Bible Commentaries
Titus 1

Verses 1-4

TITUS

IX

THE INTRODUCTION, ANALYSIS, AND GREETING OF THE LETTER TO TITUS

Titus 1:1-4

We now take up the letter to Titus and commence with a historical introduction. The first thing we deal with is the island of Crete. Its modern name is Candia. It is about 140 miles long, but very narrow. It closes up what is called the "Grecian Archipelago" (a sea full of islands). The island is lifted up high out of the sea and has some very high mountains on it. The valleys are small, but very rich. It has always been a thickly peopled island as far back as history goes.

Now, the inhabitants of the island: The original inhabitants – that is, if we go no further back than the times of the Greek supremacy – were Greeks, mingled with, perhaps earlier elements, as, Phoenicians, Philistines, Cherethites. There is a passage in Virgil’s Aeneid about the hundred cities of Crete. For an island of that size to have a hundred cities, or even small towns, implies a great population. When I studied Virgil I looked up this island and wondered where they found space for a hundred cities.

There is a passage in Tacitus that makes the Jews descendants of the Cretans. What plausible argument could Tacitus have had for such a notion? The Philistines and Phoenicians, in Palestine, were naval powers and early connected with Crete, and the Cherethites, who were associated with the Philistines. In the history of David we find that one of his body guards was made up of Cherethites, and in the Septuagint, in two Old Testament passages, the Cherethites are called Cretans.

It may have been these facts that suggested to Tacitus that the Jews were derived from the Cretans. Tacitus was a good historian on Roman affairs, but he is wrong here. This much is certain: While the base of the inhabitants was Greeks, Phoeni-cians, and Cherethites, in very early days many Jews settled there. We find an account of them in the apocryphal books, in Maccabees, and extensive reference to them in Josephus, and in Philo the Alexandrian Jew, showing how in the period of the beginning of the Greek Empire the Jews, who were great traders, had established themselves in the Island of Crete.

Now we come to the New Testament bearings upon the subject. We want to ascertain how, possibly, the gospel was planted in this island. In Acts 2 where so many Jews of the dispersion and Jewish proselytes came from all parts of the earth to be in Jerusalem at the great feast, among the number there (Titus 1:11) we find the Cretans especially mentioned. These Jews of the dispersion assembled in the city of Jerusalem, heard Peter preach that day, and it is possible that some of them were converted, and in that way the gospel originally came to Crete.

The next New Testament reference is in Acts 27. Paul is a prisoner on his way to Rome, and he touches on the coast of Asia Minor, is transferred to a new ship bound for Italy, which stops at Fair Havens, a harbor on the southern coast of the Island of Crete. The record implies a somewhat lengthy stay. We do not know whether they were allowed to go ashore or not. Paul warned them to spend the winter there, but they, beguiled by a favorable breeze, left Crete and a typhoon struck them, blowing them out of their course and wrecking them on the Island of Malta. These are two New Testament references which occur before we come to the reference here in Titus.

The next thing is to determine the character of the Greek inhabitants. Paul quotes a poem in which the poet, himself a native of the island, describes them as liars, beasts, and gluttons. At Athens Paul quotes poets, and so in this letter he quotes a poet. He was raised at Tarsus, in Asia Minor, a great university city, probably the greatest in the world. Alexandria was great, but it is held by some that Tarsus was greater. So Paul’s being raised there gave him an acquaintance with the current literature of his time.

Just a few words on the position of Crete in previous mythology. Mythology has a great deal to do with Crete. When I was a schoolboy, about 13 years old, we were reading Ovid. One of the lengthiest and best written pieces in the book of Ovid connects Jupiter and Europa with the Island of Crete. That is a special part of old Grecian Mythology.

It is not proper here to go into the details about the history of Crete before Paul’s time; so will pass over that part. But I will say this: when the Romans came to the island, 67 B.C., Metellus, a Roman general, captured Crete and thence obtained his surname "Creticus," as one Scipio, after his victory over Hannibal in Africa, was surnamed "Africanus," and another one surnamed "Asiaticus." The Romans were accustomed to giving a surname to their generals who accomplished anything great.

