

they were out of fellowship with God as a result of rejecting the gospel. Their

disobedience makes them worthless for any kind of good work.

A Christian citizen should be an influence for good in the community in every

way, demonstrating the loveliness of Christ to all through courteous and gracious

behavior. This is precisely the lifestyle that results from understanding God’s

grace. In other words the instructions in Titus 2:15–3:2 must be seen as concrete

examples of the behavior required of one who understands God’s grace (2:11–

14).18

Titus 3:1 echoes Romans 13:1 since like the former, in the latter, the apostle

Paul issues a command for his Christian readers to continue making it their habit of

voluntarily subjecting themselves to the governmental authorities. Then, he

presents the reason as to why the Roman believers should continue doing this, 16 Campbell, D. (2007). Opening up Titus (pp. 92–93). Leominster: Day One Publications. 17 Wiersbe, W. W. (1992). Wiersbe’s expository outlines on the New Testament (p. 664). Wheaton, IL: Victor Books. 18 Litfin, A. D. (1985). Titus. In J. F. Walvoord & R. B. Zuck (Eds.), The Bible Knowledge Commentary: An Exposition of the Scriptures (Vol. 2,

p. 766). Wheaton, IL: Victor Books.


43

namely because there is, as an eternal spiritual truth, absolutely no authority that

exists on the earth except by God. Lastly, he defines specifically this reason by

teaching that those governmental authorities, which do at any time in history exist

on the earth have been ordained from eternity past by God the Father under the

divine decree.

Romans 13:1 Each and every person must continue making it their habit of

voluntarily subjecting themselves to the governmental authorities because

there is, as an eternal spiritual truth, absolutely no authority except by God.

Specifically, those which at any time do exist are, as an eternal spiritual truth,

ordained by God. (Author’s translation)

In Romans 13:2, Paul presents an inference from his instruction in verse 1 by

teaching that the Christian who at any time does set himself or herself in

opposition against any governmental authority is in a state of opposition against

this institution, which originates from God the Father. He advances upon this

statement teaching also that those Christians who are in a state of opposition

against any governmental authority will, as a certainty, undergo judgment at the

hands of these authorities for the detriment of themselves.

Romans 13:2 Therefore, the one who, at any time does set himself or

herself in opposition against this authority is in a state of opposition against

this institution originating with God the Father. In fact, those who are in a

state of opposition will, as a certainty, undergo judgment for the detriment of

themselves. (Author’s translation) Then, Paul in Romans 13:3 resumes the discussion from verse 1 as to why the

Romans believers are to obey the command in verse 1 to continue to voluntarily

subjecting themselves to the governmental authorities. Therefore, the statement

presents an additional reason why they should obey his command in verse 1. This

would indicate that the Roman believers also must continue to voluntarily

subjecting themselves to the governmental authorities because governmental rulers

are a cause of fear for those whose conduct is evil.

Then, he poses a rhetorical question that follows as a logical consequence of

this previous statement. Thus, Paul is to his readers saying that since governmental

rulers are a cause of fear for law breakers consequently or as a logical consequence

to this if you do not want to live in fear of the authorities, then obey the laws of the

land. The command that presents the logical consequence of the rhetorical question

requires that Paul’s Christian readers in Rome must continue practicing that which

is good, i.e. obedience to the laws of the Roman government.

Lastly, this command is followed by a result clause indicating that if Paul’s

readers continue making it their habit of practicing that which is good in character,

i.e. obedience to the governing authorities, the result will be that they will receive

praise from the governing authorities. The implication of this result is that Paul


44

wants his readers to be outstanding citizens since only those who were outstanding

citizens received commendation from the Roman government.

Romans 13:3 Furthermore, rulers are, as an eternal spiritual truth, never a

cause of fear with respect to conduct which is good in character but rather

with respect to that which is evil in character. Consequently, do you desire not

to live in a state of fear of this authority? Continue making it your habit of

practicing that which is good in character so that you will, as a certainty,

experience recognition from the same. (Author’s translation) Then, in Romans 13:4, Paul makes two assertions that explain or elaborate on

his previous statements in verse 3 with regards to the positive and negative

function of governmental authority.

