Original Meaning
THIS SECTION DEALS with two “appearings.” The first is the appearing of God’s grace, an allusion to the first coming of Christ (v. 11), when God’s grace was revealed “through the appearing of our Savior, Christ Jesus” (2 Tim. 1:10). Titus 2:13 cites the second “appearing,” the second coming of Christ, described as the “blessed hope.” Together these two references continue the theme that first appeared in 1 Timothy 3:16 of the vindication and public disclosure of Jesus as to his true nature and accomplishments.
The fact of Christ’s first and second comings underlies the instructions in 2:1–10 (cf. the word “for” [gar], which introduces the basis for what precedes). This continues the pattern of alternation in the Pastoral Letters, where, instead of the more typical Pauline section on doctrine followed by a section on practical application, the Pastorals move frequently from one to the other.
This basis is not only the fact of the two comings of Christ, but (1) the first appearing is an appearing of “the grace of God,” which both brings salvation and teaches self-discipline, while (2) the second appearing constitutes a great hope, to be realized in the return of him who is not only the Savior, but actually “our great God” (v. 13). The language of verse 11 contains an ambiguity, however. The key question is whether the indirect object in the phrase “to all [people]” depends (1) on the verb “has appeared” (i.e., “the grace of God…has appeared to [all people]”), or (2) on the verbal idea in the adjective soterios, “bringing salvation” or “that which brings salvation” (i.e., “the grace of God that brings salvation to all [people]…”). This can be clarified in the following diagram (the first and third lines show the order of the Greek words and the numbers in the second and fourth lines show two different sequences to read them):
A strong argument/or associating “to all [people]” with “bringing salvation” rather than with “appeared” is that of proximity, while “appeared” occurs seven words away from “to all people,” at the beginning of the Greek sentence. But the strongest reason against that connection is theological. God’s grace does not save everyone (universalism), as the second option seems to teach. But if “bringing salvation to all [people]” were to be rejected because it is not true in a literal, all-inclusive sense, so should “appeared to all [people],” because, it may be argued, two thousand years later the gospel has still not reached every person.
There are, however, other possibilities. (1) “All [people]” can be understood to refer to all believers. The word “all” can be used in that sense when used alone (e.g., see Rom. 5:18b; 1 Cor. 15:22), but see further below. (2) “All” can be understood instead as distributive, that is, “all people without distinction.”
The way the sentence continues must also be considered in making our decision. Verse 12 opens with a participle (rendered as the finite verb “teaches” in NIV, relating grammatically to the noun charis, “grace” (v. 11). Its object is “us,” which in the context must mean believers. The sentence has its climax in “the glorious appearing of our great God and Savior…who gave himself for us to redeem us” (emphasis added). Thus it is “grace…teach[ing] us…while we wait [for the one who redeemed us].” This emphasis on salvation and its redemptive effect on our lives points to a grace that brings salvation to all believers and teaches them, once saved, how to live for our coming Savior.
If this is the meaning, however, it is hard to explain why anthropois (“human beings, people”) was used in the preceding verse rather than some word like laos, which often designates the people of God. Moreover, the use of “appearing” at the end of this section (v. 13) can (assuming that the second appearing of Christ is to all humanity) provide some ground for understanding “appearing,” rather than “bringing salvation,” as referring to “all [people].” It has also been suggested that “bringing salvation” can have a potential rather than realized sense, that is, “offering salvation.” It must be noted, however, that in classical Greek the phrase conveys the sense of actually bringing deliverance or safety to someone, not merely trying to do so.1
Nevertheless, in the present context, while many have not accepted deliverance, many have (as the next clause makes clear). Probably the best way to understand the clause is to let “bringing salvation” stand together with the following words “all [people]” and to understand “all” as distributive, with the sense that God’s grace brings salvation to all people for them to accept. That leads to the verse 12 as a contrast: We are the ones who are taught by it.2
In summary, the choices are as follows:
1. Grace has appeared to all people.
|
Not true in a literal sense, but would fit the contextual emphasis on “appearing.” |
