Where the world comes to study the Bible

Report Inappropriate Ad

An Introduction To The Pastoral Epistles (1-2 Timothy and Titus)

Related Media


A. External Evidence: Pauline authorship of the Pastoral Epistles1 was virtually undisputed until the modern period2

1. External evidence is as strong as that which is present for most of the other Pauline epistles with the exception of 1 Corinthians and Romans3

a. 1 Timothy:

1) Individual Attestation:

a) Cited by Clement of Rome (c. 95-95)4

b) Cited by Polycarp (c. 110-150)5

c) Cited by Hermas (c. 115-140)6

d) Cited by Didache (c. 120-150)7

e) Cited by Irenaeus (c. 130-202)8

f) Named as authentic by Clement of Alexandria (c. 150-215)

g) Cited by Tertullian (c. 150-220)

h) Cited by Origen (c. 185-284)

i) Named as authentic by Cyril of Jerusalem (c. 315-386)

j) Named as authentic by Eusebius (c. 325-340)

k) Named as authentic by Augustine (c. 400)

2) The Canons (see “d” below)

b. 2 Timothy:

1) Individual Attestation:

a) Cited by Pseudo-Barnabas (c. 70-130)9

b) Cited by Hermas (c. 115-140)10

c) Cited by Irenaeus (c. 130-202)

d) Cited by Tertullian (c. 150-220)

e) Cited by Origen (c. 185-284)

f) Named as authentic by Cyril of Jerusalem (c. 315-386)

g) Named as authentic by Eusebius (c. 325-340)

h) Named as authentic by Augustine (c. 400)

2) The Canons (see “d” below)

c. Titus:

1) Individual Attestation:

a) Cited by Pseudo-Barnabas (c. 70-130)11

b) Cited by Clement of Rome (c. 95-97)12

c) Cited by Irenaeus (c. 130-202)

d) Cited by Diogenetus (c. 150)13

e) Named as authentic by Tertullian (c. 150-220)

f) Cited by Tertullian (c. 150-220)

g) Cited by Origen (c. 185-284)

h) Named as authentic by Cyril of Jerusalem (c. 315-386)

i) Named as authentic by Eusebius (c. 325-340)

j) Named as authentic by Augustine (c. 400)

2) The Canons (see “d” below)

d. The Canons--All of the Pastorals Are Named as Authentic in the Following:14

1) The Muratorian Fragment (c. 170-200)15

2) Barococcio (c. 206)

3) Apostolic (c. 300)

4) Cheltenham (c. 360)

5) Athanasus (c. 367)

B. Internal Evidence: Although there is considerable debate concerning the authenticity of Pauline authorship due to historical, ecclesiastical, instructional, doctrinal and linguistic questions, none of it is sufficient to overturn the external evidence of Pauline authorship:

1. Opening Statements: The opening statements in each letter which ascribe authorship to Paul support authenticity (1 Tim. 1:1; 2 Tim. 1:1; Titus 1:1)16

2. Historical Allusions: The Problem of Historical Allusions in the Pastorals can be explained well outside of the history recorded by Luke in Acts

a. The Problem Stated: The problem is whether the historical allusions of Paul in the Pastoral Epistles17 can be fitted into Paul’s life as recorded in Acts

b. Possible Solutions:

1) The events can be placed into Paul’s life in Acts through the Caesarean, (Ephesian), or Roman imprisonments:

a) The Caesarean Imprisonment is not probable for the following reasons:

(1) Timothy 1:17 clearly argues against a Caesarean imprisonment since Rome is mentioned

(2) Trophimus’ illness at Miletus (2 Tim. 4:20) also argues against a Caesarean imprisonment since he was with Paul in Jerusalem and was an indirect cause of his arrest (Acts 21:29)

(3) Timothy was also not left behind in Ephesus (1 Tim. 1:3) since he accompanied Paul to Jerusalem (Acts 20:4)

b) The Ephesian Hypothesis is not probable for the following reasons:

(1) While an Ephesian imprisonment is possible (Acts 19:23-41), there is no conclusive proof that one actually occurred

(2) Timothy 1:17 clearly argues against an Ephesian imprisonment since Rome is mentioned18

(3) More time would be needed for the ecclesiastical directions affecting Ephesus to be reasonable than immediately following Paul’s own ministry there

(4) Acts does not seem to allow for Paul to have had a ministry to Crete (Titus 1:5; cf. Acts 20:31)

