Online Resource Library
Commentary Index | Return to PrayerRequest.com | DownloadInternational Critical Commentary NT - Titus 1:1 - 1:99
(Show All Books | Show All Chapters)
This Chapter Verse Commentaries:
1:1-4 Paraphrase. Paul to Titus his true son in the faith.
Paul writing as a slave of God, bound to obey his Master’s command, yet, more than that, as one formally commissioned to speak for Jesus Christ—Paul, whose only standard is the faith shared by God’s elect and a knowledge of truth such as makes for godliness, whose whole work rests on hope of eternal life, that life which the God who cannot deceive promised to man long ages past, aye, and at the right moment He published abroad His message in a proclamation, which was put as a sacred trust into my hands in virtue of a direct command from God, your Saviour and mine, writes to you as a son whom he knows that he can trust, a son in a common faith. Grace and peace be with you from God our Father and Christ Jesus our Saviour.
The address is unusually long, but compare Gal_1:1-5, Rom_1:l-7, 16:25-27; it might have been compiled with a reminiscence of those passages, but a compiler would naturally have been simpler, and the changes are more natural in the same author writing at a different time.
It strikes two notes—(1) a personal note, a letter from a father to a son (ἐὼ. . . τκῳ (2) more strongly an official note, instructions from an apostle to a delegate (ἀότλς. . . γηί τκῳ laying stress (1) on his duty rather than on his authority (δῦο . . . ἀότλς. . . ἐιτύη . . . κτ ἐιαή); (2) on the nature of the message he has to give. This is the point mainly emphasized; it is no novelty, no unfounded statement, no aimless discussion, but rooted in the past and looking forward to the future, and affecting a godly life. ὅαπςγμιτ ποίιντνεεγσῶ τῦθο, Chrys.
1. δῦο θο] here only in St. Paul of himself, but cf. δῦο ἸσῦΧ., Rom_1:l, Php_1:l; δῦο Κρο, 2Ti_2:24. It carries the thought of obedience beyond Jesus Christ to God, “the God of our fathers who had chosen him to know His will” (Act_22:14), and so places him on a level with Moses and other O.T. servants (Dan_9:10, Dan_9:11), especially with “the servant of the Lord” of Isaiah; Cf. 2Ti_2:24 note. Pelagius’ comment, “servus Dei non peccati”(cf. 2:14, 3:3, Rom_6:15-23), is suggestive, and perhaps consciously present.
ἀότλςδ ἸΧ.] strengthens the sense of duty, perhaps also to enforce his authority. “Scribit non quæTitus in cubiculo solus legat sed quæproferat in publicum,” Calvin.
κτ πσι, as in κτ εσβίν κτ ἐιαή, κτ κιή πσι, κτ gives the standard; but the application of the standard differs with the context. Here it may include (a) chosen in conformity to the faith, ὅιἐίτυεκθπρο λιο ἐλκο (Theophylact); (b) preaching by that standard, “to preache the faith” (Tynd. Cov.); cf. 1 K 19:3 ἀῆθνκτ τνψχνἑυο, “to save his life.”
ἐλκῶ θο] so Rom_8:33, Col_3:12 ὡ ἐλ τῦθ 2Ti_2:10, 2Ti_2:1 P 1:l. The phrase springs from the O.T., being based on the choice of Israel as a nation, charged with a message for the whole world; cf. ο ἐλκο μυ Psa_88:3, and especially its use with regard to Israel as the Servant of the Lord, Isa_43:20, Isa_45:4, Isa_65:9 etc. Hence it here may include the thought of the Jewish nation in the past, and lays stress on the sense of God’s choice of the Church and of its duty to carry His Truth to the world.
ἐίμσνἀη.] cf. 1Ti_2:4, 2Ti_2:25, 2Ti_3:7, Heb_10:26. Not faith alone, but knowledge also is necessary for an apostle: cf. Rom_10:2 of the Jews, ζλνθο ἔοσν ἀλ ο κτ῾ἐίνσν Joh_6:69 ππσεκμνκὶἐνκμν
τςκτ εσβ. cf. 1Ti_6:3, contrast 2Ti_3:5.
2. ἐʼἐπδ ζ.] cf. 1Ti_4:9, 1Ti_4:10.