2. Grace has appeared to all kinds of people.
|
A possible meaning, but not the emphasis here; stretches the meaning of “all.” |
3. Grace has appeared to all believers.
|
Possible and meaningful, especially if the emphasis is on appearance rather than salvation, though the use of anthropois is a problem. |
4. Grace brings salvation to all people.
|
Not true theologically. |
5. Grace brings salvation to all kinds of people.
|
Same as # 2. |
6. Grace brings salvation to all believers.
|
Possible and meaningful, especially if the emphasis of the passage is on salvation rather than appearance, though the use of anthropois is a problem. |
7. Grace brings the potential of salvation to an unrestricted number of people, many of whom accept it.
|
Possible, fits the contextual emphasis and is a possible extension of the classical usage cited.3 |
The grace of God not only saves, it “teaches” (v. 12; perhaps better “trains,” as in NRSV. The paideia-word group used here is the comprehensive Greek term for education. It connotes a disciplined kind of formation or training for life. But even “training” fails to communicate all that is in the Greek word. The description that follows in verse 12 of what this training should accomplish demonstrates the meaning of the verb better than any single English word. There are two goals: a negative one, to renounce two specified undesirable habits of life; and a positive one, to adopt in their place three desirable habits.
(1) The negative goals are introduced by the words “to say ‘No.'”4 What one should renounce or reject is not a person but “a godless, indulgent life.”5 The specific pair mentioned is “ungodliness” and “worldly passions.” (a) The first of these (asebeia, cf. 2 Tim. 2:16) is the opposite of that highly desirable character trait eusebeia, “godliness, piety” (see later in this verse). It is the object of God’s wrath (Rom. 1:18) and describes the objects of his judgment in Jude 15, 18. (b) The other trait combines the idea of desires, which can be good or (more usually) bad, with the modifying word “worldly,” which characterizes them as belonging to the human society that ignores or despises God.
(2) God’s grace also trains us positively to embrace the Christian life in a way that is “self-controlled, upright [or just] and godly.” The last word is the adverbial form of eusebeia, which appears frequently in the Pastoral Letters as an important component in the life that pleases God (1 Tim. 2:2; 3:16; 4:7, 8; 6:3, 5, 6, 11; Titus 1:1, see esp. comments on 1 Tim. 2:2; 3:16). Knight suggests that these three adverbs refer to one’s self, relationships with other people, and relationship with God.6 Whether or not that was conscious intention on Paul’s part, they probably overlap somewhat, and together they are comprehensive.
It is significant that Paul neither centers on the future consummation of our hope in the return of Christ to the neglect of our character and way of life here and now, nor centers on matters of conduct without setting these in the context of the Christian hope. The introduction of that “hope” in verse 13 is, in fact, joined to the ethical instructions grammatically by the use of a modifying participle (translated “while we wait” in NIV). All of this—manner of life and expectation of heart—is the content of the training that grace gives us.
In other words, before Paul addresses that “blessed hope,” he mentions the virtues that grace teaches us to adopt and live out “in this present age.” This exact phrase does not occur elsewhere in Paul’s writings, but he often uses the word “present.”7 Paul is adopting the Jewish concept of two ages—the present age (sometimes translated “world”)8 stands in contrast to the age to come.
“Wait” in verse 13 (which connotes “waiting in expectation”) appears elsewhere in the New Testament with other noteworthy objects, including the kingdom of God (Mark 15:43; Luke 23:51), the “consolation” of Israel (Luke 2:25), and the redemption of Israel (Luke 2:38). All these express the hope of pious Jews in the time of Jesus. Note especially Jude 21, which (like Titus 2:12–13) contrasts those who are godless with those who are “waiting” for the mercy of God. The object of the waiting here in Titus is “hope.” Our hope rests in God (1 Tim. 4:10; 5:5; 6:17), Christ himself is our hope (1 Tim. 1:1), and our hope is in eternal life (Titus 1:2; 3:7).
The hope is called “blessed.” Normally in Scripture, it is people, not things that are called “blessed.” Nevertheless, at creation “God blessed the seventh day and made it holy” (Gen. 2:3). This made it a unique, sacred day. Also the Lord blessed a field (Gen. 27:27) and a kneading trough (Deut. 28:5), apparently prospering them for the benefit of the owners. By analogy the hope may be blessed because it is sacred or, though less likely, because it brings us benefit.