In establishing the province (Rome always put what she captured into a province) Crete was united with Cyrenaica, in the northern part of Africa. It is called Cyrene in the New Testament. They were put together and governed by one proconsul.

Just a word about the impress left by Titus on the subsequent history of Crete: Archaeologists tell of a church whose ruins are yet standing, named for Titus. It is certain that in later days the Venetians, who became a great sea power, captured this island. As St. Mark is patron of Venice, Titus is regarded as the patron saint of Crete. They would pray thus: "Oh, St. Mark, do thou help us." "Oh. St. Titus, do thou help us."

We now want to consider Titus himself before we go into the letter. Here are the scriptures that present the earlier statements about Titus in the New Testament:

Titus 1:4 teaches that he was converted by Paul. Just where we do not know, possibly at Antioch. We know that Titus was a Greek on both sides. Timothy’s father was a Greek, but his mother was a Jewess. Somewhere in Paul’s work Titus was led to Christ.

Galatians 2:1-3, construed with Acts 15: In the passage in Galatians Paul is referring to the great council at Jerusalem, and says that he designedly took Titus, an uncircumcised man, with him; that there might be a test case. The Jerusalem Jews demanded that one must be a Jew to be saved. A delegation from Antioch went down, including Paul and Barnabas, the church bearing the expenses of the expedition, and in order to make a test case Paul took Titus along with him. "Here is a Gentile converted to God under my ministry. Dare you say he is not saved?"

Canon Farrar, who is cranky on Old Testament criticism, and sometimes on the New Testament, takes the position that Paul did have Titus circumcised. He stands alone on that, however. But standing alone does not bother him at all because he is so conscious of being infallibly right that he does not mind being by himself. Inasmuch as Timothy had a Jewish mother, was reared in the Jewish faith of the Holy Scriptures from a child, Paul circumcised him, lest his lack of circumcision would discount his influence with the Jews, but he would not do that in Titus’ case.

2 Corinthians 2:13, also 2 Corinthians 7:6-7; 2 Corinthians 7:13-15. From these scriptures we learn that when Paul was at Ephesus the Corinthians were urging him to come over there, but he tarried at Ephesus until Pentecost. On information from the household of Chloe he wrote the first letter to the Corinthians, and sent Titus to carry it and to set these people straight on their immortalities, particularly that man who took his father’s wife, and to work them up on that big collection for the poor saints in Judea. Leaving Ephesus, Paul went to Troas, expecting to meet Titus there bringing the report of the effect of his first letter to the Corinthians. Titus did not meet him, and he was greatly distressed; although he was having a great meeting he quit and went over into Macedonia.

The next scriptures are 2 Corinthians 8:6; 2 Corinthians 8:16; 2 Corinthians 8:23; 2 Corinthians 12:18. These scriptures show that Titus joined him in Macedonia, and brought a report from Corinth, and that Paul sent Titus back to complete the work he had so magnificently begun, sending with him Trophimus and Tychicus (Acts 20:4).

Titus 1:5: On the missionary tour after Paul’s escape from the Roman imprisonment, he came to this Island of Crete, stops a while, and finding great disorder in the churches here, leaves Titus to set things in order.

Titus 3:12: In this passage Paul writes to Titus to join him in Nicopolis, where he expects to winter. He tells him to join him there when a successor comes; that he will send Artemas or Tychicus to take his place.

Titus 3:13: Titus is still in Crete. Paul sends the letter by Zenas and Apollos, and charges Titus to take charge of these two brethren and help them forward on their way.

2 Timothy 4:10: Paul is now a prisoner a second time in Rome, and is writing to Timothy. He says that Titus had gone to Dalmatia, which is not very far from Nicopolis, where he was to winter with Paul.

The last scriptures to consider as bringing out the character of Titus are 2 Corinthians 7:7; 2 Corinthians 7:13; 2 Corinthians 7:15; 2 Corinthians 8:23. Let us picture in our minds the kind of a man Titus was. We know that he succeeded magnificently in his work, but this passage shows the character of the man:

"God comforted us by the coming of Titus; and not by his coming only, but also by the comfort wherewith he was comforted in you, while he told us of your longing, your mourning, your zeal for me, that I rejoice yet more. Therefore, we have been comforted, and in our comfort we joyed the more exceedingly for the joy of Titus, because his spirit hath been refreshed by you all." That indicates his appreciative nature; when he brought them comfort and saw how glad they were, he became glad.