Romans 13:4 For you see, it is, as an eternal spiritual truth God’s servant

for your benefit for the purpose of encouraging that which is good in

character. However, if you, at any time practice that which is evil in

character, then begin and continue to live in a state of fear because it, as an

eternal spiritual truth by no means exists in the state of bearing the sword

without justification because it is, as an eternal spiritual truth God’s servant,

an avenger for the purpose of exercising God’s righteous indignation against

those who exist in a state of committing that which is evil in character.

(Author’s translation) Romans 13:4 can be divided grammatically into five sections. First of all, the

passage begins with an explanatory statement that is divided into two sections:

(1) A declarative statement: “It is, as an eternal spiritual truth God’s servant

for your benefit for the purpose of encouraging that which is good in

character.” This assertion elaborates on the positive function of governmental authority,

which he addresses in the command at the end of verse 3.






experience recognition from the same. (Author’s translation) (2) Adversative clause containing a fifth class condition: “However, if you, at

any time practice that which is evil in character, then begin and continue to

live in a state of fear.”

This assertion elaborates on the negative function of governmental authority,

which Paul mentions in the causal clause at the beginning of verse 3.




45




experience recognition from the same. (Author’s translation)

Then, on the heels of the adversative clause, which contains a fifth class

condition, we have a causal clause that elaborates on this negative function:

“Because it, as an eternal spiritual truth by no means exists in the state of

bearing the sword without justification.” This causal clause presents the reason why Paul’s readers should live in a state

of fear for practicing evil. They should live in fear for practicing evil because God

has delegated authority to the government to inflict capital punishment for those

who practice evil such as murder. This causal clause is followed by another one:

“Because it is, as an eternal spiritual truth God’s servant.” It teaches that

governmental authority is justified for inflicting capital punishment upon those

who commit evil because they serve God by doing so.

Lastly, this second causal clause is followed by an epexegetical clause: “An

avenger for the purpose of exercising God’s righteous indignation against

those who exist in a state of committing that which is evil in character.” This

clause is clarifying for the reader exactly the responsibility of the governmental

authorities in relation to God the Father’s purpose for them. It teaches that when

the governmental authority uses capital punishment against criminals it is

expressing God’s righteous indignation.

Therefore, in Romans 13:4, Paul is teaching his readers that governmental

rulers are God’s servants, which is demonstrated by these two functions. For the

Christian, the positive function of governmental authority is that it encourages

conduct that is in obedience to the Father’s will in relation to one’s fellow human

being, which can be summarized by the command to love one’s neighbor as

oneself. The negative function discourages conduct that it is evil or in other words,

it discourages conduct that is in disobedience to the will of God. Governmental

authority serves God by fulfilling these two functions.

Romans 13:5 is a summarization and a self-evident inference or conclusion

based upon Paul’s teaching in Romans 13:1-4.

Romans 13:5 Therefore, to continue voluntarily subjecting yourselves is, as

an eternal spiritual truth, always absolutely imperative, not only because of

this exercise of righteous indignation but also because of your conscience.

(Author’s translation)

Therefore, based upon this teaching, to continue voluntarily subjecting

themselves to the governmental authorities in Rome is always absolutely

imperative for Paul’s Christian readers in Rome.


46

The statement in verse 6 advances upon his statement in verse 5 and intensifies

it.

Romans 13:6 In fact, because of this, all of you make it a habit of even

paying taxes because they are, as an eternal spiritual truth, God’s

commissioned public servants, continually dedicated to this very thing.

(Author’s translation) In Romans 13:6, Paul teaches that the Roman believers pay taxes because of

their conscience in the sense that they pay taxes because they know that all

authority originates from God and is His servant and that it is the will of the Father

that they subject themselves to these authorities. So he is speaking of the Roman

believers’ conscientious subjection to the government, which is expressed by their

paying taxes to these authorities. Consequently, Paul is teaching them that they pay

taxes to the Roman governmental authorities because of their knowledge that they,

like all human government, was established by God and are His servants to

encourage good conduct and discourage evil conduct. They also pay taxes because

of their knowledge that it is God’s will that they subject themselves to the

governmental authorities.

Paul’s statement in verse 6 is teaching the Roman believers that their paying

taxes to the Roman government is an implicit recognition of the government’s

authority and power over them that was delegated by God to the Roman

government. Then, in this passage, he teaches that the reason why Paul’s Christians

readers in Rome pay taxes to the Roman governmental authorities is that they are

God’s public servants since the Father has delegated authority to them to govern

and protect the human race from the unrestricted function of the sin nature.

