Lessons #29 and 30
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
+ 1. It is best to use this note after you have listened to the lessons because there are +
+ comments given in the actual exposition not in the note. +
+ 2. The Bible abbreviations are as follows: CEV =Contemporary English version, +
+ CEB = Common English Bible, ESV= English Standard Version, +
+ GWT = God’s Word Translation, ISV = International Standard Version, +
+ NAB=New English Bible, NASB= New American Standard Bible, +
+ NEB= New English Bible, NET = New English Translation, +
+ NLT = New Living Translations NJB = New Jerusalem Bible, +
+ NJV = New Jewish Bible, TEV = Today’s English Version. +
+ 3. Notes have not been edited for grammatical errors. +
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Three essentials of soundness in faith (Titus 1:12-16)
12 Even one of their own prophets has said, “Cretans are always liars, evil brutes, lazy gluttons.” 13 This testimony is true. Therefore, rebuke them sharply, so that they will be sound in the faith 14 and will pay no attention to Jewish myths or to the commands of those who reject the truth. 15 To the pure, all things are pure, but to those who are corrupted and do not believe, nothing is pure. In fact, both their minds and consciences are corrupted. 16 They claim to know God, but by their actions they deny him. They are detestable, disobedient and unfit for doing anything good.
In our last study, we interpreted the clause but to those who are corrupted and do not believe of Titus 1:15 as primarily a reference to the Jews who have believed in Christ but refused to accept the teaching of the apostles about the relationship of Gentile Christians to the rituals of the Mosaic Law. Consequently, they are to be considered as those who are not sound in the faith in contrast to those who are sound in the faith because they accepted the apostolic doctrine regarding the relationship of Gentile Christians to the rituals of the OT. That aside, Apostle Paul went on to describe those he had in mind in several other ways. He described them as those in a state of moral guilt as in the sentence nothing is pure of Titus 1:15 of the NIV. As we stated in our last study, the apostle was not concerned about ritual purity so that he would not state that those he had in mind were in ritual defilement. Instead, his focus was on the fact that those he had in mind were in spiritual defilement. Therefore, he proceeded to provide more facts that help to confirm the spiritual defilement of those the apostle had in mind beginning with the last sentence of Titus 1:15 In fact, both their minds and consciences are corrupted.
The sentence both their minds and consciences are corrupted is probably the apostle’s way of stating that those he had in mind are deficient of truth since truth understood is necessary for correct function of conscience. We say that those the apostle described are deficient of truth because of the words the apostle used in the sentence. The word “minds” is translated from a Greek word (noos) that may refer to the faculty of intellectual perception. Thus, the word may mean “mind” in the sense of “intellect” as the higher and mental part of a human being that initiates thoughts and plan. It is in the sense of intellect that Apostle Paul used the word to describe his inward struggles in Romans 7:25:
Thanks be to God—through Jesus Christ our Lord! So then, I myself in my mind am a slave to God’s law, but in the sinful nature a slave to the law of sin.
The expression in my mind am a slave to God’s law may be alternatively translated serve the law of God with my intellect. The Greek word may mean “mind” in the sense of the faculty of thinking and so may even mean “understanding”, as Apostle Paul used it to describe the peace God grants those who completely commit their worries or anxieties to Him, as recorded in Philippians 4:7:
And the peace of God, which transcends all understanding, will guard your hearts and your minds in Christ Jesus.
Our Greek word is translated “understanding” here in the NIV. The standard Greek English lexicon of BADG suggests the clause which transcends all understanding could be translated which surpasses all power of thought. By the way, the word “minds” is translated from a different Greek word (noēma) that may mean “thought, purpose” or “mind, understanding.” This aside, the Greek word used in our passage of Titus 1:15 may mean also “way of thinking”, “attitude as the sum total of the whole mental and moral state of being”, as the apostle used it in Ephesians 4:23:
to be made new in the attitude of your minds;
It is specifically in the way of Christian attitude or way of thinking that the apostle used the word in his statement to the Corinthians in 1 Corinthians 1:10:
I appeal to you, brothers, in the name of our Lord Jesus Christ, that all of you agree with one another so that there may be no divisions among you and that you may be perfectly united in mind and thought.
