Tired of seeing ads while studying? Now you can enjoy an "Ads Free" version of the site for as little as 10¢ a day and support a great cause!
Click here to learn more!

Bible Commentaries

Coffman Commentaries on the Bible

Titus 3

Verse 1

This concluding chapter contains sundry instructions for Christians with a warning against factious persons (Titus 3:1-11), a few personal remarks, salutations and the benediction (Titus 3:12-15).

Put them in mind to be in subjection to rulers, to authorities, to be obedient, to be ready unto every good work, (Titus 3:1)

Be in subjection to rulers ... For full discussion of the Christian's relationship to the state, see my Commentary on Romans, pp. 446-451. The authority of human government is of God, and the Christian is instructed to be obedient because such is God's will. Paul's words here are a brief summary of the teaching in Romans 13:1ff and in 1 Peter 2:13ff. Such orders as these are always appropriate, but perhaps they were especially so in Crete. "The Cretans were very dissatisfied with Roman rule, and showed signs of revolt, according to Polybius and Plutarch."[1] The large Jewish population would also gladly have taken part in such a movement. However, the most remarkable thing about Paul's orders here is the consideration that must be given to the way the apostle felt personally toward the Roman state. There is no outcropping of any resentment in any of his letters, but it must surely have been present. Roman governors, through avarice and through incompetence, had kept him in prison for years; Roman authorities had illegally bound him, beaten him with rods, delayed hearing charges against him, and when the charges were not presented, still left him bound for years longer. Beyond that, the glaring immorality and wickedness of Nero were beginning to be known throughout the world, and the eventual consequence of the enthronement of evil would certainly have aroused apprehension in a man like Paul. Yet, in view of all that, he wrote, "Be in subjection to rulers."

To authorities... Rulers are not mere exercisers of earthly power, they are also authorities, possessed of a right that reaches as far as God himself; and such authority must not be disobeyed by Christians, except in those instances where obedience would be disobeying God (Acts 5:29). In instances where it is necessary to disobey the state, due to God's commandments, the child of God is required to submit meekly to the penalties incurred, and without speaking evil of any man.

To be obedient ... This quality of Christian character tends to become rare in a society where violence, extremism and every form of private and public disobedience of the laws of God and man are practiced with impunity, and even glamorized by a secular, rebellious society. Nevertheless, it is the cornerstone of all law and order, and even of civilization itself. The opposite of it is lawlessness, a spirit working even in the culture of Paul's day (2 Thessalonians 2:7), but now even more, and threatening ultimately to usher in the final terror.

To be ready unto every good work ... The church is restricted in its worship and doctrine by the teaching of Christ and the apostles, but here is ample encouragement for Christians to engage in every good work. Here is their authority for taking part in any worthy work. May a Christian run for public office, take part in political campaigns, or serve in positions of community trust? The answer must be affirmative.

Verse 2

to speak evil of no man, not to be contentious, to be gentle, showing all meekness toward all men.

In this verse and in Titus 3:1, there are listed seven basic requirements of Christian character; and, on first thought, some might classify all of them as "old-fashioned." On the contrary, none of these virtues had ever been heard of, either in Crete or in the whole pagan world. "These things here charged by Paul were new virtues to men. They were held up to admiration by no heathen moralist."[2] Moreover, such virtues were even scorned and made light of by many pagan writers. In a sense, they are still new, because the newest, freshest, cleanest thing on earth is a Christian soul which truly exhibits them; and when such an exhibition appears, no desert flower after a shower ever bloomed with sweeter charm and fragrance than that of such a Christian personality.

Speak evil of no man... We believe Lipscomb was correct in his interpretation that this means, "Do not speak evil or contemptuously of rulers."[3] This surely seems to be the very thing Paul especially meant, but the injunction goes far beyond that. It is wrong to read this as if it said, "Speak evil of no good man." Speaking evil of any man, especially public, prominent or powerful men, invested with honor or office, is not to be indulged by Christians. Why? For us it is enough to know that it is the Lord's will, and yet many reasons are visible. To speak evil in those cases where, in a sense, it would be deserved is merely to multiply the influence of a bad example. Furthermore, dwelling in one's thoughts upon the evil of others intensifies the temptation for the Christian himself to do wrong, thus hindering the positive thrust of his life (see Philippians 4:8).

Not to be contentious, to be gentle... Both of these virtues are listed among the qualifications of elders (1 Timothy 3:3). A neighbor lacking such virtues is a thorn in the flesh, and Christians should not be thorns.