ἐηγίαο] from Gen_3:15 onwards, cf. Rom_1:2, Luk_1:70.
ὁἀεδςθ] here only in N.T.; perhaps with contrast to the ψῦτιat Crete12; but cf. 2Ti_2:13, 2Co_1:19, 2Co_1:20, Martyr. Polyc. 14, ὁἀεδςκὶἀηιὸ θό, in Polycarp’s last prayer. The God whose promise of life will not fail in face of death.
πὸχ. αωίν] “ante tempora sæ” Vulg., long ages past, age-long periods ago, not referring to God’s purpose before time began, as in 2Ti_1:9, Eph_1:4, but to definite promises (cf. Rom_9:4 α ἐαγλα) made in time.
3. ἐαέωεδ] The relative sentence is broken off and a direct sentence substituted; cf. 1Ti_6:12 and Blass, G. G., §79:11. Possibly the relative sentence is continued down to ἰίι, “which he promised and declared at the right moment,” τνλγνbeing in loose apposition to the whole sentence; cf. τ μρύιν 1Ti_2:6.
τνλγνατῦ] cf. 3:8 note.
κιοςἰίι] The thought of the Incarnation taking place at the right moment in the world’s history is a favourite one with St. Paul (Gal_4:4, Rom_5:6 κτ κιό, Eph_1:10, Act_17:26), springing from apocalyptic expectations, summed up by the Lord (Mar_1:15 ππήωα ὁκιό), and expanded by himself in his philosophy of history, Ro 1-3; perhaps consciously meeting the objection τ ννκὶο πόεο; cf. Ep. Diogn. c. I, τ δπτ κιὸ τῦογνς. . . εσλε εςτνβο ννκὶο πόεο. The nearest analogy to the phrase is also Pauline, κιῷἰί, Gal_6:9; the exact phrase is peculiar in N.T. to P.E. (1Ti_2:6, 1Ti_6:15 only); both words are ambiguous: (1) is ἰίι = “at its right moment”; cf. Tob 14:4 (א πνασμήεα τῖ κιοςατν Lev_23:4, Lev_26:4, Psa_1:3, Gal_6:9; Justin M. c. Tryph. c. 131, πναποαβννο τὸτνἰίνκιῶ τῦθο: or “at His own time,” ὄεἐοίαε Thdt.; so Psa_74:3 ὄα λβ κιό, Act_1:7 κιοςοςὁπτρἔεοἐ τ ἰί ἐοσᾳ The context, with its stress on God’s action, makes the latter probable here and in 1Ti_6:15, the former in 1Ti_2:6; but the two thoughts lie close together, and were perhaps not kept distinct. (2) Is the plural only an idiomatic usage, practically equivalent to the singular? cf. Jer_50:26 (=27:26 LXX) ο κιο ατς= ὁκιὸ ἐδκσω, ibid. 31; so χόο, Luk_20:9, Luk_20:23:8; γμι Luk_12:36; or is the plural to be pressed? In the former case the reference would be to the whole life of the Lord (cf. Heb_1:1); in the latter, to the various points in the life, the birth (Gal_4:4), the death (Rom_5:6), and to the subsequent apostolic preaching (1Ti_2:6, 1Ti_3:16). The contrast with χόο αωίιand the analogy of Rom_16:26 favours the latter view.
For the preparation for Christ in History, cf. Lux Mundi, c. 4, and Clem. Alex. Strom. vi. 44, εςκτ κιὸ ἥε τ κργανν οτςκτ κιὸ ἐόηνμςμνκὶποῆα βράος φλσφαδ Ἕλσ.
κτ ἐιαή] connected primarily with ἐιτυη (cf. 1Ti_1:l note), but Rom_16:26 suggests a further connection with ἐαέωε The command to St. Paul to preach the gospel is part of the command of the eternal God to manifest the Christ; cf. 1Ti_2:7.
τῦστρςἡῶ] of all of us Christians, but with the specializing thought “of you and me”; cf. κτ κιὴ πσι.