(5) Although Paul’s journey from Ephesus to Macedonia (1 Tim. 1:3) could relate to Acts 20:1, Timothy soon accompanied Paul to Jerusalem to deliver the collection for the poor there (Acts 20:4); therefore, it is difficult to harmonize Paul’s exhortation for Timothy to stay in Ephesus (1 Tim. 1:3).

c) The (first) Roman Imprisonment is not probable because all three letters cannot really belong to this period of confinement

2) The “Fiction” Hypothesis--which affirms that the mentioning of all of the personalities is a fictitious device to provide an appearance of authenticity, but this fails to account for the obvious realism of the personal allusions

3) The “Fragment” Hypothesis--which regards the references to personalities as being separate fragments by Paul which may be fitted into differing situations in the Acts history

4) The “Second Imprisonment” Hypothesis--which assumes that Paul had a period of further activity subsequent to the history recorded in Acts19

3. Ecclesiastical Situation: Although some argue that the ecclesiastical situation reflected in the Pastorals is too developed to belong to the age of Paul, an examination of the data overturns this thesis20

a. Not Manuals: The Pastoral Epistles are not manuals of Church order like those which were later developed for the following reasons:

1) Only about 10% of the letters comprise ecclesiastical teaching21

2) Many subjects of later manuals are almost completely not included in the Pastorals (e.g., administration, civil relationships or conduct of worship)

b. Offices Mentioned: The offices mentioned are those of bishop (ἐπισκοπῆς) and elder (πρεσβύτερος), and deacon (διακόνος)

1) The qualities are wholly comprised of character traits rather than tasks

2) The terms for “elder” and “bishop” seem to be used interchangeably (cf. 1 Tim. 3; Titus 1:5-7) rather than of more developed church structure including a monarchical episcopate

3) Timothy 5:3-16 affirms that widows are to be cared for, but this does not support a distinct order within the church

c. Church Government: Although some claim that the historical Paul had no interest in church government, but there is evidence to the contrary:

1) Paul and Barnabas ordained elders in all of the south Galatian churches on their first missionary (Acts 14:23)

2) Paul acknowledged the established orders within the church when he wrote to the “bishops and deacons in the Philippian church (Philippians 1:1)

3) Paul acknowledged that the Holy Spirit made some of the Ephesians to be elders22 over their flock (Acts 20:28

d. Rule-Elder System: Although some claim that the Pastorals assume a rule-elder system which could not function in the apostolic age until the faith had been “once and for all delivered to the saints”, this may be too rigid of a definition of elders, and the elders did have “tradition” over which to guard even if it was not all of the tradition.

e. Church Organization is Established: Although some claim that there were not enough years for Paul’s command to be viable, namely, that a “bishop not be a new convert” (1 Tim. 3:6), the command does not require that a bishop be “x” amount of years in the faith, but that promotion not be too rapid in a church that has been established for at least three plus years23

f. An Ignatian Type of Bishop: Although it is argued that the functions of Timothy and Titus are akin to those of an Ignatian type of bishop in that they rank over elders, appoint elders, and are responsible for instruction and discipline, they need not be defined in terms of a monarchical episcopate; they may well be apostolic delegates

1) Also the writer would surely have noted in his qualification for bishops that only one man was intended to hold office in each church

2) Also the author would not have used the term for “bishop” interchangeably with “elder”

4. Heresies: Although some argue that the heresies reflected in the Pauline Epistles are more closely related to second century gnosticism rather than those of Paul’s time, the evidence does not demand this conclusion; the most that could be said is that the heresies are close to what might be an incipient gnosticism24

5. Doctrinal: Although some argue that the theological differences between the Pastorals and Paul’s other letters are against Pauline authorship, there is clearly a Pauline basis to the Pastorals’ theology, and the other differences concerning Paul’s conception of God, a believer’s mystical union with Christ, the Holy Spirit, the use of “faith”, et cetera have reasonable responses25

6. Linguistic: Although some argue that the difference in language between the Pauline Epistles and the Pastorals is too great (see below), the linguistic peculiarities of the Pastorals can be explained in view of “dissimilarity of subject matter, variations due to advancing age, enlargement of vocabulary due to changing environment and the difference in the recipients as compared with the earlier letters”;26 also all but a small group of Paul’s words in the Pastorals were known in the Greek literature before AD 5027

a. Unique words to the Pastorals (175 Hapaxes)

b. The large number of words in common with other NT writings but unknown in the other ten Pauline letters

c. Grammatical and stylistic differences which supposedly support a second century composition

