NOTES ON TITUS
Introduction

     In Titus 1:5 it is stated, "For this cause left I thee in Crete, that thou shouldest set in order the things that are wanting,, and ordain elders in every city, as I had appointed thee."
     This verse sets forth the task that Titus had in Crete, first to set in order and second to ordain elders.  Thus Titus was deal with the order of  things in the church on Crete.  As this writer begins this study of  the Epistle to Titus, some
introductory matters will be considered on this web page.
     As is the usual case in the studies that this writer has presented, all references will be identified as used.  Use will be made of  Ibid. when the same page of  the previous work is cited; op. cit. will be used when another page of  the previous work is cited.  Also, if  a word seems to be misspelled in a quotation (other than the ou for o) the word "sic" in brackets will appear.  Unless otherwise specified all brackets ([ ]) will be comments within a quotation by this writer.  There may arise an occasion where the author cited uses brackets; it that case if  this writer makes a comment it will be in braces ({ }).

I. THE AUTHOR
     A. The Pastoral Epistles
          1. Which ones
               a. 1 Timothy
               b. 2 Timothy
               c. Titus
          2. Why these
               a. They are listed together in English translations, but this is not reason; rather they are together because they are
                    pastoral epistles.
               b. There is a several reasons.
                    (I) They are written to individuals, rather than churches.
                    (II) It might be argued that Philemon should be among them; however, it was written at the same time as
                         Colossians, and Philemon was part of  that church.
                    (III) Timothy and Titus were either pastors or serving in a pastoral way.
                    (IV) They were likely written about the same time.
     B. The Pastoral Author
          1. Paul
               a. All three start out identifying the writer as Paul.
               b. Each epistle closes with the usual Pauline close of  "grace be with you" with slight variation.
               c. As this writer has said, this is enough for the believer.
               d. The historical evidence
                    (I) "There never was the slightest doubt in the ancient Church, that the Epistles to Timothy and Titus were
                         canonical, and written by St. Paul." (Alford, Henry, The Greek Testament.  Chicago:  Moody Press,
                         1958; vol. III, Prolegomena, 70 [Further quotes will be identified as III:Ppg #.]
                    (II) The second century Peschito Syriac version contained all three.
                    (III) Irenaeus quotes from all three.
                    (IV) Clement of  Alexandria quotes at least from 1 Timothy and Titus.
                    (V) Tertullian has numerous quotations from all three.
                    (VI) Clement of  Rome from the end of first century alludes to 1 Timothy.
                    (VII) Polycarp and Ignatius at the beginning of  the second century alludes to both Timothys.
                    (VIII) "Thus the Pastoral Epistles seem to have been from the earliest times known, and continuously quoted,
                         in the Church." (op. cit., III:P72)
               e. The authorship of  these three epistles remained virtually unquestioned until the beginning of  the nineteen
                    century (1800s).
                    (I) At that time Schmidt, Schleiermacher, Eichhorn, and De Wette attacked the genuineness of  these epistles;
                         these were rationalistic German higher critics.
                    (II) The negative ground, of  course, was unacceptable, so Eichhorn "put forth a positive hypothesis, that the
                         Epistles were written by some disciple of  St. Paul, with a view of  collecting together his oral injunctions
                         respecting the constitution of  the Church." (op. cit., III:P73)
                    (III) These same ideas gave rise to the document hypothesis in the writing of  the Gospels.
                    (IV) These ideas were mere speculation and had no real basis in fact.
                    (V) Their argument had a supposed threefold basis. (op. cit., III:P74)
                         (A) "The historical difficulty of  finding a place for the writing of  the three Epistles during the lifetime of  St.
                              Paul;" (This can best be answered in a discussion of  the place and time of  writing.)
                         (B) "The apparent contact with various matters and persons who belong to a later age than that of  the
                              Apostle;"
                              (1) Subsidiary point to this is that the ideas and conduct that Paul opposed were heretics of  a later
                                   time.  This is a fallacious point because heresies in one form or another were present during Paul's
                                   lifetime, sometimes in an incipient form.
                              (2) There was development in Judaism through ascetism into a form of  Gnosticism.  Both Judaism and
                                   Gnosticism can be seen to be what Paul was attacking.
                              (3) This was not the form of  Judaism which Paul early in his ministry had to deal with; the earlier form
                                   strongly supported the law and its rules.
                              (4) Even in the Epistle to the Colossians there was a new departure in Judaism which were not evident
                                   earlier in Paul's ministry.
                              (5) Thus, there was a greater departure from the early legalism of  Judaism into superstition and
                                   mysticism.
                              (6) These heretics were not the Gnostics of  later time who were anti-judaistic.
                              (7) "The false teachers then of  our Epistles seem to hold a position intermediate to the Apostle's
                                   former Judaizing adversaries and the subsequent Gnostic heretics, distinct from both, and just at that
                                   point in the progress from the one form of  error to the other, which would suit the period
                                   subsequent to the Epistle to the Philippians, and prior to the destruction of  Jerusalem." (op. cit.,
                                   III:P77)
                         (C) "The peculiarity of  expressions and modes of  thought, both of  which diverge from those
                              in St. Paul's recognized Epistles."
                             (1) This shows the fallacy of  their argument, for these epistles were recognized as Paul's from the
                                  earliest of  times.
                             (2) There is no argument that there are many expressions are peculiar to these epistles as well as the
                                  manner of  thought.
                             (3) As Alford points out, means of  expression and words vary with the circumstances under which they
                                  are written.
                             (4) Many of  Paul's epistles were actually dictated and written by another; apart from inspiration by the
                                  Holy Spirit (Incidentally the Holy Spirit varied His work in each writer differently.) there may have
                                  been some degree of  cooperation in the matter of  expression.
                             (5) There is no evidence that Paul dictated this epistles; thus, modes of  expression may have been
                                  different.
                             (6) Other arguments against this notion have been given which only strengthens the overall support for
                                  the Pauline authorship of these epistles.