"But this affection is more abundantly toward you while he remembereth the obedience of you all, how with fear and trembling ye received him." That brings out his love for these people among whom he labored.

"Whether any inquire about Titus, he is my partner and my fellow-worker to you-ward." From these scriptures we get an idea of the inside man; the tenderness, sympathy, and love of his nature. Titus is not mentioned in the book of Acts at all.

ANALYSIS
We now come to the outline of the book; I am giving a very critical outline, chapter by chapter: Chapter One:

1. Elaborate greeting (Titus 1:1-4)

2. Occasion of the letter (Titus 1:5)

3. Qualifications of elders to be ordained (Titus 1:6-10)

4. Reasons for such high qualifications (Titus 1:11-16) Chapter Two:

5. Directions concerning practical piety in social life (Titus 2:1-10)

6. High doctrinal reasons therefore in the teaching of grace (Titus 2:11-14)

7. How Titus must carry out the directions (Titus 2:15) Chapter Three:

8. Directions concerning civil life and character (Titus 3:1-2)

9. High doctrinal reasons therefore in the example of the salvation of the saints (Titus 3:3-7)

10. A faithful saying in point, and the value of good works (Titus 3:8; Titus 3:14)

11. What to shun (Titus 3:9)

12. How to treat the factious (Titus 3:10-11)

13. Directions to Titus when a successor arrives (Titus 3:12)

14. Directions to forward with help, Zenas and Apollos (Titus 3:13)

15. Farewell salutation and benediction (Titus 3:15)

That is strictly a critical outline. It leaves out nothing in the letter, is orderly arranged chapter by chapter, and brings out each thought. With that the reader will more understandingly study Titus.

I will consider the first item of the analysis, the elaborate greeting (Titus 1:1-4). In the first place Paul desires to have the men to whom he writes to understand that he is writing with the fulness of authority, representing God, representing Jesus Christ, representing the faith of God’s elect, and that he is writing concerning the true knowledge of the faith, which is according to godliness.

He makes the keynote of the letter, practical religion, or godliness in life: "According to godliness, in hope of eternal life, which God, who cannot lie, promised before time eternal; but in his own seasons manifested his word in the message, wherewith I was intrusted according to the commandment of God our Saviour." Marking himself out as the one who is to speak, in every direction he buttresses his authority to speak, and especially on the topic to be discussed in this letter, practical holiness, practical religion according to the truth, the divine truth.

He will demonstrate in the letter how doctrine is the basis of morality. He will use great doctrines to enforce morality. He inculcates every one of these thoughts as special and precious. When he writes to Titus he makes the following points: "I led you to Christ; you are my true child, but it is in a common faith." Just as Jude says, "a common salvation," or as Luke says, "the things which are commonly believed among us."

Conversion is always according to the common faith. Certain impressions of men may be different, but one was not converted to one kind of faith and another to another kind. From the days of the first converts under the gospel to the present time, every conversion is unto truth which is common. Whether manifested in some cases as in others or not, the normal conversion has these elements in it’. Under the preaching of the gospel a man sees himself to be a sinner in the sight of God. He is sorry for his sins and changes his mind toward God on account of sin. There was a burden resting on him because of sin. He turned by faith to the Saviour for salvation from that sin.

These are the normal elements of conversion. Some people may not experience these things so as to be able to separate them item by item. I once received a letter from a man who heard some great teacher in a Bible rally. He wrote: "Great teachers here are saying that there is no time element between repentance and faith; that they are simultaneous. Is this true?" I wrote back that the two were distinct, repentance one thing and faith another thing; that they have different objects – repentance is toward God, and faith is toward our Lord Jesus Christ; that they are represented always in a certain order: "repentance and faith"; that while in some cases a conversion takes place in so short a time that a man is not able to separate them, the steps were there just the same; that there was a difference in time, even when one could not appreciate it.

In some cases conviction manifests itself a good while before the man reaches repentance, and sometimes a man is penitent a long time before a clear view of the Saviour is presented to him. I know a case where repentance lasted a year before faith came.