4. Ττ] Personal references to the life or character of Titus are very slight in the Epistle; such as occur are quite consistent with the little that is known of him elsewhere. He is never mentioned in the Acts. A Gentile by birth, he was perhaps converted by St. Paul on his First Missionary Journey at Iconium (Acta Pauli et Theclœ, c. 2). He is first mentioned in the Epistles as accompanying St. Paul on the visit from Antioch to Jerusalem, mentioned in Gal_2. There his case was apparently taken as a test case of the need of circumcising Gentile converts, and (although the reading and meaning of Gal_2:3-5 are not quite certain) the demand was almost certainly successfully resisted. Later he becomes St. Paul’s delegate to Corinth: he begins there to organize the Collection for the Saints (2Co_8:6-10); he goes later, perhaps taking the severe letter of 2Co_2 and 7, to deal with the refusal of that Church to obey the Apostle: he deals successfully with the difficulty and returns to gladden the Apostle’s heart in Macedonia; he then gladly returns to complete the Collection (2Co_8:16). On another occasion he is sent on a mission to Dalmatia (2Ti_4:10). He is a trustworthy, confidential delegate, walking in the Apostle’s steps, walking in the same spirit (2Co_12:18), his “brother” (2Co_2:13), his fellow-worker and sharer of his toils (8:23). So here he is a “genuine son, sharing the same faith (1:4); his life is to be a pattern to younger men (2:7); but there is less of personal guidance and exhortation than there was to the younger and more timid Timothy. His name does not occur in the Acts, but two interesting suggestions have been made: (1) that he was a relative (Ramsay, St. Paul the Traveller and Roman Citizen, pp. 284-86, 390), or even the brother (Souter, Expository Times, March 1907, cf. 2Co_8:17, 2Co_8:18, 2Co_8:12:18) of St. Luke; (2) that he was the author of the “we” sections in the Acts. Either would account for the absence of any mention of him in Acts; but both are precarious. Later ecclesiastical tradition spoke of him as Bishop of Crete (Euseb. H.E. iii. 4), and as living to a very old age; and there was an Acts of Titus, which is no longer extant (cf. Lipsius, Die Apokr. Apostelgeschichte, 3. pp. 401-06), and a panegyric on him is found in the works of Andrew of Crete (Migne, Patrol. Gr., vol. 97). He is commemorated on Jan. 4 in the Latin Church, on Aug. 25 in the Greek, Syriac, and Maronite Churches (Acta Sanctorum, 1. pp. 163, 164; Nilles, Kalendarium Manuale).
γηί] cf. 1Ti_1:2. κτ κιὴ πσι: “in virtue of a faith which is common to you, to me”—to you a Gentile as much as to me a Jew—but also with the wider suggestion, “a faith common to all Christians”: cf. Jud_1:3; but not so definite as “secundam fidem catholicam” (Holtzmann). Cf. Acta Carpi et Papyli, §30, ὁἀθπτςεπν Τκαἔες Ππλςεπν κὶπλὰδὰτνΘό. εςτςἐ τῦδμυἐόσνλγν κτ τνπσι τνΧιταῶ λγιτκαἔεν Ππλςεπν. . . ἐ πσ ἐαχᾳκὶπλιεσ μιτκακτ Θό.
Θο πτό] ἡῶ is perhaps to be supplied from τῦστρςἡῶ: if not, πτό is used in its widest sense (cf. 1Th_1:1, 1Ti_1:2, 2Ti_1:2 only), Father of all, ἐ ο πσ πτι . . . ὀοάεα, Eph_3:15, perhaps (so Chrys.) recalling γηί τκῳ God the source of all fatherhood, and of my relation to you my son.
τῦστρςἡῶ] Christ is placed on the same level as God 3; the phrase anticipates the stress on salvation from sin in 2:11-14, 3:4-7.
5-9. Paraphrase. Be sure to carry out the purpose for which I left you behind in Crete: there was much left by me incomplete; you were to complete it by appointing a body of elders in each city. I gave you general instructions, but the important point in the choice of them is the character they bear in their own homes. One whom you appoint must not be liable to have any charge brought against him, he must be the husband of one wife, his children must be loyal and trustworthy—not liable to be accused of wasteful extravagance or disorderly life. For it will never do for the presiding officer of a church to be liable to have any charge brought against him; for it is God’s own family that he has to control. So he must not be self-willed, not hot-tempered, not violent in speech, nor given to striking others, nor willing to make money in unworthy: ways he must be ready to welcome Christian passers-by, to give a welcome to every one and everything that is good; self-controlled, just to others, holy in character, having himself well in hand, holding firmly a preaching that is loyal to our doctrine: for he has a twofold duty—both to stir up the faithful by the sound teaching that he gives and to answer those who oppose it.