Although the object of our waiting is twofold, “the blessed hope and glorious appearing,” it is a conceptual unity, with the two nouns joined in the Greek by one article. The NIV nicely expresses this by the use of a dash between them rather than with an “and.” There are several options for assessing the grammatical structure of the content of the “blessed hope.” To help view their distinctives they may be paraphrased and diagrammed as follows:
- the glorious appearing of our great God and Savior, Jesus Christ
- the glorious appearing of the great God and of our Savior Jesus Christ
- the appearing of the glory of our great God and Savior, Jesus Christ
- the appearing of the glory of the great God and of our Savior Jesus Christ
There are two issues here. Should the genitive “of the glory” be translated like a Hebraic genitive of description (i.e., “glorious”; cf. 1 and 2) or simply “of the glory” (cf. 3 and 4)? What about the grouping of the words that follow “appearing”? Does the single article after “glory” belong with both “God” and “Savior” (i.e., “the-great-God-and-our-Savior-Jesus Christ”; cf. 1 and 3), or only with “God” (i.e., “the-great-God and of-our-Savior-Jesus-Christ”; cf. 2 and 4).9
As regards the first issue, while “glorious appearing” is possible, “the appearing of the glory of God” corresponds, perhaps intentionally, to the appearing “of the grace of God” in verse 11 and is therefore more likely. On the second issue, the use of the definite article in Greek to link together words constituting a conceptual unity (e.g., a single article with “hope” and “appearing” earlier in v. 13) enables us to see “God” and “Savior” as together. In the Pastoral Letters God is repeatedly called “Savior” (1 Tim. 1:1; 2:3; 4:10; Titus 1:3; 2:10; 3:4). By calling him the “great” God and Savior, Paul affirms this truth against those Greco-Roman cults who honored their gods as saviors.10 If Paul had wanted to separate God and Christ in this sentence and avoid any attribution of deity to Christ, that could easily have been done with grammatical precision.
“Who gave himself” in verse 14 points to the voluntary offering of Christ on the cross for us (Mark 10:45; Gal. 1:4; Eph. 5:25; cf. Heb. 10:5–10). It is also true that God gave him to us and gave him up for us (John 3:16; Rom. 8:32). Earlier, Paul noted that the training that grace gives us is in both a positive and a negative form. Here the same pairing is the result of our Lord’s sacrifice: negatively, to “redeem us from all wickedness,” and positively, “to purify for himself a people that are his very own, eager to do what is good.” These last words remind one of 1 Peter 2:9, especially “a people belonging to God.” In Titus the people of God, taught by grace, are to do good works (cf. Eph. 2:10); in 1 Peter God’s chosen are to declare his praises.
In verse 15 “these…things” occurs first for emphasis. Titus is to “teach” these things (cf. comments on “teaching” in 2:1). Two verbs follow: “encourage” (nrsv “exhort,” which may be more appropriate in this context) and “rebuke.” This continues the tone of the Pastorals (cf. 1 Tim. 4:11; 5:1, 20; 6:2; 2 Tim. 4:2; Titus 1:9; 2:6). These three verbs can have “these things” as its object (as Knight argues).11 However, the grammar of Titus 1:9, in which Titus was instructed to encourage by sound doctrine and to rebuke those who opposed it, suggests that here in 2:15 “teach,” “encourage,” and “rebuke” all have people as their object.
Timothy was to do this “with all authority.” Timothy needs authority in order to “command” (or “charge”) the heretics to stop their teaching (see comments on 1 Tim. 1:3; cf. also 4:11; 5:7; 6:17), just as Paul charged Timothy to keep his command (6:13–14). The word for authority here in Titus 2:15 is epitage, a specific command. The use of this word in 1:3 is helpful in understanding the kind of authority Titus has. There Paul writes of the preaching (or “proclamation”) entrusted to him by the “command” (epitage) of God our Savior. Just as this proclamation was entrusted to Paul, so Paul entrusts it to Titus. And just as Paul functioned under the command of God, so Titus is to function under the apostolic command of Paul, though there is no indication that Titus had broad apostolic authority as Paul did.
Bridging Contexts
LEARNING HOW TO LIVE. In verses 1–10 Titus was to tell several specific social groups to demonstrate the truth of God’s Word in the way they lived. Now we see an important reason why they, and we, are able to do that: The same grace that saves us from the penalty of sin reorganizes our lives by “training” us how to live. The ancient Greeks, although encompassing different modes of education, had a word that came to characterize Greek education. The word was paideia: training the individual for life as a mature, wise person. It was a high ideal.