QUESTIONS

1. Give an account of the Island of Crete: (1) Where, what the dimensions and what the topography? (2) Early inhabitants. (3) Density of population including citation from Virgil.

2. What the strange statement of Tacitus as to national origin, of Jews and the probable ground of the statement?

3. What the strange account in Maccabees of the common origin of Jews and Spartans?

4. Give account of Jews settling in the Island and the authorities.

5. What the New Testament references prior to this letter to the Island and its Jewish population and how may the gospel have been planted there?

6. What the character of the population according to one of its poets quoted by Paul?

7. What noted myth concerning Crete?

8. Who conquered Crete for the Romans, what surname did he receive and with what other section of country was it constituted a Roman province?

9. Later what Mediterranean Sea power conquered the Island?

10. To what nation does it now belong?

11. What archaeological testimony to Titus?

12. Give connected New Testament history of Titus and the impression of his character and ability conveyed.

13. Give is the analysis of the letter?

14. What is the keynote of the letter?

15. What are the two great doctrinal statements in the letter?

16. What relation does the letter establish between doctrine and morals, or practical religion?

17. What is the office of Titus, and what his special authority?

Verses 5-15

X

EXPOSITION OF THE BOOK OF TITUS

Titus 1:5-3:15

At the close of our discussion on the historical introduction to the letter to Titus, I gave an elaborate outline of the letter, so inclusive that it practically becomes an exegesis of the letter. Moreover, we need now to consider but three points in the letter, because in the first letter to Timothy we have gone over much of the ground relating to preachers, their ordination, and all the parts relating to their social life.

The historical introduction also expounded the elaborate salutation, so that this section really commences at Titus 1:5: "For this cause I left thee in Crete, that thou shouldest set in order the things that are wanting, and appoint elders in every city, as I gave thee charge."

"Elders in every city": there can be no efficient development of church life without pastors. The pastors teach the word and rule according to the word; they oversee the work of the church; they shepherd the flock, feeding, guarding, and healing. Upon the entrance qualification into the office of elder, we need to emphasize one point additional to those considered in the first letter to Timothy. It has been rightly said that the entrance spiritual qualification to church membership should be the simple, trustful acceptance of Christ as Saviour. It is not necessary for one to be a theologian in order to unite with the church. We receive babes in Christ into the church. But it is not true that in ordaining elders we should limit the scope of the examination to entrance qualifications into the church. Let us commence with Titus 1:9. He is here cautioning Titus about whom to ordain, that the candidate to the ministry must “hold to the faithful word, which is according to the teaching, that he may be able both to exhort in the sound doctrine and convict the gainsayers."

Then follow the reasons for such high qualifications on entrance into the ministry. He shows the presence of "unruly men, vain talkers, and deceivers, especially they of the circumcision, whose mouths must be stopped; men who overthrow whole houses, teaching things which they ought not for filthy lucre’s sake." The fact that there are capable opponents to the Christian religion, sometimes exceedingly plausible, who can overturn the faith of whole households, makes it necessary that the man to be ordained to the ministry must understand the teaching, the deposit of faith, as enunciated in the New Testament, and summaries of which are given repeatedly by the apostle Paul. We had this thought in part in the first letter to Timothy, where be says, "Lay hands suddenly on no man; not on a novice."

In order to do the work of a preacher, and especially that of a pastor of a church, one must be able to lead babes in Christ to mature Christian knowledge. That is what he is for, and he must be able to meet the gainsayers, those who stand out against the doctrine. Where the pastor is unable to do either one or the other, his church in all probability will suffer severely, not only in lack of development, but also by in-roads of the opposition. That this point may be clear let the reader study this passage from Ephesians:

"And he gave some to be apostles, and some prophets, and some evangelists, and some pastors and teachers, for the perfecting of the saints unto the work of ministering, unto the building up of the body of Christ: till we all attain unto the unity of the faith, and of the knowledge of the Son of God, unto a full grown man, unto the measure of the stature of the fulness of Christ: that we may be no longer children tossed to and fro and carried about with every wind of doctrine, by the sleight of men, in craftiness, after the wiles of error; but speaking truth in love, may grow up in all things into him, who is the head, even Christ; from whom all the body fitly framed and knit together through that which every joint supplieth according to the working in due measure of each several part, maketh the increase of the body unto the building up of itself in love."