Cf. 1Ti_3:1-7 and the notes there. The main qualifications for the presbyters are the same in both places, but 1 Ti implies a community of longer standing and completer organization—
(a) in insisting more upon good testimony to character from those without,
(b) in excluding recently-converted Christians (μ νόυο),
(c) in laying down rules for deacons and deaconesses as well.
[One cursive, 460, adds here μ χιοοενδγμυ μδ δαόοςατὺ πιῖ μδ γνῖα ἔενἐ δγμα.] The method of ordination is left undefined. A free hand seems to be given to Titus (ἵα. . . κτσήῃ); but this would be consistent with a previous choice by the community (cf. Act_6:5, 1Ti_1:20 note). The duties are also undefined, but there are implied discipline over the members of the community, teaching, perhaps control of the finances (μ ασρκρῆ and the duty of hospitality to strangers. The qualifications insisted upon are moral. they are such as have been tested in the family life of the candidate before his appointment, and therefore show, even in points like “the husband of one wife,” the standard expected in a good layman. For the relation of the ἐίκπςto the πεβτρι cf. Introd., p. xx; and for the whole section, Hort, The Christian Ecclesia, pp. 190-92.
5. τύο χρν] Eph_3:1, Eph_3:14 only in N.T.; cf. ο χρν Luk_7:47 and the adverbial use of χρνis very common, e.g., Gal_3:19, 1Jn_3:12.
ἀέιο, 2Ti_4:20; elsewhere not in St. Paul, who uses κτλίεν(1Th_3:1 only). Both words were in common usage. ἀο. perhaps suggests more than κτλ the thought of intention—I purposely told you off for this work, and left you behind for it.
τ λίοτ] in this neuter sense, 3:13, Luk_18:22 only in N.T., but common both in prose and poetry; cf. ἵʼἐαοθστιτ ἐλίοτ, Plut. X. Or. Vitæ, p. 844 E (Wetstein).
ἐιιρώῃ] complete (ἐί setting thoroughly (δά right; cf. δόθσς Heb_9:10; δοθτς Wisd 7:15; ἐαόθσν 2Ti_3:16. The middle is not quite so personal as the active “see that things are got right under your guidance.”
κτσήῃ] cf. Act_6:3 οςκτσήοε, which shows that it does not exclude a choice by the community, but the change from the middle ἐιιρώῃperhaps points to the separate action of Titus.
πεβτρυ κτ πλν] (Κήηἑαόπλς Il. 2. 649!) a body of “elders” in each city; cf. Act_14:23, Act_20:17, and 1Ti_4:14 τ πεβτρο, which Theophylact substitutes here both in text and commentary.
ὡ ἐώσιδεαάη] perhaps with implied antithesis to some opponents at Crete: “as I, Christ’s Apostle (cf. ὃἐιτύη ἐώ 1:3), laid down to carry out my own ideal (middle; cf. 1Co_7:17 οτςἐ τῖ ἐκ. πσι δαάσμι and impressed upon you my son and my delegate.” The instructions may be limited to the following qualifications for the ministry: but more probably they were wider, and included rules for the method of appointment and the duties of the presbyters.
6. μᾶ γνιὸ ἀή] cf. 1Ti_3:2 note.
πσά] perhaps “believing,” “Christian,” “non ad idolorum culturam proruentes,” Thd.; cf. 1Ti_4:12, 1Ti_5:16, 1Ti_6:2, Concil. Carthag. 3. Canon 18. “ut episcopi et presbyteri et diaconinon ordi nentur priusquam omnes qui sunt in domo eorum Christianos catholicos fecerint.” More Probably, as suiting the following qualifications better, “trustworthy,” “loyal”; cf. 1Co_4:17 τκο ἀαηὸ κὶπσό, and 1Ti_3:5.