Therefore, Paul is teaching that the institution of human government is a

manifestation of God’s sovereign rule over human beings and functions as His

servant to carry out His purpose of protecting and sustaining and blessing the

human race.

Romans 13:7 I solemnly charge all of you to make it your top priority to

fulfill each and every one of your obligations to each and every one of them,

without exception: To the one who receives the tribute tax, that which is the

tribute tax, to the one who receives the indirect custom tax, that which is the

indirect custom tax, to the one who receives reverence, that which is

reverential in character, to the one who receives honor, that which is

honorable in character. (Author’s translation) In Romans 13:7, Paul solemnly charged the Romans to make it their top priority

to fulfill their four-fold obligation to the governmental authorities. This four-fold

obligation involves paying the Roman government “direct tribute taxes,” “indirect

custom taxes,” and bestowing “reverence” and “honor” on them because they are

public servants of God for their good.


47

Titus 3:2

Titus 3:1 Remind them to be subject to rulers, to authorities, to be

obedient, to be ready for every good deed, 2 to malign no one, to be peaceable,

gentle, showing every consideration for all men. (NASB95) Titus 3:2 is composed of the following: (1) accusative masculine singular form

of the adjective medeis (µηδείς), “no one” (2) present active infinitive form of the

verb blasphēmeō (βλασφηµέω), “to malign” (3) accusative masculine plural form

of the adjective amachos (ἄµαχος), “peaceable” (4) present active infinitive form

of the verb eimi (εἰµί), “to be” (5) accusative masculine plural form of the

adjective epieikēs (ἐπιεικής), “gentle” (6) accusative feminine singular form of the

adjective pas (πᾶς), “every” (7) accusative masculine plural present middle

participle form of the verb endeiknumi (ἐνδείκνυµι), “showing” (8) accusative

feminine singular form of the noun prautēs (πραΰτης), “consideration” (9)

preposition pros (πρός), “for” (10) accusative masculine plural form of the

adjective pas (πᾶς), “all” (11) accusative masculine plural form of the noun

anthropos (ἄνθρωπος), “men.”

Blasphēmeō

The verb blasphēmeō is composed of the verb blapto, “to injure” and noun

pheme, “speech,” thus the word literally means, “to injure with speech.” Thus, the

word denotes “slandering” someone, which refers to defaming someone’s

character as a result of bitterness towards them.

In classical Greek, the verb blasphēmeō means, “to speak profanely of sacred

things.” It also was used of “slandering” a person and was used of simply

“speaking evil” of someone or something. The word was one of the strongest

words in Greek to denote derision, abusive speech or ridicule (Theological

Dictionary of the New Testament, volume 1, page 621).

In the Septuagint, the word appears approximately seven times in which it was

rendered by three different Hebrew terms: (1) Gadhaph (2) Yakhach (3) Na’ats.

The verb blasphēmeō was always used in the Septuagint with God’s person,

character and reputation as the objects of blasphemy by His enemies (2 Kings

[LXX 4 Kings] 19:4, 6, 22; Isaiah 52:5).

In the Greek New Testament, blasphēmeō appears 34 times and like the

Septuagint, the word is used with God as the object of blasphemy by men.

Louw and Nida define the verb blasphēmeō, “To speak against someone in such

a way as to harm or injure his or her reputation –‘to revile, to defame, to


48

blaspheme, reviling’” (Greek-English Lexicon of the New Testament Based on

Semantic Domains, 33.400).

The Analytical Greek Lexicon Revised defines blasphēmeō, “To calumniate,

revile, treat with calumny and contumely; to speak of God or divine things in terms

of impious irreverence, to blaspheme” (pages 70-71).


Literature-Third Edition “primarily ‘to demean through speech’ an especially

sensitive matter in an honor-shame oriented society; to speak in a disrespectful

way that demeans, denigrates, maligns; (a) in relation to humans, slander, revile,

defame (b) in relation to transcendent or associated entities slander, revile, defame,

speak irreverently/impiously/disrespectfully of or about (Page 178).

In Titus 3:2, the verb blasphēmeō means “to blaspheme, to slander” since it

pertains to defaming someone’s character as a result of bitterness towards them.

Thus, Paul is instructing Titus to continue making it his habit of reminding the

Cretan Christian community to slander absolutely no one in their communities,

whether Christians or non-Christians. This would constitute obeying the command

to love one’s neighbor as oneself.