The keynote of the letter to Titus is the practical religion coming from the acceptance of sound doctrine. Paul never conceived of an empty Christian faith. He never dissociated morality from doctrine, but always predicated morality upon doctrine. Doctrine is the fountain and morality is the stream.

While standing as he did with such earnestness for the truth which he had received from Christ, and while exhorting them to keep this truth just as he gave it to them, to preserve it inviolate, to transmit unimpaired, he always insisted that the evidence of one’s acceptance of this truth was a sound religious life. This letter, perhaps more than any other, stresses that point. True, in every letter after he had stated his doctrine, there is an exhortation to practical morality, but in this letter the main thought is in the direction of practical holiness, and the doctrines introduced are for illustration.

With this thought before us, we consider the first great doctrinal statement, which is the second chapter. Throughout that chapter he defines the things becoming sound doctrine: "That the aged be temperate, grave, sober-minded, sound in faith, in love, in patience," how the aged women, young women, and young men should do.

But when he unveils the fountain from which the stream of moral life flows, and which this good life adorns, we find this doctrinal origin: "For the grace of God hath appeared, bringing salvation to all men, instructing us to the intent that, denying ungodliness and worldly lusts, we should live soberly and righteously and godly in this present world." He affirms that this is the teaching of salvation by grace. There is no antinomian fruit in the doctrine of salvation by grace.

From the lips of every expounder of salvation by grace in the New Testament comes the one teaching that sound doctrine concerning the world to come leads us to a sound life in this present world; that here on earth and in time, we should live soberly, righteously, godly, and in denial of worldly lusts. It is a little difficult, in view of the clear statement upon this subject, to understand how antinomianism ever originated. Certainly it is not warranted in the Bible. We may put it down as a fundamental of Christianity, that where there is anything of Christianity in the heart, it will make its subjects better, here and now. It will make a husband a better husband, a wife a better wife, a child a better child, a citizen a better citizen, a slave a better slave. Many times in my life I have felt called upon to preach from this text: What the grace of God which bringeth salvation teaches.

The second thing that it teaches us is to "look for the blessed hope and appearing of the glory of the great God and our Saviour Jesus Christ." Wherever there is a genuine acceptance of Jesus as a present Saviour there is an attitude of expectation toward the second advent. We cannot have sound faith in the historical Christ without having an expectant hope of the coming Christ. Baptist churches need to have that ground into them. Whenever we find that a considerable part of our life is elapsing without thought of the final coming of our Lord, then there is something wrong in us.

As the first coming was the highest mountain peak which loomed up on the Old Testament horizon, so is the second advent the highest mountain peak in our future, and we should never lose sight of it.

Here the question arises: "How do you maintain such an attitude toward the final coming of our Lord, with your postmillenial views?" It is easy to answer that question.

1. Having postmillenial views, I have no trouble with the universality in preaching required in "bringing salvation to all men," since our only hope of saving men is before the final advent, expecting none to be saved after that advent; whereas the premillennial view expects to save only an ever-lessening few before that advent, and looks to postadvent times for saving the bulk of those to be redeemed.

2. To any one individual life it is only a little time until the Lord comes. As soon as we come to death we pass out of time into eternity, where there is no time, no measuring of duration. So the only period in which my looking for the Lord can be beneficial to me is in my lifetime here upon earth. But to the race of man, the succession of individuals, it may be a very long time until the second coming of Christ. All through the New Testament men are addressed not so much with reference to the lapse which must pass in the history of the race before the final advent, as to the individual’s brief stay on earth.

To illustrate: Peter positively knew that Christ would not come before he died, because Christ had told him just how he was to die. He himself makes reference to that. And yet Peter was marvelously stirred in his heart with the thought of the final coming of the Lord. He knew that it would not be in his time, but he knew he was influenced by the thought while he lived. In the great prophecy of our Lord, each steward in his day, whether that day be remote from the second advent, or near to it, is warned not to say in his heart: "My Lord delayeth his coming," that in such a time as he thinks not the Lord will come and he will be cut down and his portion appointed with hypocrites. Very much in point is a passage in John’s Gospel: "I go to prepare a place for you, and if I go I will come again to receive you unto myself." This was meant for the men addressed and men ages remote from the final advent.