ἀωίς] “luxuriæ” Vulg.; “lasciviæ” Thd.-Mops. The conduct of the ἄωο, one who cannot save, who wastes his money, often with the implication of wasting it on his Pleasures, and so ruining himself, cf. Luk_15:13 ζνἀώω, Eph_5:18 ον ἐ ᾧἐτνἀωί, 1 P 4:4, 2 Mac 6:4 ἀωίςκίκμν“extravagance,” “Prodigality,” almost “profligacy.” Aristotle (Nic. Eth. iv. 1) defines it as ὑεβλ πρ χήαα ἐεθρόη being the true mean, ἀεεθραthe failure to use money rightly. The characteristic of the ἄωο is τ φερι τνοσα: so he comes to ruin himself ὁδʼατνἀολμνς δκῖδ ἀώεάτςατῦενικὶἡτςοσα φοά Pro_28:6 Provides an apposite comment on this verse, φλσε νμνυὸ σντς ὃ δ πιανιἀωίνἀιάε πτρ: cf. Trench, Syn. N.T. s.v.
ἀυόατ] primarily—to himself, 1Ti_3:4 τκαἔοτ ἐ ὑοαῇ but including disorder out of doors, insubordinate to the officers of the city; cf. κτγραand inf. 3:1.
7. The qualifications are partly negative, partly positive. (1) Negative: qualities which would Prevent his successful government of the community or discredit it.
αθδ] self-willed, obstinate in his own opinion, arrogant, refusing to listen to others, “superbum,” Vulg.; “audacem,” Thd.; “stubborn,” Tynd.; “frowarde,” Geneva. In Aristotle (Eth. Magn. i. 29, Rhet. i. 9, 29), αθδι is the antithesis to ἀέκι, σμόη being the right mean between them. It is fatal to the ruler of free men: cf. Theophylact, ἐίκπςδ ἐότνἄχνοκὀελιαθδςενι ὥτ ατγώω κὶατβύω κὶἄε γώη τνἀχμννπάτι·τρνιὸ γρτῦο and Plato, Eph_4Eph_4, in advice to Dion, ἡδ αθδι ἐηί ξνιο. For other illustrations, cf. Field, Ot. Norvic. ad loc.; Trench, N. T. Syn., M.M. s.v.
πριο] perhaps quite literally—“not given to much wine”; cf. 2:3, 1Ti_3:8; “vinolentum,” Vulg.; but this is not necessarily implied: perhaps only “blustering,” “abusive,” like a man who has been drinking; cf. Joseph. Ant. iv. 6, 10 (Holtzmann), where πριενis used of the Israelite who married a Midianitish woman, as the antithesis to σφοεν = “to act outrageously”; Aristides, Apology, c. 14, ἐπριήατςεςατν of the conduct of the Jews to Christ: so Chrys. de Sacerd. iv. 1 applies πριί to the conduct of the sons of Eli.
πήτν] quite literally, not hasty to strike an opponent; cf. 2Co_11:20 ε τςεςπόωο ὑᾶ δρι Apost. Canon 28, Ἐίκπν. . . τποτ πσοςἁατννα . . . κθιεσα ποττοε: Pelagius, “non debet discipulus Christi percutere, qui percussus est et non repercussit.” But the Greek commentators extend the reference, μτ δὰχιῶ μτ δὰπκῶ λγν(Theophyl.), πήτνατνσνίηι τνἀεφν(Oecumenius), “cito increpantem”(Theod.), “brow-beating.”
ασρκρῆ] “turpis lucri cupidum,” Vulg., making money discreditably: adapting his teaching to his hearers in the hope of money from them (cf. 11, 1Ti_6:5, 1Ti_6:1 P 5:2); or appropriating to his own use the gifts of the faithful (cf. 2Co_12:16-18, Joh_12:6); or perhaps engaging in discreditable trades (cf. 3:8 note). Contrast St. Paul’s example, Act_20:33, Act_20:34. For the Cretan love of money, cf. supra, p. 122.
8. (2) Positive: mainly the central Christian Virtues, and those which will fit him for ruling and teaching: there is more stress laid here than in 1 Ti on the teaching test.