II. THE TIME AND PLACE
     A. The Time
          1. Negatively
               a. The problem is finding a time for what is set forth in these epistles.
               b. A suggested order of  these epistles would be 1 Timothy, Titus, and 2 Timothy.
                    (I) This order is suggested because a lapse of  time would have to exist between 1 Timothy and 2 Timothy,
                         for it would take time for the first epistle to get to Paul and some information get back to him.
                    (II) Though Titus 1:5 indicates that Paul left Titus in Crete, there is no indication one way or  the other that he
                         was still there.
                    (III) Titus 3:12, 13 give no indication as to where Titus was when Paul wrote to him; all it really shows was
                         that he was not then in prison which evidently he was when he wrote 2 Timothy.  (Incidentally, this is one
                         of  the evidences given for a second imprisonment of  Paul.)
               c. It would seem apparently that the events suggested in these epistles would not fit into any of  Paul's work in the
                    Book of  Acts.
                    (I) "All the data with which they themselves [the epistles] furnish us, are against such a supposition [that the
                         events could be fitted into the Book of  Acts]." (Alford, III:P87)
                    (II) The nature of  the false teachings and heresies would preclude these events being in any of  Paul's labors
                         as set forth in the Book of  Acts.
                    (III) These books belong together and cannot be separated placing possibly 1 Timothy earlier with 2 Timothy
                         and Titus later.
                    (IV) Virtually no one places 2 Timothy at any earlier date than the end of  Paul's life (Cf. 2 Timothy 4:6-8,
                         16).
          2. Positively
               a. Various theories have been proposed which are of  such a detail that this writer does not believe it worth the
                    space to discuss.
               b. Several factors would suggest that Paul was imprisoned in Rome for only a couple of  years or so.
                    (I) It would seem, therefore, that a second imprisonment would be required to fit all the facts that appear to
                         be set forth in these epistles.
                    (II) "The contents of  our Epistles absolutely requires as late a date as possible to be assigned them.  The
                         same internal evidence forbids us from separating them by any considerable interval, either from one
                         another, or from the event which furnished their occasion." (op. cit., III:P94)
               c. Besides the internal evidence, we have traditional, or external, evidence that needs to be considered.
                    (I) Eusebius indicates that Paul was martyred in the last year of  Nero which would be roughly the fall of  A.
                         D. 67.
                    (II) Jerome apparently agreed with this time.
               d. Thus, one may conclude that these epistles were written in the latter part of  Paul's life, probably within a year
                    or two of  each other from approximately 65 A. D. to 67 A. D.
     B. The Place
          1. The place is certainly dependent upon the time.
          2. It is reasonable to assume that 2 Timothy was written from prison in Rome.
               a. This is evident from 2 Timothy 4:16.
               b. This is in accord with the external evidence.
          3. It may be that Paul had gone to Spain after his initial imprisonment in Rome.
               a. Paul stated in Romans 15:24, 28, it would try to do so.
               b. Clement of  Rome apparently reported that he did.
          4. It may be that Paul then to went back to Ephesus as may be suggested by 1 Timothy 1:3 where he left Timothy
               while he went into Macedonia.
               a. "He seems to speak of  the whole occurrence as one past by, and succeeded by other circumstances." (op.
                    cit., III:P95)
               b. 1 Timothy 3:14, 15 suggests that he may be delayed in returning to Timothy.
               c. It may, therefore, hard to determine from where 1 Timothy was written.
          5. This is a study of  Titus, why be concerned with the Epistles to Timothy?
               a. Remember this epistles were written about the same time, particularly 1 Timothy and Titus.
               b. Thus, where 1 Timothy was written might have bearing upon where Titus was written.
               c. To try to fit in the presence of  Titus in Crete may be a necessary factor.
               d. Paul had left Titus in Crete, but as this writer stated earlier there is no indication that he was still there.
               e. It is possible that Paul wrote Titus shortly after leaving Crete; if  he did, then Titus was still there.
               f. If  Titus had already left Crete and gone to Dalmatia as shown in 2 Timothy 4:10 (There is no intimation as to
                    when Titus went to Dalmatia), then it may not be entirely possible to determine where Paul was when he
                    wrote to Titus.
               g. Paul was headed for Nicopolis (Titus 3:12), so the epistle would have to be written before he reached there,
                    perhaps on the road there.
               h. It is possible "to trace out this his last journey as having been from Crete by Miletus, Ephesus, Troas," possibly
                    to Corinth, then headed toward Nicopolis. (op. cit., III:P96)  There is the possibility that his itinerary was
                    from Crete to Corinth and then into Asia as he headed toward Nicopolis.
               i. This writer, therefore, would conclude that Titus was probably written somewhere on Paul's way to Nicopolis;
                    any closer pinpointing would be impossible.