The word “mind” in this passage in Corinthians refers to way of thinking in that the apostle wanted the Corinthians to be united in the way they think as Christians. Another meaning of the Greek word translated “mind” in Titus 1:15 is mind in the sense of result of thinking so that the word may mean “thought, opinion, decree.” It is in this sense that the word is used by Apostle Paul in 1 Corinthians 2:16:
“For who has known the mind of the Lord that he may instruct him?” But we have the mind of Christ.
The sentence we have the mind of Christ is subject to different interpretations. One interpretation is that it means the Holy Spirit reveals Christ to the believer. Another interpretation takes it to mean that we can understand spiritual truths and wisdom similar to the way the Lord knows them. Still another interpretation takes this as a reference to the thoughts of Christ as they are revealed by the Holy Spirit, causing some to interpret the mind of Christ as a reference to the Scripture. It is difficult to be certain of what the apostle meant but it is likely that he meant that Christians think the way Christ does when they are filled of the Spirit. In our passage of Titus 1:15, our Greek word translated “mind” probably means the way of thinking or understanding so that we can assert that those the apostle had in mind are deficient in their understanding of truth or that their way of thinking is deficient of truth of God’s word.
In any case, we maintain that those the apostle described in the passage we are studying are deficient in their way of thinking or in their understanding of truth revealed in the Scripture. This is not a far-fetched interpretation because the apostle implies in another of his Pastoral Epistle that the mind may be corrupted because of lack of truth. I am referring to 1 Timothy 6:5:
and constant friction between men of corrupt mind, who have been robbed of the truth and who think that godliness is a means to financial gain.
Granting the word “corrupt” in 1 Timothy 6:5 is translated from a different Greek word (diaphtheirō) than used in Titus 1:15 but the Greek word used in 1 Timothy also means “to cause to become morally corrupt” so that the word means “to corrupt.” That aside, the passage in 1 Timothy 6 indicates that a person’s mind can become corrupt because the person is devoid of truth or the person has refused to accept the truth the individual has heard taught or even distort the truth that has been taught. This being the case, those the apostle had in mind were false teachers who have rejected the apostolic doctrine and so we can say that they are deficient in their understanding of truth. The point being that once a person is deficient of truth, that individual is defiled spiritually or that the person’s mind may be said to be corrupt. The fact we are stressing implies that anyone who is sound in the faith must be one that has truth in the soul. Therefore, if you want to be sound in the faith then you should endeavor not to be deficient of truth, by learning and accepting the apostolic doctrines revealed in the NT. Of course, the truth is that a person who is sound in the faith must accept the entire doctrine of the Scripture.
It is not only the minds of those the apostle described as deficient of truth that were corrupt but also their consciences as in the sentence both their minds and consciences are corrupted conveys. The word “conscience” is translated from a Greek word (syneidēsis) that may mean “consciousness” in the sense of awareness of information about something, as the Greek word is used to describe a believer who suffers unjustly but endures it because the person is mindful of God’s will or conscious of God, as we read in 1 Peter 2:19:
For it is commendable if a man bears up under the pain of unjust suffering because he is conscious of God.
Another meaning of the word is “moral sensitivity, conscience” in the sense of the psychological faculty that can distinguish between right and wrong, as the Greek word is used by Apostle Paul to indicate that Gentiles that do not have the Mosaic law are still aware of the concept of right and wrong in Romans 2:15:
since they show that the requirements of the law are written on their hearts, their consciences also bearing witness, and their thoughts now accusing, now even defending them.)
In our passage of Titus 1:5, the Greek word has the sense of conscience.
The apostle described those he had in mind in Crete as those with corrupt consciences. So, we ask, what does it mean to have corrupt or defiled conscience? To answer this question, we need to examine briefly the concept of “conscience.”