However, certain aspects of Greek education forfeited idealism in favor of pragmatism. While their study of language and the widespread training in rhetoric or oratory had a positive side, this could degenerate into mere platform performances of rhetorical ability and legal debate. One comic playwright caricatured Sophists as those who make the better argument sound worse and the poorer argument sound better. Sophistry reappeared in what we call the Second Sophistic (roughly second century a.d.), when its “chief characteristic [was] its irrelevance to life.”12 Thus even the highest ideals, whether of Greek paideia or of Christian education, can degenerate into arguments about words and opinions and into mere performance.
But Hebrew education both antedated and surpassed the Greek. Memorizing facts, learning history, and mastering the teachings of the Law were all intended to provide the means to live for the God who delivered their ancestors from Egypt. This had immediate implications in obedience to the Law God had taught them. Behavior was the necessary fruit of knowledge. The goal was not to be an educated person, even in the best Greek sense, but to be a good son or daughter of the covenant. Wisdom was not the ability to solve philosophical or mathematical problems or to win debates, but to understand the transcendent yet personal God of both their corporate and individual salvation. Jewish education at its best was in the context of the Exodus, and the grace that saved them, so to speak, also instructed them. Psalm 119 was a magnificent reminder that God’s Word should be active in every realm of life.
Thus, God’s saving grace does not end at the crucial point of salvation, but accompanies us on the further journey of our new life, providing the wisdom and direction needed to remake our now-redeemed lives. The contrast of verse 12 in itself has a teaching function, as contrasts often do. A “Yes” to one choice requires a “No” to another. Paul opted here for the advantage of using a pair of similar sounding familiar words (eusebeia and aseibeia) that contrast a way of life that is godly and wholesome with a life totally opposite to that. The other expressions Paul uses, both positive and negative, flesh out the picture.
The reference to “this present age” was familiar (as noted above) to Jewish readers, who were used to the idea of the present age in contrast to the age to come. However, non-Jewish readers in any culture can recognize that if there is a “present” age during which we “wait” for the realization of a “hope,” there must be a future “age” of some sort, however long or short it may be, in which that hope is fulfilled. The present age is also a time of opportunity for Christians to live a life of high moral quality that is appropriate between Christ’s two “appearings,” the one of God’s saving grace (i.e., the first coming of Christ), the other his second coming. That kind of life is both possible and required because we have been “redeemed” (or “liberated”) from wickedness and “purified” for doing good (v. 14). Thus, we have the two assertions, the “No” and the “Yes,” the two ways of life, the two ages, the two appearings, and the two divine actions, redeemed and purified—all true of the one “people that are his very own.”
The description in verse 13 of hope as an objective reality for which we wait accords with the fact that in Christianity hope is not merely a subjective feeling. Romans 5:1–11 demonstrates that the Christian hope is based on the fact that God has already accomplished the harder part of our redemption, in that while we were still helpless sinners and enemies of God, Christ died for us. That we “rejoice in the hope of the glory of God” (Rom. 5:2) is, in content, comparable to Titus 2:13. In Romans 8:22–25 even in the context of suffering Christians are given strong hope.
This section continues the all-important theme in the Pastoral Letters of the character that God expects to be found in his people, especially church leaders. Again, therefore, we must observe that both the fact of frequent repetition of this theme and the manner in which it is inextricably entwined with doctrinal matters is a distinctive feature of the Pastoral Letters. We affirm again that the pervasive theme of these letters is not church order, which appears only at certain points, or the refuting of heresy, even though it is the occasion for the letters and an urgent theme in them, but the importance of orthodoxy-plus-character.
The issue of authority. One of the most persistent and universal issues among churches and parachurch organizations is that of authority. Is authority passed down in apostolic succession or some equivalent mode of transmission (such as from the founder of a mission to his or her hand-picked successor), or is such a process restrictive and susceptible to unspiritual influences? Is church leadership best chosen by democratic voting, or is that a flawed method, especially in a church too large for the people to know the candidates and their qualifications? Should elders be self-perpetuating, or does that spawn nepotism and inbreeding? Is it right that a person who occupies the pulpit be accorded, or be perceived as possessing, an authority that others do not have? And who should make the decision as to where a pastor should serve and when it is time to leave—the church elders, the congregation, the bishop, or the pastor?