Meekness... "This is the temper which does not make us assert ourselves; it is an unassuming, passive spirit, the opposite of harshness and haughtiness."[4] Meekness must never be thought of as mere weakness, for it is the most awesome strength. Charles Rann Kennedy caught a glimpse of this in the lines, "The meek, the terrible meek, the fierce agonizing meek, are about to enter into their inheritance."[5] Moses was meek, but no more powerful figure ever appeared in history than the Jewish lawgiver.

[2] H. D. M. Spence, Ellicott's Commentary on the Holy Bible, Vol. VIII (Grand Rapids, Michigan: Zondervan Publishing House, 1970), p. 260.

[3] David Lipscomb, New Testament Commentaries, Titus (Nashville: The Gospel Advocate Company, 1976), p. 281.

[4] R. C. H. Lenski, Interpretation of St. Paul's Epistles ... Titus (Minneapolis: Augsburg Press, 1964), p. 928.

[5] Charles Rann Kennedy, The Terrible Meek, quoted in John Bartlett, Familiar Quotations (Boston: Little, Brown, and Company, 1939), p. 817.

Verse 3

For we also once were foolish, disobedient, deceived, serving divers lusts and pleasures, living in malice and envy, hateful, hating one another.

Just as seven Christian virtues are given in Titus 3:1,2, there are seven negative qualities listed here, being in the principal part, merely the negative of the aforementioned virtues. Paul's reason for bringing in this description of unregenerated men is apparent in the first three words, "for we also."

This is an accurate picture of themselves before they became Christians. As White said:

The connection is: you need not suppose that it is hopeless to imagine that these wild Cretan folk can be reclaimed. We ourselves are a living proof of God's grace. Ephesians 2:3ff is an exact parallel. See also 1 Corinthians 6:11; Ephesians 5:8; Col. 3:7,1 Peter 4:3.[6]

Foolish... All sin against God is foolish. The unprepared virgins, the rich man who planned to build bigger barns, the man who built upon the sand, and the disciples who did not "believe all" that the prophets had spoken were all given a single designation by the Son of God, "foolish, fool, foolish... fools!"

Disobedient... This means disobedient to divine law, the commandments of God, as in Luke 1:17; Titus 1:16, etc.

Deceived... That is, deceived, either by false systems of religion, our own lusts and appetites, or by the foolish arrogance of our own conceit.

Serving divers lusts and pleasures... Although they had become "slaves of God," Paul reminded them that once they were "slaves" to all kinds of lusts and pleasures. "Pleasures," as generally used in the New Testament, is in the sense of evil pleasures (Luke 8:14; 1 Timothy 5:6).

Living in malice and envy... Malice is a general term for wickedness, but "here it has the special connotation of and malignity."[7] Such malice is desire to do harm to others as in Ephesians 4:31.

Hateful, and hating one another... What a sad picture of the sinful life is this. The sinner himself becomes hateful, despising himself, and even being hated by other sinners. As White put it:

This marks the stage of degradation before it becomes hopeless: when vice becomes odious to the vicious, and stands a self-confessed failure to produce happiness.[8]

[6] Newport J. D. White, Expositor's Greek New Testament, Vol. IV (Grand Rapids, Michigan: Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Company, 1967), p. 197.

[7] Carl Spain, Commentary on 1,2Timothy and Titus (Austin, Texas: The R. B. Sweet Company, 1970), p. 186.

[8] Newport J. D. White, op. cit., p. 198.

Verse 4

But when the kindness of God our Saviour, and his love toward man, appeared,

The wretched night of human sin, suffering and shame was pitied by the Father himself; and Paul here related that pitying and loving kindness of God to the rescue of the Christians from the intolerable lives of sin which they formerly lived. John 3:16 is an excellent comment on this verse, for Paul was thinking of how God's kindness and love toward men had "appeared" upon earth in the epic events of the Incarnation and the preaching of the gospel of Christ which followed as a consequence of it. That it was the gospel message that Paul particularly had in mind is proved by the next verse.

Verse 5

not by works done in righteousness, which we did ourselves, but according to his mercy he saved us, through the washing of regeneration and renewing of the Holy Spirit,

Before taking up a line-by-line analysis of this, it is profitable to glance at other Scriptures which are admitted by scholars to be parallel to the teaching here. Scripture is always the best comment on Scripture.

As many of you as were baptized into Christ have put on Christ (Galatians 3:27).