It is unquestionable that there is a sense in which the advent of the Lord comes to the individual. He meets every one at the depot of death. It is not at all peculiar to postmillennial people to neglect the thought of the second advent of our Lord. While I believe that it is absolutely impossible for that advent to come in my life time, and base my belief upon the clear teachings of preceding things – things which must come to pass before the final coming – yet the influence of the second advent has been a tremendous power over my life. I have preached from it oftener than from any other one theme in the Bible except the cross of Christ.

To resume our discussion: Paul says that the grace of God which bringeth salvation teaches these things: (1) That in this present world we must live soberly, righteously, and godly; (2) That the heart must be turned toward the final coming of the Lord. These two lessons, and they are both good lessons, are reinforced by the following:

"God gave himself for us that he might redeem us from all iniquity, and purify unto himself a people for his own possession, zealous of good works." So the teaching is buttressed by the purpose which was in the mind of our Lord Jesus Christ. You recall how that point was emphasized when we recently passed over Ephesians, where it said that Christ loved the church and gave himself for it, that he might sanctify it, having cleansed it by the washing of water with the word, that he might present the church to himself a glorious church not having spot or wrinkle, or any such thing, but that it should be holy and without blemish.

It was once common for preachers, resting on the King James Version, to insist that God’s people must be peculiar, i.e., odd. But that is not the meaning of the word. He gave himself for his people, having in view their complete holiness, and that they were to be a people for his own possession, i. e., peculiar to him and zealous of good works. If one finds himself without that zeal for good works, he may question the Lord’s title to him. First make a tree good, then its fruit will be good.

The other doctrinal passage is much more difficult. Indeed to expound it satisfactorily to myself is to dissent from most Christian scholars. I have tried hard to fall in with their views, but cannot do it.

Titus 3:3: "For we also once were foolish, disobedient, deceived, serving divers lusts and pleasures, living in malice and envy, hateful, hating one another, but when the kindness of God, our Saviour, and his love toward man appeared, 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, which he poured out upon us richly, through Jesus Christ our Saviour; that being justified by his grace, we might be made heirs according to the hope of eternal life."

The only difficulty in the passage is that relating to the washing of regeneration. Most commentators find here an allusion to baptism. To my own mind there is no allusion whatever to baptism. To justify my dissent from the majority of commentators, I submit an exegesis of the passage, and then leave the reader to agree with the author or to follow some other exegesis, as he pleases.

The difficult passage is one of a group, all based on Old Testament imagery, and referring exclusively to the divine side of salvation, and not at all to our responses to divine commands. Neither in this, nor any passage of the group) is’ anything that we do referred to or considered; neither contrition, repentance, faith, baptism, nor anything else.

This passage with its true parallels, is sharply contrasted with another group which does set forth what we do in response to divine commands, e.g., Mark 16:16: "He that believeth and is baptized shall be saved." That is something we do. We believe and we are baptized. Acts 2:36: "Repent ye and be baptized every one of you unto the remission of sins." Here again is something we do. We repent and are baptized. Acts 22:16: "Arise and be baptized and wash away thy sins." Here is an injunction to human duty. Paul is commanded to be baptized. 1 Peter 3:21-22: "Eight souls were saved through water; which also after a true likeness doth now save you, even baptism, not the putting away of the filth of the flesh ... " Here again is a passage that tells us what baptism does and what it does not.

All of this group of passages must be construed together, whatever the interpretation. They all set forth something that we do, and all discuss the human responses to divine commands; but this expression, "the washing of regeneration," in the Titus passage is dissociated particularly from anything we do, expressly saying, "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, which he poured out upon us richly through Christ Jesus our Saviour."

Unlike Galatians and Romans, this passage does not even consider salvation in its legal aspects – justification, redemption, adoption – i.e., the salvation done outside of us and for us, but confines itself wholly to the salvation in us, wrought by the Holy Spirit. The "washing" is in us as much as the "renewing," and both by the Holy Spirit.