It is clear by now that while the Pastoral Letters do not address the specific means of perpetuating leadership in the church, they do (1) prescribe doctrinal correctness for the health of the church and (2) demonstrate the need for morally upright teachers to communicate God’s commands. While Timothy and Titus were to convey these commands, it was neither a single individual, such as Timothy at Ephesus or Titus at Crete, or a successor to each of them who was to exercise authority in the continuing church, but the overseers or elders whom they were to see installed. This explains why the other Pauline letters (except for the personal one to Philemon) are not addressed to some individual church leader but to the “saints” in general, with Philippians specifically addressing a plurality of leadership (“the overseers and deacons,” Phil. 1:1).
In other words, the ongoing ideal was plural leadership, with warnings on hand for any Diotrephes, who “loves to be first” (3 John 9). This, however, does not lessen the importance of authority; on the contrary, it emphasizes it. Paul’s address to the elders from Ephesus showed that elders must be able to maintain doctrinal purity and guard the flock from heretics (Acts 20:25–31). That is a function of authority, and it is similar to the concerns of the Pastoral Letters.
Contemporary Significance
LIVING IN THIS present age. The wide availability of the Christian gospel today is an amazing reality. Although there are many of the earth’s inhabitants who still have never heard the name of Christ, the grace of God has “appeared” to an immense number of people worldwide, with unexpected responsiveness even among those traditionally opposed and hostile. Ralph Winter, to cite one mission authority, has repeatedly shown the progress of the gospel among the “people groups” of the world. Wycliffe Bible Translators and other lesser known translators have opened the Word of God to ever smaller groups of people in the languages they understand best. In spite of flaws and misunderstandings in our presentations, God’s grace has powerfully brought the saving word of the gospel to billions of people.
In megacities, rural lands, tribal domains, universities, offices, hospitals, and other locations beyond imagination, this gospel message has been brought by earnest witnesses whose lives have commended their words. Martyrs and kings have represented the Lord with clear consciences. But more often than we know or want to know, the communicators of God’s grace have failed to be taught by that grace.13 And even if their failures have not been discovered, their effectiveness may have been lessened by spiritual battles in the unseen world. It is easy for a pastor to say “No!” to the twice-divorced visitor to the church office who wants a third marriage without counseling. It is harder for a missionary to deal with the recently converted tribal chieftain with multiple wives who seeks church membership. But it is harder still to say “No!” to our own passions and undisciplined use of time and money. True believers are “eager to do what is good.”
Some years ago, several of my maternal uncles and an aunt were employed by a Christian publishing house and its associated printing firm in New York. One item this firm published found its way into many homes, especially in the 1940s. It was called the “Perhaps Today Calendar.” Those who used it were of the eschatological persuasion that no biblical event needed to take place before the rapture of the church to heaven. We were to wait for what was understood to be the “blessed hope,” focused and ready for the coming of our Savior. There have been many, of course, who have not looked for a “secret rapture,” but for a glorious appearing of Christ to the whole world. In either case, such intense hope and eager waiting for the Lord’s return is both commendable and all too easily lost.
The two world wars and a depression that made Christ and heaven more desirable have been succeeded by decades of changing world history and corresponding moods. Such recent competitors for our attention as the Internet, video games, video disks, and interactive TV seem to make waiting for the “blessed hope” less attractive. Those deeply involved in corporate life, trying earnestly to maintain performance standards and focused on seeking promotions, will naturally find it harder to value a supernatural eschatological event than those who struggle with life’s basic necessities. No doubt, if we could probe our inner dispositions honestly, some of us would like time to accomplish further personal goals on earth before every eye stares in wonder at that “glorious appearing” as a headline event on our TV screens.
Authority and its limits. We have seen that Timothy and Titus were given a clear mandate by Paul that is restated and interspersed throughout the Pastoral Letters. But the authority Timothy and Titus had was not autonomous. It was the authority inherent in the commission and message they received from Paul. Today the preacher’s authority comes from the Word that is being preached. Timothy and Titus had that Word directly from the apostle Paul; we have it in the Scriptures. This is a warning regarding pastors who have an unhealthy sense of personal authority. Such pastors may, if they feel their authority waning, try to control a hostile congregation by taking illegitimate recourse to apostolic claims to authority. That apostolic language must not be detached from the circumstances of its legitimate authoritative use in its original context.