φλξνν (“herberous,” Tynd.; “harberous,” Genev.), φλγθν: he starts not from self (contrast αθδ), but from love for others, cf. 2Ti_3:2 note; ready to welcome Christian passers-by (cf. 3:13, 1Ti_3:2 note); ready to Welcome all good men, or probably “goodness wherever he sees it,” cf. Wisd 7:22 ἔτνἐ ατ (Wisdom) πεμ . . . φλγθν φλγθνφλῦτ τ ἀαό rather than τὺ ἀαος cf. Rom_12:9 κλώεο τ ἀαῷ For the thought, cf. Php_4:8; “a lover of goodness” (Tynd., Coverdale).
σφοα] his duty to self (contrast ὀγλν πριο, πήτν δκιν to his neighbour; ὅιν to God; cf. 2:12.
ἐκαῆ] the climax, as in the fruit of the Spirit, 5:23, complete self-mastery, Which controls all passionate impulses, and keeps the will loyal to the will of God; cf. Additional Note, p. 148.
9. ἀτχμνν] a strong Word—“amplectentem,” Vulg.; “tenacem sermonis,” Ambrosiaster; “utroque brachio amplexi et mordicus tenentes,” Calvin; “holding firmly to”—both for his own support (cf. Pro_3:18 of Wisdom, ξλνζῆ ἐτ τῖ ἀτχμνι ατς Pap. Tebt. i. 409 ἀτχσα τςσςσέη), and in loyal obedience to it (cf. Isa_56:4, Isa_56:6 τςδαήη μυ Jer_2:8 τῦνμυ Arist. Poet. 9, τνπρδδμννμθνἀτχσα: Pap. Oxyr. ix. 1203, τνὑότνἡενδκίνπνω ἀτχμθ (M.M s.v.).
τῦπσο λγυ] not to the law or the old covenant as a Jewish Rabbi would (cf. last note), much less to commandments of men (14), but to the trustworthy (“unde admonitio et elenchus robur accipit,” Bengel) message (cf. 3), Which corresponds with the true teaching—the teaching of the Apostle himself (cf. Rom_6:17 εςὃ πρδθτ τπνδδχς 16:17 πρ τνδδχνἣ ἐάεε which is ultimately that of the Lord Himself (cf. 1Ti_6:3).1. The phrase suggests a stereotyped outline of doctrine, either oral or written, such as is quoted in 1Co_15:3ff.
ἐ τ δδσαί] cf. 1Ti_1:10 note, almost equivalent to τνδδχνof “the body of doctrine,” but thought of as embodied by the ἐίκπςin his own “teaching.”
ἐέχι] refute with argument: also including the thought of “reprove,” cf. 13, 2:15 and 2Ti_3:16 πὸ δδσαίν πὸ ἐεμν Origen in a very interesting chapter (c. Celsum, iii. 48, cf. vi. 7) quotes this verse in answer to the taunt of Celsus that Christianity only appealed to the uneducated.
10-16. Necessity for such qualifications: the character of the false teachers at Crete and the substance of their teaching.
paraphrase. They will need this qualification for there are many at Crete who are unwilling to submit to any control, teachers of worthless doctrine, clever enough to impose upon the minds of others—this is especially true of those of them who have been Jews—and all these must have their mouths stopped; forasmuch as they upset whole households, teaching things which they know they have no right to teach, merely to make gains of which they ought to be ashamed. It was one of their own islanders, one whom they themselves regard as a prophet, who said:
“Cretans are always liars, very Minotaurs, gluttonous, idlers.”
This testimony is true. Wherefore rebuke them sharply, that they may be sound in their faith, and not devote themselves to Jewish legends and commandments, which are only commandments of men, aye, and of men who are turning their backs upon the truth. It is ture that “ All things are ;pure to the pureminded”;but to those who have been defiled and have no true faith, nothing is pure; nay, for them both mind anhd conscience hage been defiled. And that is the case with them: God, indeed, they acknopwledgte in their creed, but in their lives they belie such knowledge, being abominable, and disobedient, and with a view to every good work, unable to stand the test.