Conscience is that inherent mental ability God has given everyone to discern the difference between right and wrong. Its nature is such that it encourages an individual to do that which the person recognizes to be right while restraining the individual from doing that which the person recognizes to be wrong. Thus, it can pass judgment of guilt or give reassurance in case of innocence. Because of the nature of the function of the conscience it is worthwhile our effort to describe it in a little more detailed fashion.
Understanding of the function of the conscience should be related to the type of action under consideration. The conscience may be sequent to an action (that is, after the action has taken place) or it may be antecedent (that is, before the action takes place). If the conscience acts in a sequent mode, its primary function is judicial which can result in acquittal or in punishment. As soon as an action takes place the conscience goes into action to render a judgment favorable or adverse, a sentence of guilty or not guilty. It is because of this that some have compared the conscience to a court of law, in which there are culprit, judge, witnesses and jury; but only in this case the individual himself are all these. You are the one charged; you are the trial lawyer, the jury, and the judge. These play out inside of you where no one sees it. If you are innocent your conscience acquits you and you have a sense of satisfaction of approval from your conscience. But if you are guilty then the punishment phase sets in so that pain and suffering follow since the conscience is now an executioner. The terror of conscience is beyond description. The torture can go on for a long time without relief. This is the reason people confess hidden crimes after so long a time to try to free themselves from the pain inflicted on them by their conscience. It is true that some people seem to be able to hide the verdict from the conscience, but in general the satisfaction of a good conscience may stamp itself on the habitual serenity of one’s face, and the accusations of an evil conscience may impart a hunted and sinister expression to another. This means that facial expression can, most time, indicate one’s state on guilt or innocence. Anyway, a good illustration of the conscience at work given in the Scripture is with Joseph’s brothers when they first got to Egypt to purchase grain. They did not recognize Joseph as the one before them, who ordered them to be put in custody for three days. During this period, their conscience began to condemn them so that they associated their plight with their treatment of Joseph about 20 years from the time of their going to Egypt to purchase grain. It is because their consciences condemned them and or inflicted punishment on them that they declared what is recorded in Genesis 42:21:
They said to one another, “Surely we are being punished because of our brother. We saw how distressed he was when he pleaded with us for his life, but we would not listen; that’s why this distress has come upon us.”
It is true that the word “conscience” did not appear in this passage or in any other passage in the Hebrew Scripture, but Joseph’s brothers were punished by their consciences for the wrong they did to Joseph. By the way, we stated the word “conscience” does not appear in the Hebrew Scripture, that is, the OT and you may dispute this assertion because the English versions have the word “conscience” in certain OT passages but that is not really the case in the Hebrew text. A good example of this, is the use of the word “conscience” after David’s action regarding Saul described in 1 Samuel 24:5:
Afterward, David was conscience-stricken for having cut off a corner of his robe.
We see that the word “conscience” is used in this passage but the truth is there is no Hebrew word for conscience but its function is assigned to the heart, so the sentence David was conscience-stricken is more literally the heart of David struck him. In the cases of Joseph’s brothers and that of David, the conscience pronounced a negative verdict of being guilty. But the conscience can also render a verdict that commends someone, as Apostle Paul indicated with respect to his conscience and that of his team regarding their conduct as they relate to the Corinthians in 2 Corinthians 1:12:
Now this is our boast: Our conscience testifies that we have conducted ourselves in the world, and especially in our relations with you, in the holiness and sincerity that are from God. We have done so not according to worldly wisdom but according to God’s grace.
The apostle boasts that his conscience assures him that his life has been ruled by God’s grace, which is a good verdict of the conscience with respect to the past activities of the apostle. Anyway, on the one hand, if the conscience functions after an action then its function is that of rendering judgment either favorably or adversely, that is, it renders the subject as either guilty or not guilty.