The present tense and the active voice of the verb blasphēmeō are stative

indicating that Paul is instructing Titus to remind the Cretan Christian community

to exist in the state of slandering absolutely no one. The present tense of this verb

can also be interpreted as a gnomic present indicating that the Cretan Christian

community was to be characterized as slandering absolutely no one.

The infinitive form of the verb blasphēmeō is a complementary infinitive

meaning it is completing the thought of the verb hupomimnēskomai which appears

in Titus 3:1. Thus, blasphēmeō identifies another item Titus was to remind the

Cretan Christian community about.

Medeis

The emphatic negative adjective medeis functions as a substantive and means

“absolutely no one” referring to both non-Christians and Christians or in other

words, the human race as a corporate unit. Therefore, Paul is instructing Titus to

remind the Cretan Christian community to make it their habit of slandering

absolutely no one.

This word medeis is functioning as an accusative predicate adjective meaning is

stands in predicate relation to the accusative intensive personal pronoun autos,

“them” and is making an assertion about this pronoun. Thus it is making the

assertion that the Cretan Christian community was to exist in the state of being

characterized as slandering absolutely no one.


49

Eimi

The verb eimi means, “to exist in a particular state or condition” indicating that

Paul is instructing Titus to remind the Cretan Christian community that they are to

exist in the state of being peaceable.

The present tense and the active voice of the verb eimi are stative indicating that

Paul is instructing Titus to remind the Cretan Christian community to exist in the

state of being peaceable and magnanimous. The present tense of this verb can also

be interpreted as a gnomic present indicating that the Cretan Christian community

was to be characterized as peaceable and magnanimous.

The infinitive form of the verb eimi is a complementary infinitive meaning it is

completing the thought of the verb hupomimnēskomai which appears in Titus 3:1.

Thus, blasphēmeō identifies another item Titus was to remind the Cretan Christian

community about.

Amachos

The word mache means “a fight, combat,” and is used of those in arms, “a

battle,” and the prefix a negates it, thus the word means, “not a fighter.” Wuest

states “the word describes a person who does not go about with a chip on his

shoulder.” Louw and Nida define the term “pertaining to a lack of conflict and

contention-‘not contentious, peaceful’ (Greek-English Lexicon of the New

Testament Based on Semantic Domains, 39.24)

In Titus 3:2, the adjective amachos means “not a fighter, not contentious, not

combative, not argumentative” indicating that Paul is instructing Titus to remind

the Cretan Christian community to not be characterized as contentious or in other

words, they were to be characterized as peaceable.

The adjective amachos is functioning as an accusative predicate adjective

meaning is stands in predicate relation to the accusative intensive personal pronoun

autos, “them” and is making an assertion about this pronoun. Thus it is making the


characterized as peaceable.

Epieikēs

The adjective epieikes in the Greek New Testament expresses the concept of

magnanimity and is a compound word composed of the preposition epi, “upon”

and the adjective eikos, “reasonable, probable.”

The adjective epieikes and the noun epieikeia are both derived from eikos,

“becoming, decent,” or from eiko, “to yield, give way,” and mean from Homer


50

onwards “the proper way of life,” or from Thucydides onwards “forbearance,

indulgence, mildness.”

Epieikes, together with its derivatives, was originally an expression for the

balanced, intelligent, decent in outlook in contrast to licentiousness. Then it was

used for a considerate, thoughtful attitude in legal relationships, which was

prepared to mitigate the rigors of justice, with its laws and claims, in contrast to the

attitude, which demands that rights, including one’s own, should be upheld at all

costs. It is opposed to unbridled anger, harshness, brutality and self-expression. It

represents character traits of the noble-minded, the wise man who remains meek in

the face of insults, the judge who is lenient in judgment, and the king who is kind

in his rule. Hence, it appears often in pictures of the ideal ruler and in eulogies on

men in high positions.

Epieikes expresses moderation or kindness towards men. Praotes, which is also

translated “gentleness” in the English translations pertains more to the attitude of

the individual, whereas epieikeia is related to the outward conduct of the

individual. Praotes is unrestricted divine whereas epieikeia is directed towards

others.

The adjective epieikes appears only four times in the Septuagint. Each time it

translates sallach. The adjective epieikes is found five times in the New Testament

(Phlp. 4:5; 1 Tim. 3:3; Titus 3:2; James 3:17; 1 Pet. 2:18). Its cognate noun

epieikeia is found twice in Acts 24:4; 2 Cor. 10:1.