C. Various Solutions: Although various solutions to authorship have been advanced, Paul still seems to be the best choice among them:

1. Timothy & Titus: The suggestion is that they edited the Pauline material in their possession and then published it in its present form after Paul’s death, but there seems to be no adequate motive for such a procedure

2. An Editor: This is a modification of the above suggestion with the editor being some other person, but the question of arrangement is not a particular issue in the letters, and if the editor rewrote the material, there would be an insufficient motive for publishing it

3. A Later Paulinist: This theory affirms that a later Paulinist (Pseudo-Paul) desired to represent Paul in his day with some genuine Pauline fragments, but this falls against many obstacles28

4. The Apostle Paul: This view affirms that the Apostle Paul is the author of the Pastorals supported by the salutation in each letter and by the strong external evidence of the church; some consider the possibility that the differences between Paul’s other letters and the Pastorals may be explained by an amanuensis such Luke, due to the similarities with the Pastorals and Luke-Acts, but it is questionable whether Paul would have allowed such freedom

II. DATE: Although it is difficult to be exact, it seems that the Pastoral epistles were written some time between AD 62-68: 1 Timothy AD 62/63; Titus AD 63/66; 2 Timothy AD 67/68

A. Difficult to Be Specific: It difficult to determine the chronology at the end of the life of Paul not to mention a definite date for the Pastoral Epistles:

1. Paul’s Death: Many different dates have been proposed for the time between Paul’s first arrival in Rome and his subsequent execution

2. Paul’s Journeys: Under the second imprisonment theory a longer period is demanded if Paul journeyed both to the East (Macedonia, Asia), and West (Rome)

B. Dates Suggested:

1. Timothy and Titus seem to have been written not long before Paul’s death,29 perhaps during the years between Paul’s first and second Roman imprisonments30

2. Timothy seems to have been written when Paul’s death was imminent

3. In accordance with Hoehner’s chronology31 this would place the Pastorals with the following dates:

a. Timothy in the fall of AD 62 or 6332

b. Titus in the summer of 63/6633

c. Timothy in fall of 6734

III. The Recipients:35

A. Timothy:

1. Timothy was the personification of the mystery to the church in that he was the son of a Gentile father and a Jewish mother (Acts 16:1)

2. Timothy lived in Lystra and no doubt first heard the gospel message during Paul’s first missionary journey there (Acts 14:6; 16:1)

3. Paul took on Timothy as a promising protégé, and became like a spiritual father to him (1 Tim. 1:2; 2 Tim. 1:2; Phil. 2:22)

4. Timothy became one of Paul’s fellow-labors (Rom. 16:21; 1 Cor. 16:10; Phil. 2:19-22; 1 Thess. 3:2) and faithful representative and messenger (Acts 19:22; 1 Cor. 4:17; 2 Cor. 1:19; Phil. 2:19; 1 Thess. 3:2,6)

B. Titus:36

1. Titus was one of Paul’s converts, or at least one of his protégés (Titus 1:4)

2. Nothing is known about his conversion or his family other than that he was a Gentile whom Paul refused to allow to be circumcised by those in Jerusalem as an expression of the freedom of the gospel (Gal. 2:3)

3. Titus represented Paul in Corinth (2 Cor. 2:13; 7:6-7,13-15; 8:6,16-17)

4. Between Paul’s two Roman imprisonments Paul visited Crete with Titus and left Titus behind to continue the work which they had begun (Titus 1:5)

5. Sometime during Paul’s second Roman imprisonment Titus left Crete and traveled to Dalmatia37 for what were probably evangelistic purposes (2 Tim. 4:10)

6. Titus 2:6-7 may imply that Titus was still a comparatively young man when Paul wrote to him

C. The Churches

1. Many recognize that these letters to individuals were also read in public to the churches38

2. Specifically Fee writes, “The purpose of 1 Timothy, then arises out of these complexities. The letter betrays evidences everywhere that it was intended for the church itself, not just Timothy. But because of defections in the leadership, Paul does not, as before, write directly to the church, but to the church through Timothy. The reason for this would have been twofold: to encourage Timothy himself to carry out this most difficult task of stopping the erring elders, who had become thoroughly disputatious, and to authorize Timothy before the church to carry out his task. At the same time, of course, the church would be having the false teachers/teachings exposed before them, plus Paul’s instruction to Timothy about what he was to do. Thus the letter, though addressed to Timothy, turns out to be all business”39