On the other hand, if the action is still contemplated, the conscience functions in a different manner. It would still function in a judicial manner rendering decision on the right action or decision. But once it does that, another function kicks in. It becomes obligatory. In other words, when the will stands at the cross road of decisions or actions, seeing clearly before it the right course and the wrong, conscience commands to proceed in the one and forbids the other. And as one writer puts it “What conscience commands may be apparently against our interests, and it may be completely contrary to our inclinations; it may be opposed to the advice of friends or to the solicitations of companions; it may contradict the decrees of principalities and powers or the voices of the multitude; yet conscience in no way withdraws or modifies its claim. We may fail to obey, giving way to passion or being overborne by the allurements of temptation; but we know that we ought to obey; it is our duty; and this is a sublime and sacred word. The great crises of life arise when conscience is issuing one command and self-interest or passion or authority another, and the question has to be decided which of the two is to be obeyed.”[1] The implication is that one may have to set aside prejudice, denounce self-interest, or even disobey an authority that is in conflict with the truth from God and, of course, suffer the consequences of such disobedience. Many martyrs in the past have done so. They have been given opportunities to live while denying that Jesus Christ is Lord but their conscience would not permit them to do so and therefore they suffered death.
Our discussion so far implies that we can use pain inflicted on us by our conscience to check the correctness of our actions, but we must always be cautious of our conscience. This is because conscience is not an infallible guide to the correct action to take. It is for this reason Apostle Paul could state that a clear conscience does not necessarily imply innocence before God in 1 Corinthians 4:4:
My conscience is clear, but that does not make me innocent. It is the Lord who judges me.
Another reason that we must be wary of our conscience is because it is capable of producing dead works as the writer of Hebrews informs us in Hebrews 9:14:
How much more, then, will the blood of Christ, who through the eternal Spirit offered himself unblemished to God, cleanse our consciences from acts that lead to death, so that we may serve the living God!
The clause acts that lead to death is literally from the Greek dead works that refers to works that cannot give eternal life or works that lead to death. The interpretation of the literal phrase dead works depends on whether it is concerned with believers or unbelievers. On the one hand, if unbelievers are in view then the phrase refers to those activities that the individual undertakes with the purpose of pleasing God or being in the right relationship with Him. On the other hand, if believers are in view then the phrase refers to those activities that believer does when not under the control of the Spirit. Here in Hebrews 9:14 believers are in view because of the use of “our” in this verse so the focus of the phrase is sin since sin is that which will cause problem for the conscience of a believer that will make it difficult to have fellowship with God. The implication is that conscience may not always be relied to keep a person from doing what is wrong although in the context of Hebrews 9:14, the concern is to state that the death of Christ on the cross has the effect of freeing our consciences from the condemnation we experience due to sin. Nonetheless, the truth is that our conscience may not keep us from doing what is wrong and so we should be careful with what our consciences allow.
Our consideration of the subject of conscience is because we want to understand what Apostle Paul meant in the sentence consciences are corrupted of Titus 1:15. We have noted that conscience is the innate ability to discern the difference between right and wrong but that alone does not help us in interpreting the apostle’s statement. For further help in interpreting what the apostle wrote, it is necessary to consider what he had to say in his epistles concerning the conscience. The apostle described conscience using primarily three adjectives. The first adjective the apostle used to describe the conscience is “weak.” He refers to weak conscience in 1 Corinthians 8:10:
For if anyone with a weak conscience sees you who have this knowledge eating in an idol’s temple, won’t he be emboldened to eat what has been sacrificed to idols?
The context of this passage is concerned with the question of eating or not eating meat sacrificed to an idol in Corinth. The apostle is concerned on the influence of those who are not comfortable eating meat bought from an idol temple by those who have no problem eating such meat with the understanding that idol means nothing since there is only one true God. The weak brother, that is, in this context, one with less understanding of the true nature of idol, is uncertain whether it is right to eat such a meat or not. This being the case, a weak conscience may refer to one that is not sure whether an act is right or wrong or to the one that considers an act to be wrong when it is right. The implication is that a conscience is weak due to lack of knowledge of God’s word with respect to a given issue that brings uncertainty regarding its correctness or wrongness. That aside, a second adjective the apostle used to describe conscience is the word “good” as the apostle used it to describe conscience in 1 Timothy 1:5:
The goal of this command is love, which comes from a pure heart and a good conscience and a sincere faith.