Literature-Third Edition defines the adjective “not insisting on every right or letter

of law or custom, yielding, gentle, kind, courteous, tolerant” (Page 371).

Louw and Nida define the term “pertaining to being gracious and forbearing—

‘gentle, gracious, forbearing’ (Greek-English Lexicon of the New Testament Based

on Semantic Domains 88.63).

The Analytical Greek Lexicon Revised defines the term “gentle, kind,

forbearing” (page 163).

Commenting on the word E.K. Simpson wrote “Epiekes defies exact

translation…Gracious, kindly, forbearing, considerate, magnanimous, genial, all

approximate to its idea” (Page 51).

Hawthorne says that this word is “one of the truly great Greek words that is

almost untranslatable” and suggests that the word means “magnanimity, sweet

reasonableness (Philippians, page 182).

In Titus 3:2, the adjective epieikēs means “magnanimous” which speaks of a

wise person who remains meek in the face of insults and of a judge who is lenient

in judgment, and the king who is kind in his rule. It speaks of someone who is

considerate, thoughtful in legal relationships and does not demand his own rights at

all costs.


51

The adjective epieikēs is also functioning as an accusative predicate adjective

meaning is stands in predicate relation to the accusative intensive personal pronoun

autos, “them” and is making an assertion about this pronoun. Thus it is making the


characterized as magnanimous.

Endeiknumi

The verb endeiknumi is composed of the preposition en, “in” and the verb

deíknumi, “to show,” thus the world literally means, “to demonstrate or manifest

something by arguments or acts, to give outward proof of something that is

inherent.” The word means “to present as a demonstration” (Xenophon, Anabasis

6.1.19; Plato, Laws 966B). It was familiar to classical writers such as Homer,

Sophocles, Plato and Euripides. It was used in a legal sense as confirmed by the

papyri meaning “to inform against someone.”

The verb endeiknumi appears 13 times in the Septuagint and 11 times in the

New Testament. It is used with both God and men as its subject. In the Septuagint,

the verb was used of “showing” respect to someone as demonstrated by their

actions (Genesis 50:15, 17). It occurs in Exodus 9:16, which Paul quotes in

Romans 9:17 and is used of God demonstrating His power through Pharaoh’s

stubbornness.


Literature-Third Edition: (1) to direct attention to or cause something to become

known, show, demonstrate (2) to display conduct that affects another, show (Page

331).

Analytical Lexicon of the Greek New Testament lists the following meanings:

(1) as giving outward proof show, demonstrate (HE 6.10); (2) as perpetrating

something openly against someone do to (2T 4.14) (Page 148)

The verb appears in Romans 2:15 where it is used of the Gentiles

“demonstrating” or “manifesting” that they possess inherently a moral code by

their obedience to the principles that appear in written form in the Mosaic Law. In

Romans 9:17, Paul used the verb endeiknumi of God causing Amenhotep II to

ascend to power as the Pharaoh of Egypt in order to “demonstrate” or “manifest”

His omnipotence through Pharaoh’s disobedience to His commands to release the

nation of Israel from their bondage in Egypt. The verb endeiknumi appears in

Romans 9:22 where Paul uses the word to express the spiritual principle that God

does “demonstrate” or “manifest” His wrath, i.e. His righteous indignation towards

those in the nation of Israel who reject Jesus of Nazareth as Messiah.

In 2 Corinthians 8:22, Paul uses the word again with respect to the Corinthians

demonstrating the proof of their love through giving to the poor saints in


52

Jerusalem. It is used in Ephesians 2:7 by Paul of God demonstrating the

immeasurable riches of His grace through saving sinners. In 1 Timothy 1:16, the

verb endeiknumi means “to demonstrate” and is used of the Lord Jesus Christ

demonstrating His perfect patience through the life and conversion of Paul. The

apostle uses the word in 2 Timothy 4:14 of Alexander the coppersmith doing

something against him openly. The word occurs in Hebrews 6:10 of believer

showing their love for the Lord by serving His body. In Hebrews 6:11, it is used of

believers continuing to demonstrate this to the end.

In Titus 2:10, the verb endeiknumi is used of slaves in the Cretan Christian

community “showing” or “demonstrating” complete trustworthiness by being

submissive or obedient to their masters.