The divine side of salvation alone is considered and the washing of regeneration and the renewing of the Holy Spirit refer to the Spirit’s work in contradistinction to the Father’s work or to the Son’s work in salvation, and especially to anything we do. That baptism in water is a work of righteousness done by us is evident from the statement from our Lord to John: "Suffer it to be so now, for thus it becometh us to fulfill all righteousness." But this passage says that the salvation here discussed is according to mercy, "not by works done in righteousness, which we did ourselves."

Now the kindred passages with which this passage must be associated in exegesis are to be found in John 3:2-8 and Ephesians 5:25-27. In these two passages, as in Titus, the divine side of salvation is considered. Christ said to Nicodemus, "Except a man be born from above he cannot see the kingdom of God." Again he said, expanding the same statement, "Except a man be born of water and Spirit, he cannot enter the kingdom of heaven."

Note particularly the following: Christ and Nicodemus are discussing two births, one natural, the other spiritual. "That which is born of flesh is flesh, that which is born of the Spirit is spirit." He is not discussing three births – one natural, one figurative, and one spiritual.

Second, his teaching concerning the necessity of this new birth was clearly taught in the Old Testament, for he rebukes Nicodemus, he being a teacher in Israel, for not understanding the new birth. If there had been any reference to baptism in the word ’’water," Nicodemus, as a teacher of the Old Testament, could not have been rebuked, because the Old Testament knew nothing of this New Testament ordinance of baptism. So that whatever "born of water and Spirit" means, it is something unequivocally taught in the Old Testament.

Where, then, in the Old Testament is it so plainly taught? The answer is, first, in Numbers 19. God, through Moses, makes provision for the typical purification of his people; a red heifer was killed and burned outside of the camp, her ashes gathered up and mixed with water and this lye of commingled ashes and water was kept for purification, hence the name "water of cleansing and purification." It was administered by taking a branch of hyssop and sprinkling it upon the one to be cleansed.

In Ezekiel 36 we have a second exceedingly pertinent reference: There the prophet foretells that the dispersed Jews shall one day be gathered together and saved and, as in this Titus passage, he says that it is not on account of anything they have done. Then he describes how they are to be saved: "Then I will sprinkle the water of purification on you and you shall be cleansed from all your filthiness and all your iniquities. I will take away your stony heart and give you a heart of flesh, and put my spirit within you, and then ye shall keep my commandments." Here we have the first element of regeneration typified, in the water of cleansing; its second element in the renewing by the Holy Spirit. Regeneration always consists of two elements: first, cleansing; second, renewing. The cleansing always comes first.

We have another reference to it in Psalm 51 where David says, "Wash me, and I shall be whiter than snow; purify me with hyssop, and I shall be clean. Renew a right spirit within me." Here are precisely the same thoughts presented by the psalmist, and they are the very thoughts presented by the Titus passage, the "washing of regeneration and renewing of the Holy Spirit," and it means exactly what it means in John 3:5, "Born of water and Spirit." What then, does the water of purification, referred to in the Ezekiel and psalmist passages, typify? The answer is to be found in Hebrews 9:13:"For if the ashes of a heifer sanctify unto the cleansing of the flesh, how much more shall the blood of our Lord Jesus Christ purify your conscience to serve the true and living God?"

So that this water cleansing in Numbers and in Ezekiel, and in Psalm 51 and in John 3 refer to the cleansing by the blood of Jesus Christ. When our Lord said to Nicodemus: "Except a man be born of water and Spirit" it was the same as saying "Except a man be cleansed by the Spirit’s application of the blood of Christ, and by the Spirit’s renewal, he cannot see the kingdom of heaven."

The proof positive of the matter is Christ’s answer to Nicodemus’ second pressing question, "How can these things be?" "The wind bloweth where it listeth and we hear the sound thereof, but cannot tell whence it cometh nor whither it goeth." Nicodemus kept insisting, "How can these things be?" And Jesus explained in this fashion: "As Moses lifted up the serpent in the wilderness, even so must the Son of man be lifted up, that whosoever believeth in him shall not perish but have eternal life." That is how these things come about. That is, when Christ is held up before our eyes, in preaching, and we accept him as a Saviour, then the Holy Spirit first applies the blood of Christ to our hearts) purifying them, and then renews us, changing our nature.