IV. Purposes for the Pastoral Epistles:

A. Overall Purposes:

1. Guthrie strongly contends that the Pastoral Epistles were not designed to be manuals of pastoral theology40

2. To reflect on Paul’s concerns toward the end of his life with respect to ecclesiastical and pastoral subjects

3. To provide for Timothy (in 1 Timothy) and Titus written instructions about methods of procedure in their respective churches for which they are temporarily responsible41

4. To encourage Timothy and Titus to maintain sound doctrine and discipline in the churches

B. 1 Timothy:

1. To warn Timothy against false teachers (1 Tim. 1:3)

2. To inform Timothy that Paul intends to visit him in Ephesus at some time (1 Tim. 4:13)

3. To encourage Timothy to grow in his spiritual life42

4. To exhort Timothy concerning proper church conduct (3:14-15)

5. To provide a proper antidote to the false teachers (1:3ff)43

C. Titus:

1. To encourage Titus to meet Paul at Nicopolis (3:12) and to assist Zenas and Apollos on their journey (3:13)

2. To strengthen the hand of Titus as his personal representative in Crete as he carried out a difficult assignment of organizing the church through the appointment of morally and doctrinally qualified elders in the various churches in view of the false teachers present (1:6-16, 11; 2:15; 3:9=11)44

3. To encourage Titus to insist upon a high level of moral and social conduct by the churches in Crete who are God’s people in the world (2:1-10; 3:1-3)45

D. 2 Timothy:

1. To express Paul’s longing to see his son, Timothy (2 Tim. 1:4)

2. To urge Timothy to come to Paul before winter (2 Tim. 4:9, 11, 21) with the warm coat which he left at Troas, with his books and with his parchments because he wants to study (2 Tim. 4:13).

3. To express once again Paul’s concerns about false teachers as in 1 Timothy, but in a more personal and urgent way (2:14--3:9)

4. To express a “last will and testament”; to almost “pass on the mantle” to Timothy (3:10-11; cf. 1:3-5; 1:6-14; 2:1-13; 3:10--4:5)

5. To exhort Timothy to entrust his ministry to others in the church whom he has found to be faithful (2:2)

6. To exhort Timothy to continue the Gospel and its ministry (1:6-8, 13, 14, 16; 2:3; 3:12; 4:5; 4:2)

7. To express a note of confidence in the face of hardships, opposition and defection (1:5, 8-10, 14; 2:3-7, 9, 11-13 19; 3:14; 4:5, 8)

1 1 and 2 Timothy, and Titus.

2 Guthrie, NTI, p. 584, 588.

3 See Guthrie, NTI, p. 585; Geisler and Nix, A General Introduction to the Bible, pp. 188, 193; Gordon D. Fee, 1 And 2 Timothy, Titus, xxxiv-xxxvii. Homer A. Kent Jr. actually cites the comments by the church Fathers in his commentary The Pastoral Epistles: Studies in I and II Timothy and Titus, pp. 24-38. Also Kent’s defense of Pauline authorship is extensive (Ibid., pp. 11-71).

4 Clement’s Epistle to the Corinthians.

5 Philippians 4.1..

6 The Shepherd, Similitude 8:29, cites 1 Timothy 2:4.

7 Didache, 13:1-2, quotes 1 Timothy 5:17-18.

8 Against Heresies 2.14.7; 3.3.3.

9 5:6 (cf. 2 Timothy 1:10).

10 The Shepherd, Mandate 3:2 (2 Tim. 1:14).

11 Pseudo-Barnabas 1:4-6 and 14:5 cite Titus 1:1-3,7 and 2:14.

12 1 Corinthians.

13 Epistle to Diognetus 9:1-2 (Titus 3:3-5).

14 Marcion’s Canon did not include the Pastoral Epistles. Only ten of Paul’s letters are included. Some have thus argued that Marcion did not know of the Pastorals. However, Marcion was known to reject any book which did not agree with his contentions (e.g., Matthew, Mark, John; cf. Tertullian Adversus Marcionem, 5:21). Also, he mutilated Luke to fit his notions.  Marcion may have rejected them because of statements like, “the Law is good” (1 Tim. 1:8) since he rejected the OT altogether, “oppositions of falsely called science” (1 Tim. 6:20) since he used this very term to describe his own writings (cf. also 1 Tim. 4:1-5). Therefore, the absence of the letters from Marcion’s canon is not conclusive for their non-existence, or their non-acceptance in his time. It does not out weigh the early attestations in their favor (see Guthrie, NTI, p. 586-587).