Note. —These teachers are not heathen; they are professing Christians (16), mainly but not wholly Jewish Christians (10), who pander in their teaching to curiosity and dwell upon Jewish legends of the patriarchs, and add to the Christian life a number of external duties which can claim no divine authority, and which deal with the distinction between things clean and unclean (15), and spring out of the Jewish law (3:9). There is no reference to the enforcement of circumcision; so that they do not correspond to the Pharisaic Jewish Christians denounced in Gal., but more to the opponents at Colossæ Jews of the dispersion trying to represent certain sides of the Jewish life as a higher philosophy (cf. Hort, Judaistic Christianity, pp. 116-46). Such Jewish teaching would find natural support in incipient tendencies to Gnosticism, with its belief in the evil of matter, and that may be subordinately alluded to in 15, 16.
The writer deals with this teaching in two ways: (1) it is sharply denounced as profitless for all moral purpose; it does not raise the moral life or fit men for service; (2) appeal is made to great Christian principles. True purity is purity of heart; true faith must issue in good works.
10. γρ] gives primarily the reason for the last qualification (cf. ἐέχι 9, ἔεχ 13), but also for the whole section (5-9).
ἀυόατι] cf. 6 (which was leading up to this) and 3:1 note.
μτιλγι] here only in N.T.; cf. μτιλίν1Ti_1:6. μτιςwas the favourite Jewish term of scorn for heathen idols and worship: this thought may be present here. Their teaching, so far from being on a higher level, is as worthless as that of heathenism; cf. βευτί16.
φεαάα] here only in N.T., but φεααᾶ Gal_6:3, Scarcely (as Lightfoot, ad loc.) = φεὶἀαᾶ, to deceive by fancies, cf. φεοέτν but = φέαἀαᾶ, “mentiumdecep tores” (Jerome); cf. φεοηή, φεοεγς φεολπς
11. ἐιτμζι] (here only in N.T., though in some cursives of 11:53), perhaps anticipating κκ θρα12: either “to bridle,” “to guide aright,” “refrenari” (Jerome), cf. Jam_3:3; or more probably “to muzzle, to silence”: “redargui” (Vulg.), “silentium indici” (Jerome). This is more analogous to its classical usage; cf. illustrations in Wetstein and in M.M s.v.
ὅοςοκυ] Where order and discipline need such careful guidance; cf. 6, 2:1-10.
ἀαρπυι] “upset their faith”; cf. 2Ti_2:18 ἀαρ τντννπσι, “pervert” (Tynd., Coverdale), or “upset their peace and harmony,” “subvert,” A.V.; contrast the teaching of 2:1-10.
ασρῦκρος] cf. 7 note, hoping for greater gifts from their hearers; cf. 1Ti_5:17, 1Ti_5:18, 1Ti_5:6:5, 2Co_12:14-18. For this tendency at Crete, cf. Polybius, vi. 46, 3, ὁπρ τνασρκρεα κὶπενξα τόο οτςἐιωιζιὥτ πρ μνι Κηαεσ τνἁάτνἀθώω μδνασρννμζσα κρο.
12. ἐ ατν] sprung from themselves, so with special knowledge.
ἴιςατνποήη] whom therefore they ought to believe, and whom I may quote without offence: Epimenides, whom they regarded not merely as a poet but as a prophet, a great religious reformer (θοιὴ κὶσφςπρ τ θῖ, Plut. Solon. 12) and predicter, who had predicted the failure of the Persian invasion of Greece ten years before it took place (Plato, Laws, i. 642 D), and whom we may still regard as a prophet, his words in this saying being true still; cf. the treatment of the words of Caiaphas (Joh_11:51), of Balaam’s ass (2 P 2:16). Similarly Irenæ (iv. 33, 3), apparently borrowing the phrase from here: “Accusabit autem eos Homerus proprius ipsorum Propheta” (Wohlenberg).
ψῦτι] cf. 10 and 16. So Hesychius, κηίεν ψύεθικὶἀαᾶ: Ovid, Ars. Am. I. 297:
“Nota cano: non hoc, quæcentum sustinet urbes,
Quamvis sit mendax, Creta negare potest,”
and other interesting illustrations in Wetstein.
κκ θρα] cf. 10 ἀυόατι. . . ἐιτμζι. Is there an allusion to the Minotaur?
γσέε ἀγί] cf. 11 ασρῦκροςχρν 16 πὸ πνἔγνἀαὸ ἀόιο.