In Titus 3:2, the verb endeiknumi is used of the Cretan Christian community

“showing” or “demonstrating” every consideration for each and every human

being. The word speaks of the Christian manifesting the fact that they love their

neighbor as themselves.

The present tense and the active voice of the verb endeiknumi are stative

indicating that Paul is instructing Titus to remind the Cretan Christian community

to exist in the state of showing every consideration for all people. The present tense

of this verb can also be interpreted as a gnomic present indicating that the Cretan

Christian community was to be characterized as showing every consideration for

every human being.

The middle voice of the verb endeiknumi is a reciprocal middle which is used

with a plural subject to represent interaction among themselves. There is an

interchange of effort among the subjects. Here the subjects are the members of the

Cretan Christian community. Therefore, the reciprocal middle voice emphasizes

that the individual members of the Cretan Christian community are “together”

show every consideration for all people. It emphasizes that the Cretan Christian

community is to interact with each other as they show every consideration for

every human being they come in contact with. They were to function as a team as

they showed every consideration for all people.

The participle form of the verb endeiknumi could be interpreted as a participle

of means which indicates the means by which the action of a finite verb is

accomplished. This would indicate that Paul is instructing Titus to remind the

Cretan Christian community to be characterized as slandering absolutely no one,

and to be peaceable, magnanimous “by” together showing every consideration for

all people. The problem with this interpretation is that if the participle of means is

absent or removed, the point of the main verb is removed as well. Here if it was

removed, one would still understand Paul’s point.

The participle form of the verb endeiknumi could be interpreted as an

imperatival participle meaning it is expressing a command. This type of participle


53

is not attached to any verb in the context. However, in Titus 3:2 this verb can be

connected with the preceding verbs.

The participle form of the verb endeiknumi could be interpreted as a temporal

participle expressing contemporaneous action with the preceding present tense

verbs blasphēmeō and eimi. This is indicating that Paul is instructing Titus to

remind the Cretan Christian community to be characterized as slandering

absolutely no one, and to be peaceable, magnanimous “while at the same time”

together showing every consideration for all people. However, one should not

interpret a participle as temporal unless all the other categories of a dependent

adverbial participle have been considered.

It is best to interpret the participle form of the verb endeiknumi as a result

participle which is used to indicate the actual outcome or result of the action of the

main verb. This would indicate that Paul is instructing Titus to remind the Cretan

Christian community to be characterized as slandering absolutely no one, and to be

peaceable, magnanimous “with the result that” together they show every

consideration for all people. The participle of result emphasizes what the action of

the main verb accomplishes. Here it would it emphasize what the Cretan Christian

community would accomplish by being characterized as slandering absolutely no

one, and being peaceable and magnanimous.

Interpreting endeiknumi as a result participle makes the best sense of the

context. The Cretan Christian community would be showing every consideration

for all people as a result of not slandering people as well as not being contentious

with people and being magnanimous with people. It the natural consequence of

practicing these things. In fact, being magnanimous is the direct result of being

considerate of others. To be magnanimous speaks of someone who is considerate,

thoughtful in legal relationships and does not demand his own rights at all costs.

The accusative form of this verb is also functioning as an accusative predicate

adjective meaning is stands in predicate relation to the accusative intensive

personal pronoun autos, “them” and is making an assertion about this pronoun.

Thus it is making the assertion that the Cretan Christian community was to be

characterized as together showing every consideration for all people.

Prautēs

In Titus 3:2, the noun prautēs means “consideration” since it pertains to being

thoughtful of the rights and feelings of others, or thoughtful and having

sympathetic regard for others.

This word is modified by the adjective pas, which pertains to being each within

a range of opportunities. Therefore, it is indicating that Paul wants the Cretan


54

Christian community to show “every” consideration for all people in the sense that

whenever they have an opportunity they were to show consideration for people.

The noun prautēs is functioning as an accusative direct object meaning it is

receiving the action of the verb endeiknumi.

Pros pantas anthrōpous

The noun anthropos denotes a “person, human being” and is used in a generic

sense for the human race and in the plural means “people.” It is modified by the

adjective pas, which is used attributively emphasizing the totality of the human

race. The adjective is used here in a distributive sense meaning that the word

denotes that Paul wants the Cretan Christian community to show every

consideration for “each and every” member of the human race without exception,

both Jew and Gentile, regenerate or unregenerate.