The Chester Beatty Papyri (P46) which dates from about the year 200 does not include the pastoral epistles. Metzger writes, “The Pastoral Epistles were probably never included in the codex, for there does not appear to be room for them on the leaves missing at the end. (since it is a single-quire codex, the number of leaves lacking at both ends can be computed more or less accurately.)” (The Text of the New Testament: Its Transmission, Corruption, and Restoration, pp. 37-38). But this too may not be determinative for the following reasons: (1) the scribe could have written smaller in the latter part of the codex when he saw that his space was getting limited, (2) the scribe could have added sheets at both the beginning and ending to accommodate the additional epistles, and (3) one cannot conclude that P46 is a true indication of the state of the Canon in Egypt in the third century since other books of the NT would also become suspect in their absence (e.g., portions of Romans and 1 Thessalonians, and 2 Thessalonians in its entirety are lacking, etc.). Also early patristic evidence shows widespread use of the Pastorals earlier than the date of P46 (see above).

15 The Muratorian Canon linked the Pastorals with Philemon as valuable for ecclesiastical use (Guthrie, NTI, p. 632, n. 585). Earle writes, “After mentioning Paul’s letter to seven different churches, it says, ‘But he wrote one letter to Philemon, and one to Titus, and two to Timothy from affection and love’” (“1 Timothy” in The Expositors Bible Commentary, 11:346).

16 Guthrie argues that the slight evidence of pseudonymous Pauline epistles (The Epistle to the Laodiceans, and the third Epistle to the Corinthians) is not enough to support the assertion that the Pastoral epistles were pseudonymous in their greeting (NTI, pp. 584-585).

17 “As I urged you upon my departure for Macedonia, remain on at Ephesus” (1 Timothy 1:3), “For this reason I left you in Crete, that you might set in order what remains” (Titus 1:5), “The Lord grant mercy to the house of Onesiphorus for he often refreshed me and was not ashamed of my chains; but when he was in Rome, he eagerly searched for me, and found me” (2 Timothy 1:16,17); “When you come bring the cloak which at Troas” (2 Timothy 4:13), “Erastus remained at Corinth, but Trophimus I left sick at Miletus” (2 Timothy 4:20). For a discussion of these passages see Guthrie, NTI, pp. 589ff; The Pastoral Epistles, pp. 16-17).

18 There is no textual evidence for Ephesus or any other emendation in this verse.

19 See Guthrie, The Pastoral Epistles, pp. 20-22 for a further discussion of the last two theories. Perhaps Paul was released, abandoned his Spanish mission (Rom. 15:24,28), and then entered into more missionary activity in the east.

20 Guthrie, NTI, pp. 591-593; The Pastoral Letters, pp. 24-32.

21 1 Tim. 3:1-13; 5:3-22; Titus 1:5-9.

22 The actual term is ἐπισκόπους or “bishops”. This again argues against a monarchical bishop.

23 Note that no such command is given to Titus in Crete. Perhaps the Cretan church was so new, compared to Ephesus, that such a prohibition would have been inapplicable.

24 See the discussion by Guthrie, The Pastoral Epistles, pp. 32-38. Paul does clearly have Judaizers in view when he calls the false teachers “teachers of the Law” (1 Tim. 1:7) and describes them as “paying attention to Jewish myths and commandments of men who turn away from the truth” (Titus 1:14). See also Gordon D. Fee, 1 and 2 Timothy, Titus, pp. xx-xxiv.

25 See Guthrie, The Pastoral Epistles, pp. 38-46.

26 Guthrie, The Pastoral Epistles, p. 47.

27 Ibid., pp. 57-58.

28 See Guthrie, The Pastoral Epistles, pp. 49-52.

29 Guthrie, NTI, p. 623.

30 Duane Litfin, “1 Timothy,” in BKC, p. 729.

31 Hoehner, Harold W. “Chronology of the Apostolic Age,” Th.D. dissertation, Dallas Theological Seminary, 1965.

32 At the beginning of Paul’s period of travel to the East wherein he left Timothy in Ephesus.

1 Timothy 1:3 may indicate that Paul wrote 1 Timothy from Macedonia after he left Timothy off in Ephesus.

33 Hoehner places this during his postulation of Paul’s second journey to the East after his release from Rome (AD 66); see also Kent, The Pastoral Epistles, p. 53.