Of this verse, Spence said, "The apostle has grandly paraphrased his words here in Titus 3:5."[9]

And such were some of you: but ye were washed, but ye were sanctified, but ye were justified in the name of the Lord Jesus Christ, and in the Spirit of our God (1 Corinthians 6:11).

Of this verse, Beasley-Murray said, "The relation of baptism to justification in 1 Corinthians 6:11 and in Titus 3:5 is fundamentally the same: the grace that baptizes is the grace that justifies, inseparably one, and experienced as one."[10]

Christ loved the church and gave himself up for it; that he might sanctify it, having cleansed it by the washing of the water with the word (Ephesians 5:25,26).

Of this passage, Lenski said:

Paul's other great passage regarding baptism is Ephesians 5:26, where we discuss at length "the bath of the water in connection with the spoken word," and reject the English Revised Version (1885) marginal translation "laver."[11]

There are a number of other very important passages bearing upon the subject Paul introduced here, namely, John 3:5, Acts 2:38,1 Peter 3:12; Matthew 3:16; Romans 6:3-5, etc. With the background of the passages cited here, it is impossible to miss Paul's meaning in this verse.

Not by works done in righteousness, which we did ourselves... God's unmerited grace is the source of all salvation, and all the good works of a hundred lifetimes could never earn or merit the saving grace of God. These words have been made the excuse for denying that such ordinances as baptism and the Lord's supper are in any wise essential to salvation; but that class of deeds commanded by Christ as prerequisite to redemption simply do not lie within the periphery of this statement here. What Paul spoke of here was "the righteousness of men," the works "which we did ourselves." It is imperative to notice that "the washing of regeneration" mentioned at once is by that very citation excluded from the "works done in righteousness" which are contrasted with it.

But according to his mercy he saved us... It is customary for commentators at this point in their exposition to take five pages explaining how this means that God's mercy saves us without our being baptized, despite the fact that the very next line says that "God's mercy saved us through baptism!"

Saved us through the washing of regeneration...

The ASV margin gives "laver" in this clause instead of "washing"; but as Spence said, "Laver here can only signify the baptismal font."[12] The allusion, of course, is to the great bronze laver that stood at the entrance to the Jewish temple, in which priests washed themselves before engaging in their duties within the sanctuary. The analogy in the Christian religion is the baptistery, the same being the only laver connected with the holy faith, and being the place where sinners are cleansed and justified prior to their entry into the true sanctuary, which is the Lord's church. The use of the term laver is very fortunate, because the primary meaning of it, in context, is the baptistery, standing in a figure (metonymy) for baptism, for which alone a baptistery is used, and adequately translated as "washing." But please note the significance of this. It is a thundering, emphatic denial of the nonsense that "The washing referred to is wholly spiritual."[13] Is a baptistery needed for that?

The Expositor's Greek New Testament sums up the meaning here thus:

God saved us by baptism, which involves two complementary processes, (a) the ceremony itself which marks the actual moment in time of the new birth, and (b) the daily, hourly, momently renewing of the Holy Spirit.[14]

It is inexcusable to say that baptism "is only setting the seal on the essential act of faith"... or that baptism is little more than a purifying act; as Beasley-Murray stated it, "Neither of these contentions is worthy of discussion."[15] In the verse we are considering, as the same writer added, "Baptism is efficacious by itself."

But isn't baptism only a symbol? This has been shouted so loudly and so frequently and for so long that many believe it; but it is untrue. Lenski sets the matter straight. Commenting on the affirmation that "Man submits to baptism after the new birth to picture it forth to men," he has this:

Paul excludes this idea in a double way. "God saves us by means of the bath, etc. - this is the bath of regeneration. How can anyone think Paul would say, "God saved us by means of a picture of regeneration? Compare Jesus' own words in John 3:5.[16]

And renewing of the Holy Spirit. . ." The twin elements of the new birth, as set forth in John 3:3-5, are present here. One birth with two elements in it, the bath in water (baptism) and the Holy Spirit of promise - this is the teaching of the New Testament. The same twin elements in the new birth are evident in Peter's Pentecostal command to "Repent and be baptized... receive the Holy Spirit" (Acts 2:38,39). It is appropriate that Paul should have mentioned this other element (the renewal of the Spirit) in connection with baptism; because, as Beasley-Murray said, "Baptism is the occasion when the Spirit works creatively in the believer."[17] It should not be thought strange that Paul thus emphasized the place of baptism as a means used in our salvation by the mercy of God. Jesus himself said, "He that believeth and is baptized shall be saved" (Mark 16:15,16). Note too that baptism is God's means, not man's. Baptism is not a work of men; no man ever baptized himself; only God can do that, and even then, only for those who will believe and repent; and every true baptism in all history was a work of Almighty God himself; to this solemn ordinance alone is conjoined the sacred triple name of Father, Son and Holy Spirit. All who despise it or downgrade it do so at their eternal peril.