The noun anthropos is also the object of the preposition pros which means

“for” since it is functioning as a marker of benefaction or advantage indicating that

this every consideration Paul wants the Cretan Christian community to show is

“for the benefit of” each and every human being.

Translation of Titus 3:2

Titus 3:2 They are to be characterized as slandering absolutely no one, to

be characterized as peaceable, magnanimous with the result that together they

show every consideration for each and every member of the human race.

Exposition of Titus 3:2

Paul’s instructions in verse 2 is an addition to his instructions in verse 1 which

contains reminders for the Cretan Christian community with regards to their

relationship to the governmental authorities. His instructions in verse 2 contain

more items that Titus was to remind the Cretan Christian community about but this

time they address their relationship with all people, non-Christian and each other.

Here in Titus 3:2, the apostle is instructing Titus to continue making it his habit of

reminding the Cretan Christian community to be characterized as slandering

absolutely no one, to be characterized as peaceable, magnanimous. Consequently,

by doing so, together they would show every consideration for each and every

member of the human race or in other words, everyone they came into contact

with.

The first characteristic mentioned by Paul in verse 2 that the Cretan Christian

community was to manifest was not slandering people. This would constitute


55

obeying the command to love one’s neighbor as oneself. “Slander” pertains to

defaming someone’s character as a result of bitterness towards them. Therefore,

Paul did not want the Cretan Christian community to be characterized as

“slandering” people’s character in the sense that they defame the character of

others as a result of bitterness towards them. Christians are prohibited from

slandering each other or any person for that matter (Ephesians 4:31; Colossians

3:8; 1 Peter 2:1). Thus, Paul is instructing Titus to continue making it his habit of

reminding the Cretan Christian community to slander absolutely no one in their

communities, whether Christians or non-Christians.

The apostle Paul is not saying that Christians must never correctly evaluate and

confront and speak about evil that they see in anyone since he does this himself as

recorded in Titus 1:10-16. But rather, he is exhorting the Cretan Christian

community to restrain their natural inclination to say the worst about people and

which inclination originates from their sin nature. Jesus confronted and rebuked

openly the character and teachings of the Pharisees and the apostles did so as well

with the Judaizers and other false teachers.

The apostle’s directive could not be clearer. No such abusing and insulting

language is to be heard on our lips. We may feel it necessary to criticize a certain

politician, for example, or a fellow believer, or a colleague at work, or a family

member. And the criticism may be justified. But we must be exceedingly careful

about the way in which we express it and be at pains to avoid the kind of language

that Paul is condemning here. Our great example in this respect is our Lord Jesus,

‘who, when he was reviled, did not revile in return’ (1 Peter 2:23, NKJV). ‘Bless

those who persecute you,’ writes Paul in Romans 12; ‘bless and do not curse’ (v.

14). People may be insulting and abusive in their language to us but by God’s

grace our language to them is to be altogether different.19

The second characteristic which the Cretan Christian community was to

manifest was that of being peaceable or in other words, they were not be

characterized as contentious. This means that they were not to be involved in

bickering. They were not to be quarrelsome people and who struggle against others

for self-seeking reasons such as jealousy or selfish ambition. They could strongly

disagree with people but can state their case without being contentious. They were

to be people characterized as walking away from physical altercations even though

they may have the strength and skill to fight. They were to be peacemakers who

are willing to keep a loose grip on their rights.

The fact that Paul wants the Cretan Christian community to be characterized as

peaceable “does not mean that a Christian, as a good citizen, will not be ready to

stand up for the principles he believes in and even give reasons for the hope that is

19 Campbell, D. (2007). Opening up Titus (p. 93). Leominster: Day One Publications.


56

in him (1 Pet. 3:15), but he is willing to allow others to hold to their opinions and

is not one who is always ready to step into the ring with those who disagree with

him. Those who are contentious and quarrelsome with their neighbors not only

make poor citizens but poor testimonies for the Savior.”20

The third characteristic mentioned by Paul in verse 2 is being magnanimous

which speaks of a wise person who remains meek in the face of insults and of a

judge who is lenient in judgment, and the king who is kind in his rule. It speaks of

someone who is considerate, thoughtful in legal relationships and does not demand

his own rights at all costs.