Hiebert argues that since Titus makes not mention of the Neronian persecution which began in October AD 64, that it seems best to date the letter between the time of Paul’s release and the beginning of the persecution--c. AD 63 (“Titus”, The Expositors Bible Commentary, 11:423).

In any case the book was probably written from some place before Paul reached Nicopolis (on the western coast of Achea) since he does not seem to be there yet at the time of his writing (Titus 3:12). Corinth could be a good suggestion.

34 Just before Paul’s death in AD 67 or 68. Earle writes, “The early church unanimously testifies that Paul was put to death by Emperor Nero, who committed suicide in June of A. D. 68. Since Paul asked Timothy to come to him ‘before winter’ (2 Tim 4:21), it is obvious that the second Epistle to Timothy was written not later than A.D. 67” (“1 Timothy” in The Expositors Bible Commentary, pp. 343-344).

2 Timothy seems to have been written from Rome shortly before the apostles death (1:16-17; 2:9). He has already undergone a preliminary trial, and now is awaiting his final trial from which he expects death (4:6-8).

35 For a Reconstruction of Timothy’s and Titus’ lives see Gordon D. Fee, 1 and 2 Timothy, Tutus, A Good New Commentary, edited by Ward Gasque, pp. xv-xvii

36 For a reconstruction of Titus’ life see D. Edmond Hiebert, “Titus” in The Expositors Bible Commentary, ed. by Frank E. Baebelein, v. 11, pp. 421-422.

37 This is the area above Macedonia and across the Mediterranean Sea from Italia which is also known as Illyricum (Aharoni and Avi-Yonah, The Macmillan Bible Atlas, p. 167, # 264).

38 Calvin writes, “This Epistle appears to me to have been written more for the sake of others than for the sake of Timothy, and that opinion will receive the assent of those who shall carefully consider the whole matter” (Commentaries on the Epistles to Timothy, Titus, and Philemon, translated by William Pringle, p. 13); see also Fee, 1 and 2 Timothy, Titus, xxiii; D. Edmond Hiebert, “Titus” in Expositors, 11:423; A. Duane Litfin, “1 Timothy,” BKC, p. 727.

39 Gordon D. Fee, 1 and 2 Timothy, Titus, p. xxiii.

40 Guthrie, NTI, p. 284; The Pastoral Epistles, p. 25.

41 Guthrie, NTI, p. 622.

42 Fee offers a unique perspective on this material in view of his thesis that false teachers are the pervasive issue in 1 Timothy when he writes, “Such an occasion and purpose also helps to explain another phenomenon of the letter, namely, that Paul is forever calling on Timothy to teach “sound” or “healthy” doctrine, but without spelling out the nature or content of such teaching. The reason now becomes obvious. The letter was written to a lifelong companion, who wouldn’t have needed such instruction. But the church needed to hear that the deviations were a disease among them and that what Timothy would have to teach would be the words of health ...” (1 and 2 Timothy, Titus, p. xxiii).

43 Fee understands 1 Timothy to have been written completely around the issue of false teachers (1 Timothy, p. xx-xxiv).

44 Hiebert, “Titus”, p. 423. The letter from Paul would serve as a written authorization to the churches in Crete. Evidently these Pastoral Epistles were read by the churches.

Fee understands Titus’ situation to be different from that of Timothy’s in Ephesus in that Timothy had to deal with reform in an established church, while Titus was being left behind to do what had not yet been accomplished in newly formed churches. Therefore, there is little urgency in Titus (1 and 2 Timothy, Titus, pp. xxiii-xxiv).

45 As Fee writes, “The dominant theme in Titus is good works (1:8, 16; 2:7, 14; 3:1, 8, 14), that is, exemplary Christian behavior, and that for the sake of outsiders (2:5, 7, 8, 10, 11; 3:1, 8). Christ died precisely to create such a people, who would be zealous for good works (2:14; cf. 3:3-7). Even relationships and attitudes among believes (2:1-10) are to be such that outsiders will not only not reject the gospel (2:5), but might even be attracted to it (2:10)” (1 and 2 Timothy, Titus, p. xxiv).

Related Topics: Introductions, Arguments, Outlines

Report Inappropriate Ad