[9] H. D. M. Spence, op. cit., p. 261.

[10] G. R. Beasley-Murray, Baptism in the New Testament (Grand Rapids, Michigan: Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Company, 1962), p. 216.

[11] R. C. H. Lenski, op. cit., p. 933.

[12] H. D. M. Spence, op. cit., p. 261.

[13] William Hendriksen, New Testament Commentary ... Titus (Grand Rapids, Michigan: Baker Book House, 1957), p. 391.

[14] Newport J. D. White, op. cit., p. 198.

[15] G. R. Beasley-Murray, op. cit., p. 213.

[16] R. C. H. Lenski, op. cit., p. 934.

[17] G. R. Beasley-Murray, op. cit., p. 211.

Verse 6

which he poured out upon us richly, through Jesus Christ our Saviour;

As Lenski said, "This is not a reference to Pentecost... but to baptism and the Spirit's outpouring in it."[18] Thus the Pentecostal emphasis of "repent, be baptized... and ye shall receive the Holy Spirit" (Acts 2:38,39) is identical with what is revealed here. The gift in view here is the gift ordinary, the earnest of the Holy Spirit, the Holy Spirit of promise, the indwelling Spirit which is received by every true convert to Christ. See in my Commentary on John, pp. 83-87, for more complete discussion of the twin elements in the new birth. Baptism (the birth of water) is the element for which man is responsible for the doing of it (despite the fact of baptism not being the work of any man); nevertheless God required even of Saul of Tarsus that he "have thyself baptized." [19] This is every man's responsibility. Although baptism is exclusively a work of Almighty God, the Lord will not perform it upon any person who does not seek it through faith and repentance. On the other hand, "the renewal of the Holy Spirit," here and in the preceding verse, is the element of the new birth which is performed by God through Christ, it being appropriate to say that the Spirit is sent both by the Father and by the Son.

[18] R. C. H. Lenski, op. cit., p. 936.

[19] W. E. Vine, An Expository Dictionary of New Testament Words (Old Tappan, New Jersey: Fleming H. Revell Company, 1940), p. 97.

Verse 7

that, being justified by his grace, we might be made heirs according to the hope of eternal life.

Justified... The text is saying that God not only saves us by baptism and the resulting reception of the Holy Spirit, but that "his grace" justifies us by exactly the same means. As Zerr pointed out, "justification has many shades of meaning,"[20] but two of these meanings are predominant, "Justification" in the ultimate sense of being the grounds upon which the Father declares men to be righteous is grounded in the perfect faith and obedience of Jesus Christ our Lord, in whom sinners are justified by being united with, and actually incorporated into Christ's spiritual body, thus being, in fact, "Christ," and justified "as Christ." There is a secondary sense of justification, the one in view here, in which God cleanses from all past sins and receives the sinner into the body of the redeemed. Significantly, baptism here appears as the means used by God's grace in order to achieve man's justification and to make him an heir of eternal life. "Then and there, in and by baptism, and in and by the Spirit bestowed in baptism (we) actually became heirs of eternal life."[21] The bestowal of such high privilege and rich benefit is actual, genuine, real; but it is neither final nor irrevocable. That state will be given to Christians only "on that day." Another word with references to the two uses of "justification" is thus: (1) one is used in the temporary sense, the same being probational, and (2) the other is used in the eternal sense, being final. Of course, it is the first of these which is referred to in this verse.

How nearly incredible is the fact that there are some who do not believe what Paul said here; but this is not due to any inconsistency in what he wrote with reference to his other letters, or to anything else in the New Testament, being entirely due to the Lutheran heresy of salvation by "faith alone" which has blinded many of the modern Protestant scholars and has all but ruined Protestant Christianity. We shall not note all of the objections that have been raised against the interpretation followed here, but we shall make an exception for that voiced by Ward: "Some of the bloodiest dictators and some of the most wicked men have been baptized people."[22] This is no valid objection because it applies equally to those "who believed on" the Lord Jesus Christ, and then went on to crucify him (John 12:42). The answer lies in the probationary nature of the justification that comes as a result of the new birth of "water and of the Spirit." Angels fell, and Judas was, at first, a faithful apostle.