The New Universal Unabridged Dictionary lists the following definitions for

the adjective magnanimous: (1) Generous in forgiving an insult or injury; free from

petty resentfulness or vindictiveness: to be magnanimous towards one’s enemies.

(2) High-minded; noble: a magnanimous king (3) Proceeding from or revealing

nobility of mind, character, etc: a magnanimous love of justice.

If we paraphrase this definition and apply it to the Christian, we would say that

a Christian must be: (1) Generous in forgiving an insult or injury; free from petty

resentfulness or vindictiveness especially towards one’s enemies. (2) High-minded;

noble (3) Possessing nobility of mind, character, having a magnanimous love of

justice.

Magnanimity is related to forgiveness (Col. 3:13-14). God the Father, God the

Son and God the Holy Spirit are inherently magnanimous. It is one of their

attributes. The Lord Jesus Christ during His First Advent revealed this

magnanimous character of the Trinity. The greatest manifestation of God’s

magnanimity was at the Cross when every sin in human history, past, present and

future was imputed to Christ on the Cross and He was judged as our substitute. Our

Lord’s magnanimous behavior was demonstrated during His First Advent by the

manner in which He demonstrated the quality of being generous in forgiving

insults and injury without being pettily resentful or vindictive.

Luke 23:34 Then Jesus said, “Father, forgive all of them, for they know not

what they are doing.” (NASB) He was noble in character, loving justice but not insisting upon the letter of the

law in order to preserve the spirit of the law. The Lord was generous in forgiving

insults and injuries without being vindictive and becoming involved in petty

resentfulness. He was generous, tolerant, patient, moderate, courageous, and noble.

He did not insist upon his own rights to the fullest but rectifies and redresses the

injustices of justice. The pastor is to be the same way like His Lord and Savior (cf.

1 Timothy 3:3).

20 Keathley III, J. Hampton, The Letter to Titus: An Exegetical and Devotional Commentary, page 71; Biblical Studies Press, 2000;

www.bible.org


57

“With the result that together showing every consideration for each and

every member of the human race” presents the result of the Cretan Christian

community being characterized as magnanimous. The Cretan Christian community

was showing every consideration for each and every member of the human race as

a result of being characterized as being magnanimous. This statement emphasizes

that the individual members of the Cretan Christian community are together show

every consideration for all people as a result of being magnanimous. It emphasizes

that the Cretan Christian community is to interact with each other as they show

every consideration for every human being they come in contact with. They were

to function as a team as they showed every consideration for all people. To show

every consideration for every person pertains to being thoughtful of the rights and

feelings of others, or thoughtful and having sympathetic regard for others. It

indicates that whenever they have an opportunity the Cretan Christian community

was to show consideration for people.

The Cretan Christian community would automatically manifest all these

characteristics and obey Paul’s instructions here in verse 2 by loving their

neighbors as themselves. By treating others the way they would want to be treated

would automatically result in the Cretan Christian community obeying Paul’s

instructions here in verse 2.

The fact that Paul is telling Titus to remind the Cretan believers of their

responsibilities in relation to their fellow human beings, saved and non-saved

implies that they were taught these responsibilities in the past by Paul and Titus.

Paul was very concerned that no one would think and speak badly of the gospel

and thus the apostolic teaching. He did not want the Cretan church to become

involved in slander and contentious behavior, which he knew would bring the

apostolic teaching of the gospel into disrepute.

By being obedient to Paul’s instructions here in Titus 3:2 the godly character of

the Cretan Christian community would stand in stark contrast to the ungodly

character of the apostate pastor-teachers on the island of Crete who rejected the

gospel and adhered to the legalistic teaching of the Judaizers. By being obedient to

Paul’s instructions their godly character would stand in contrast to the ungodly

character of the unregenerate Cretan people. The purpose of such obedience is not

only for the purpose of developing Christ-like character in the Cretan Christian

community and to glorify God but it was would also to serve to evangelize the

non-Christian and rebuke the apostate Christian. By obeying Paul’s instructions

here in Titus 3:2, the Cretan Christian community would be reflecting the godly

standards of the gospel of Jesus Christ and the apostolic teaching which

communicated the gospel.

Documents

Exegesis and Exposition of Titus 3:1-2 - Wenstrom · 2014 William E. Wenstrom, Jr. Bible Ministries 1 Exegesis and Exposition of Titus 3:1-2 Titus 3:1-Reminder of Responsibilities