Note. —1. The line was attributed to Epimenides (of Crete, 600-500 b.c.) doubtless in pre-Christian times. It is quoted as from him by Clem. Alex. (Strom. I. xiv, 59), by Jerome (here) as from a poem entitled Χημί Oracula, and by Isho’dad, a Syrian commentator (c. a.d.. 850), as from the Minos (cf. Rendel Harris, Expositor, 1906, p. 305; 1907, p. 332; 1912, p. 348). But the attribution is very doubtful, as the dialect is Attic and not Cretan (cf. Moulton, N.T. Gr. i. p. 233 n.). It was probably earlier than Callimachus (a.d.. 300-240), who quotes the first half of it in his hymn to Zeus:
Κῆε ἀὶψῦτι κὶγρτφν ὦἄα σῖ
Κῆε ἐετννο σ δ ο θνς ἐσ γραε.
And it was probably the legend that the tomb of Zeus was to be found in Crete that gave rise to the charge of lying as characteristic of Crete. It is also possible, as Rendel Harris also suggests, that the last half of the verse is abuse of the animal sacrifices and the feeding on them in the worship of the Cretan Zeus. His further suggestion, that the words in Act_17:28, “For in him we live, and move, and have our being,” are a quotation from the same poem of Epimenides, would give an interesting link between our writer and St. Paul, but can scarcely be maintained; they are too mystical for so early a date (cf. J. U. Powell, Classical Review, Aug.-Sept., 1916).
2. For an interesting account of the use of classical literature in the early Church, see Plummer, Expositor’s Bible, c. xx. Clem. Alex., in quoting this passage (l.c.), adds: “you see how Paul assigns even to the prophets of the Greeks an element of the truth, and is not ashamed to use Greek poems for edification and rebuke”: but when heathen critics urged that the quotation virtually implied St. Paul’s belief in the real and immortal existence of Zeus, the Fathers take pains to refute the inference. So Chrys. Theod. Thdt. Jerome, ad loc.
13. ἡμρυί] not in the earlier Epistles, which use μρύιν(four times): perhaps slightly different, “witnessing,” rather than “witness.” For similar severity, cf. Rom_16:18, Php_3:19.
ἔεχ] cf. 9, as an example to the ἐίκπς ἀοόω, 2Co_13:10, only in N.T.
δʼἣ ατα] Luk_8:47, Act_22:24, Heb_2:11, 2Ti_1:6, 2Ti_1:12, only in N.T., not in the earlier Epistles: perhaps a Latinism = quamobrem. So κτ τύη τνατα, δὰτύα τςατα in the papyri, M.M s.v.
ἐ τ πσε] perhaps “in the Creed,” and the context makes this almost certain; but, possibly, “in their faith, their loyalty to Christ”: cf. 2:2.
14-16. Cf. Rom_14:13-23, Col_2:16-23, 1Ti_4:1-5 and notes there, Mar_7:18-23. ποέοτς 1Ti_1:4 note.
Ἰυ. μθι] cf. 3:9, 1Ti_1:6, Introduction, p. xvii. ἐτλῖ ἀθώω (contrast ἐτλνΘο, 1Co_7:19), a reminiscence of Isa_29:13 μτνσβνα μ (cf. μτιλγι10) δδσοτςἐτλααἀθώω κὶδδσαίς quoted by Christ (Mar_7:7) and adopted by St. Paul (Col_2:22). The reference is to the “traditions of the elders,” and will include interpretations of the law of clean and unclean meats and ceremonial washings, Mar_7:2-4. These have no authority, as only the interpretations of men, and of men who are now turning away from (cf. Act_13:46) the truth “as it is in Jesus” (Eph_4:21).
15. πνακθρ] This goes further than the tradition of the elders; it abolishes the Mosaic law, which had served the purpose of separating the Jews from the heathen world.
τῖ κθρῖ] those who are pure—not, as the false teachers would say, by ceremonial washings, but by purity of heart. Cf. Mat_5:8, Joh_15:3, 1Ti_2:8 note. ἀάατςμν ἡἁατα Chrys.
πνακ τῖ κθρῖ] has the ring of a proverb, and was perhaps a saying of the Lord Himself (so von Soden); cf.