[20] E. M. Zerr, Bible Commentary (Marion, Indiana: Cogdill Foundation, 1954), p. 205.

[21] R. C. H. Lenski, op. cit., p. 937.

[22] Ronald A. Ward, Commentary on 1,2Timothy and Titus (Waco, Texas: Word Books, Publisher, 1974), p. 271.

Verse 8

Faithful is the saying, and concerning these things I desire that thou affirm confidently, to the end that they who have believed God may be careful to maintain good works. These things are good and profitable unto men:

Faithful is the saying... This is not a formula for introducing either a hymn or a proverb, despite the widespread prejudice to that effect. See under 2 Timothy 2:13, above. This is merely Paul's equivalent of the "Amen, Amen" sometimes used by Jesus.

Scholars cannot agree upon whether it should be applied here to what precedes, or what comes after. Many refer it to the epic pronouncement in Titus 3:5-7; but Hervey was sure that:

Here the faithful saying can only be the following maxim: "That they which have believed in God may be careful to maintain good works," the words, "these things I desire that thou affirm confidently" being parenthetically added to give more weight to it.[23]

Scholars who insist upon applying it to the foregoing "affirm that it is ungrammatical to refer it to the following." But as Conybeare said, "This objection is avoided by taking `that' as a part of the quotation,"[24] as Hervey did, above. Perhaps the biggest objection to construing it as a reference to the preceding is that there is no agreement on "what part" of the preceding is meant. The viewpoint of this writer is that it refers generally . to all Paul was writing.

Maintain good works... The allegation that this means "pursue honest occupations," while true enough in principle, is not what Paul said here. White pointed out that throughout the New Testament, the terms used here "mean good works in the religious or moral sense."[25]

[23] A. C. Hervey, Pulpit Commentary, Vol. 21, Titus (Grand Rapids, Michigan: Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Company, 1950), p. 45.

[24] J. W. Conybeare, Life and Epistles of St. Paul (Grand Rapids, Michigan: Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Company, 1966), p. 762.

[25] Newport J. D. White, op. cit., p. 200.

Verse 9

but shun foolish questionings, and genealogies, and strifes, and fightings about the law; for they are unprofitable and vain.

Genealogies... These were the specialty of the Jews, so much so that Christian writers included the genealogy of Jesus in both Matthew and Luke.

The law ... can have reference only to the Mosaic law, thus illuminating Tasker's comment that "The Jewish character of the Cretan heresy is brought out as clearly here as in the earlier reference."[26] Therefore, the period of aggressive Judaism prior to 70 A.D. is indicated as the certain date of this epistle.

Verse 10

A factious man, after a first and second admonition refuse;

By definition, a factious person's sin is of a "public" nature; but even in cases of public sins, the first and second admonitions commanded by the Lord Jesus Christ were not to be omitted or ignored. See dissertation on this in my Commentary on Matthew, pp. 279-281.

Verse 11

knowing that such a one is perverted, and sinneth, being self-condemned.

Self-condemned... does not indicate his acknowledgment of his sin, but that his withdrawal from the spiritual body and separation of himself from it condemned him.

Shun... here means "avoid," and does not seem to carry the implication of what was later called "excommunication." The man had apparently already separated himself from the believers.

Verse 12

When I shall send Artemas unto thee, or Tychicus, give diligence to come unto me to Nicopolis: for there I have determined to winter. Set forward Zenas the lawyer and Apollos on their journey diligently, that nothing be wanting unto them.

Artemas ... Zenas ... Apollos ... It is a remarkable fact that these three names of faithful helpers of the blessed apostle, still with him in the closing period of his life, are names derived from three of the most famous heathen deities. As Spence pointed out, "Artemas is from Artemis the famous tutelar goddess of Ephesus; Apollos is from the well-known sun god; and Zenas is from Zeus."[27]

Nothing is known of Zenas and Artemas except what appears here; but Apollos is mentioned a number of times in the New Testament. He came to Ephesus (Acts 18:24), teaching mightily in the Scriptures, but knowing only the baptism of John. Priscilla and Aquila taught him the way of the Lord more perfectly (Acts 18:26). He powerfully confuted the Jews (Acts 18:28), made many disciples who were required by Paul to be re-baptized in the name of the Lord Jesus (Acts 19:1-7); and in 1 Corinthians 1:12 to 4:6 Paul referred to Apollos again and again, ranking him with himself and the apostle Peter. Due to his great ability as a scholar and his marvelous gift of eloquence, he might have rivaled even the apostle Paul in his influence in Corinth and Ephesus; "But Apollos seems resolutely to have declined any such rivalry, and to have lived ever as the loyal and devoted friend of the great apostle."[28]