The other passage (Ephesians 5:25-27) is perfectly in line. It says, "Christ loved the church and gave himself for it; that having cleansed it by the washing of water through the word, he might sanctify it and present it to himself a glorious church, having neither spot nor wrinkle, nor blemish, nor any such thing." Here again the work done is all on the divine side. It is Christ that loved us. It is Christ that gave himself for us. It is through the application of Christ’s blood that we are cleansed, washed through the word preached and believed. There is nothing in it that we are to do. We may learn our duty from other passages of Scripture, but not from these three.

The cleansing, mark you, is a washing by the word, not a washing by water. That is, the word of God holds up Christ as the object of our faith, we accept him and the Spirit applies the blood for our cleansing. It is said in the first letter to the Corinthians, "Such were some of you, but ye were washed, ye were sanctified." Here we have the washing first again. The washing here referred to is not a bodily washing in baptism, but a spiritual cleansing that comes from the application of Christ’s blood by the Spirit, then follows the sanctifying.

It has been objected that the term loutron in Titus 3 and Ephesians 5, meaning laver or bath, is too expressive and broad a word to correspond to the sprinkling of the ashes of the red heifer. I meet this criticism squarely by citing a pertinent passage from Zechariah 13:1: "In that day there shall be a fountain opened to the house of David and to the inhabitants of Jerusalem for sin and for uncleanness." This fountain evidently refers to the blood of Christ, and is so embodied in Cowper’s hymn which we often sing: There is a fountain filled with blood Drawn from Immanuel’s veins; And sinners plunged beneath that flood, Lose all their guilty stains.

Certainly if the blood of Christ can be referred to as a fountain into which the bathing or cleansing takes place, loutron in Titus 3 and Ephesians 5 is not too broad a word to express the fact.

But to put on the crowning proof: In Revelation 7, referring to the great multitude which no man can number, which God brought out of every nation, of all tribes and places, and tongues, standing before the throne of the Lamb, arrayed in white robes, with palms in their hands, this explanation is given: "These are they that came out of the great tribulation, and they washed their robes and made them white in the blood of the Lamb."

In the last chapter of the book (Revelation 22:14) it is said) "Blessed are they that wash their robes that they may have the right to come to the tree of life, and may enter in by the gates into the city." Here is the washing that corresponds to the passage in 1 Corinthians 6:11, "Ye were washed," and to the passage in Ephesians, "having cleansed them through the washing of water by the word," and to the passage in John, "born of water."

If anything more were needed, the added clause in the Titus passage is, "which he poured out upon us richly through Jesus Christ." That is, the washing of regeneration and the renewing of the Holy Spirit, both come from his out-poured Spirit. Indeed, if it could be maintained that the "washing of regeneration" in Titus, and the "born of water" in John, and the "cleansing by the washing of water through the word," in Ephesians, refer to baptism, two things would follow like a conqueror: First, that baptism is absolutely essential to salvation; second, it must precede in every case the work of the Holy Spirit in renewing our hearts. The grammatical construction demands as much, and no less.

QUESTIONS

1. Why should every church have an elder or elders?

2. What reason here given for extending the scope of the examination of the elder beyond church entrance qualifications?

3. What passage in Ephesians emphasizes this thought, and what the substance of it?

4. What is the keynote of this letter?

5. What use does Paul make of doctrine in this letter?

6. What is the first great doctrinal statement in the letter?

7. What does the grace that brings salvation teach us?

8. What fundamental of Christianity taught here?

9. What is the relation of the second advent to the life?

10. How may one with postmillennial views maintain such an attitude toward the second advent?

11. How are the lessons of grace reinforced?

12. What is the meaning of "peculiar" in the King James Version?

13. What is the second great doctrinal passage in the letter?

14. What is the difficulty of the passage?

15. What is the meaning of "washing of regeneration," what its true parallels in Scripture and what their explanation?

16. What hymn contains this truth?

17. If "washing of regeneration" here means baptism, then what must follow?