To combine the teaching, encouraging, and rebuking mentioned in verse 15 without feeling “despised” requires maturity and confidence in the Lord’s commission. As one who has devoted many years to preaching as well as to academic teaching, I can testify that preachers can become very sensitive to criticism and discouraged if a congregation does not seem to respond to exhortation. (We should note here that the teaching, encouraging, and rebuking of individuals should take place in private rather than in public. Too often a rebuke from the pulpit is a thinly veiled criticism of individuals in the congregation.) With the Reformed emphasis on preaching, pastors can feel inadequate or even as failures if they lack in this aspect of ministry, even though they may be effective in other areas.
At the same time, however, skill in preaching can easily bring pride and neglect of other responsibilities. Further a so-called “bully pulpit” (Theodore Roosevelt’s phrase is still used today) can become a bullying pulpit. Therefore it requires the “great patience and careful instruction” mentioned in 2 Timothy 4:2, rather than a domineering attitude. In this connection, the attitude of Ezra the scribe is instructive. He set his heart (1) to study the law of the Lord and (2) to do it; and then, as an obedient student, (3) to teach the statutes and ordinances in Israel (Ezra 7:10, NRSV). In recent years the practice of expository preaching has been much discussed and highly praised. We must remember, however, that expository preaching is not validated only by the truth conveyed, but by the life of the preacher.
Moreover, preaching is not a matter of mere sequential comments on a text, but the explanation and application of a portion of Scripture with due attention to its place and function in its context.14 The contemporary significance of verse 15 is complex and of immense importance. The principles must be derived carefully, with due regard for the differences between the unique commission of Titus as an apostolic delegate to a threatened congregation and the commission of those who care for churches today with a broader and less authoritative range of responsibilities. Yet this passage, like other passages in the Pastoral Letters, teaches the importance of transmitting sound doctrine, and that doctrine carries divine authority. It is right for us to say, “Thus says the Lord” or, “The Bible says,” making sure that we are properly teaching and applying Scripture.
1. See LSJ, 1751.
2. In whatever way this particular exegetical issue may be solved, the importance of the gospel of God's grace in the Pastoral Letters is without question and must not be lost in the exegetical discussion. It is important to note that the “Savior” is also mentioned in verse 10, immediately before this section.
3. Peterson’s paraphrase, “Salvation is for everyone!” communicates this option well (The Message).
4. On this verb, see Peter's denials of Christ (Matt. 10:33; 26:70, 72) and Titus 1:15 (regarding those who claim to know God but deny him by their actions; cf. also 2 Tim. 2:1213 and comments).
5. The Message.
6. Knight, Pastoral Epistles, 320.
7. See Rom. 3:26; 8:18, 22; Gal. 4:25; Eph. 2:2; 1 Tim. 4:8; 6:17.
8. See Rom. 12:2; 1 Cor. 1:20; 2:6, 8; 3:18; 2 Cor. 4:4; Eph. 1:21; cf. Gal. 1:4.
9. An excellent discussion of this, combined with an appendix on “The Definite Article in the Greek New Testament,” is in the important work Jesus As God by Murray J. Harris (Grand Rapids: Baker, 1992), 173–85, 301–13. Harris structures his discussion on several different grammatical options, four of which I have synthesized above (he also cites a fifth, more complex, option).
10. See comments on 1 Tim. 1:1; also Bridging Contexts section there about “God our Savior.”
11. Knight, Pastoral Epistles, 329.
12. Moses Hadas, A History of Greek Literature (New York: Columbia Univ. Press, 1950),
13. For a significant and challenging treatment of grace and its many implications for Christian life see Philip Yancey, What's So Amazing About Grace (Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 1997).
14. See the Contemporary Significance section on 2 Tim. 4:2. See also Sidney Greidanus, The Modern Preacher and the Ancient Text: Interpreting and Preaching Biblical Literature (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1988); Walter Liefeld, New Testament Exposition, D. Martyn Lloyd-Jones, Preaching and Preachers (Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 1971).