III. THE RECIPIENT
     A. The Person
          1. Paul names him as Titus--1:4
          2. There is no other one who could be the receiver of  this epistle, not even a hint of  anyone else.
     B. The History
          1. His history is scanty, but adequate.
               a. Never mentioned in the Book of  Acts
               b. Strange in the light of  his being a trusted companion of  Paul.
          2. First mentioned in Galatians 2:1, 3
               a. These verses show he was a Gentile.
               b. He was uncircumcised.
               c. He was not compelled to be circumcised.
               d. He was led to Christ by Paul as per Titus 1:4.
          3. Went with Paul to Crete
               a. Paul left him in Crete.
               b. He was to set things in order in the church.
               c. He was to ordain elders in every city which suggests that there was more than one assembly.
               d. He stay may have been there a relatively short time as suggested by Titus 3:12
          4. Joined Paul, probably in Nicopolis
               a. This is assumed on the basis
                    (I) He was requested to come to Paul when Artemas or Tychicus comes to Titus.
                    (II) He departed from Paul to Dalmatia.
                    (III) 2 Timothy 4:10
               b. He either left Paul from Nicopolis or possibly departing from him on some journey; 2 Timothy 4:10 does not
                    specifically say when he left Paul for Dalmatia.
               c. To this writer there is no suggestion that Titus left Paul for the love of the world as Demas did.
          5. Tradition is really of  no help in this matter; thus, the matter must be left here.
     C. The Church
          1. Who founded the church in Crete?
               a. It is very doubtful that Paul founded them.
               b. It is equally obvious that Titus did not found the Cretan church.
               c. Zenas and Apollos are both mentioned in Titus 3:13, but there is no evidence that they founded the church.
          2. The probable founders of  the church in Crete.
               a. It may have been converts of  Paul from cities that he had visited.
               b. More likely they were Judaic converts from the Day of  Pentecost for Cretans were present there--cf. Acts
                    2:11.
          3. The purpose in writing to Titus was to set order the things lacking.  This theme will be evident in the web pages to
               follow.

     This Epistle to Titus is concerned with order in the church.  On this web page some introductory matters were considered.  There is no reason not to accept the author as being Paul.  Evidence, both internal and external, are more than sufficient.  The main problem is where and when the epistle was written.  It was concluded that it was written somewhere on Paul's way to Nicopolis.  It was written late in his life, probably between 65 A. D. and 67 A. D.
     This epistle, though primarily concerned with church order, still presents the gospel message, particularly in Titus 2:11, 14 and 3:5-7.  These verses clearly show that Jesus Christ is the Savior from sin and the only true source of  righteousness.

Have you trusted Him for salvation from sin?  If  not, why not do so right now!