Nicopolis... Paul's purpose of spending the winter in this town may or may not have been realized. Some believe that his arrest and final imprisonment came soon after what was written here, although there cannot be much certainty about that. "It is possible that the winter is that mentioned in 2 Timothy 4:21."[29] Paul was not always permitted to foretell future events as regarded his own personal affairs. See comment on Acts 20:25, in my Commentary on Acts. In that circumstance he said, "I know that ye all ... shall see my face no more"; and yet he was permitted to return to Ephesus.


Nine cities of this name are found in the Mediterranean area.[30] However, the one to which Paul here referred "is probably the city of that name situated on the southwest promontory of Epirus."[31] This is only a few miles from the modern city of Prevesa, the city which the Greeks bombarded in 1912. It was founded by Augustus, whose camp happened to be pitched there the night before the famous fight with Anthony (Battle of Actium, 31 B.C.). Considerable ruins of the ancient city still remain, including two theaters, a stadium and an aqueduct. The name "Nicopolis" means "Victory City," so-called from Augustus' victory over Anthony.

That nothing be wanting unto them... This constitutes instructions to Titus to provide whatever material things would be needed by Apollos and Zenas on their journey. From these brief references, it is concluded that "They were with Paul, had received their directions from him, and carried this letter to Titus who was sending them on."[32]

[27] H. D. M. Spence, op. cit., p. 266.

[28] Ibid.

[29] Newport J. D. White, op. cit., p. 201.

[30] R. C. H. Lenski, op. cit., p. 945.

[31] J. E. Harry, International Standard Bible Encyclopaedia (Chicago: The Howard-Severance Company, 1915), p. 2143.

[32] R. C. H. Lenski, op. cit., p. 946.

Verse 14

And let our people also learn to maintain good works for necessary uses, that they be not unfruitful.

The natural inference of this seems to be that Titus had a fund from which to supply such things as Paul requested for Apollos and Zenas; and, if this is correct, the meaning here would appear to be:

Let our Christians learn to do what Jews do, and even heathens too, viz., really provide for the real wants of their own.[33]

The emphasis throughout these letters which Paul placed upon good works was commented upon thus by Lipscomb:

In these "pastorals" we have eight reminders to be earnest and zealous in good works. The passages are: 1Tim.2:10,5:10,6:18; 2 Timothy 2:21; Titus 1:16,2:7,14; 3:14. It is noteworthy that these epistles containing so many exhortations to work for Christ are among his last inspired utterances.[34]

[33] A. C. Hervey, op. cit., p. 47.

[34] David Lipscomb, op. cit., p. 188.

Verse 15

All that are with me salute thee. Salute them that love us in faith. Grace be with you all.

All that are with me... It is impossible to know who any of these might have been.

That love us in faith... Here the preference of the ASV translators for "subjective trust/faith" wherever they could stick it in produced this monstrosity of a rendition, of which Spence said, "That love us in faith has no sense. The faith is right ."[35]

White also commented on this, thus:

This means "the faith," that is, the household of faith... Absence of the article before familiar Christian terms is a characteristic of the pastorals.[36]

One final word concerning this last little paragraph (Titus 3:12-15) is in order. Dummelow noted that:

The mingling of old names with new (Artemas and Zenas being new; Apollos and Tychicus being old) is a strong critical argument for the Pauline authorship. A pupil wishing to imitate Paul would hardly be apt to mention any but well-known names.[37]

Grace be with you all... This final benediction is identical with those of 1,2Timothy. How grateful all men should be to the Lord who preserved and handed down through history this priceless letter so rich and encouraging in its teachings, and so full of the Lord Jesus Christ.

[35] H. D. M. Spence, op. cit., p. 266.

[36] Newport J. D. White, op. cit., pp. 91,202.

[37] J. R. Dummelow, Commentary on the Holy Bible (New York: The Macmillan Company, 1937), p. 1009.

Copyright Statement
Coffman Commentaries reproduced by permission of Abilene Christian University Press, Abilene, Texas, USA. All other rights reserved.
Bibliographical Information
Coffman, James Burton. "Commentary on Titus 3". "Coffman Commentaries on the Bible". Abilene Christian University Press, Abilene, Texas, USA. 1983-1999.