Bearing in mind that conscience is concerned with making right moral decisions based on certain acceptable standards, then a good conscience is one that will lead a person to make and act out correct moral decisions. In effect, a good conscience enables an individual to make correct decision about the rightness or wrongness of a contemplated action. An implication of good conscience is that it is one that is well informed with truth so that a person always makes the right choice when faced with alternatives. Anyway, the third adjective the apostle used to describe conscience is the word “clear”, as the apostle used it in 2 Timothy 1:3:
I thank God, whom I serve, as my forefathers did, with a clear conscience, as night and day I constantly remember you in my prayers.
The phrase a clear conscience is literally pure/clean conscience. In the context, a clear conscience refers to uncompromising ability to distinguish between right and wrong. It is the moral certitude or moral sensitivity that allows a person not to waver from what is right. It is true that conscience refers to the psychological faculty which can distinguish between right and wrong but it may also be understood as that silent voice that forbids a person from doing that which is wrong and encourages a person to do the right thing. So, a “pure/clean conscience” is one that leads a person to do the right thing. However, when a person is accused of a crime then possession of a clear conscience generally means that that individual has the strong conviction that he has done nothing wrong and that his actions are not motivated by selfish desires. In other words, a clear conscience is one possessed by an individual who has the conviction that the person has done nothing wrong, and whose actions are not motivated by selfish desires. In addition to these descriptions of conscience by the apostle, he also described conscience with the word “seared” in 1 Timothy 4:2:
Such teachings come through hypocritical liars, whose consciences have been seared as with a hot iron.
The word “seared” is from a Greek word (kaustēriazō) that means “to mark by branding, to brand.” It is used in medical sense “to cauterize.” Figuratively, it means to “render insensitive.” Hence a person with a “seared conscience” is an individual with an ineffective conscience in that such a conscience no longer bothers one who has it so that the person can live and act as if the conscience does not exist. There are many people with very insensitive conscience or “seared consciences”. This explains a reason some individuals murder fellow humans and think nothing of their action. It is insensitive conscience that leads many people to the point where they become very cruel and unkind without being bordered by it. Those with “seared” consciences are such that if they are false teachers then they will teach that which is contrary to sound doctrine without being concerned that they are misleading others probably because they are unaware they are in the wrong. It is therefore not surprising that such individuals are then described as advancing demonic doctrines with respect to marriage and food in 1 Timothy 4:3:
They forbid people to marry and order them to abstain from certain foods, which God created to be received with thanksgiving by those who believe and who know the truth.
The pronoun “they” refer to those with seared consciences mentioned in 1 Timothy 4:2.
Our consideration of the various descriptions Apostle Paul gave with respect to conscience, enables us to interpret what he meant in the sentence consciences are corrupted. He meant that the consciences of those he had in mind were devoid of the truth of the word of God such that they are incapable of making right or wrong decision, especially as it pertains to the true doctrine about Gentile Christians relationship to the ceremonial aspects of the Mosaic Law. There is then a sense that corrupt conscience corresponds to a seared conscience or a weak conscience since the apostle described weak conscience as that which is due to defilement on the part of those with it, as we can gather from 1 Corinthians 8:7:
But not everyone knows this. Some people are still so accustomed to idols that when they eat such food they think of it as having been sacrificed to an idol, and since their conscience is weak, it is defiled.
The clause and since their conscience is weak, it is defiled is more literally and their conscience, being weak, is defiled which may also be translated and their conscience, because it is weak, is defiled as in the NET. In the context of 1 Corinthians 8, defilement refers to feeling of guilt that one has done something wrong or that one has sinned against God by eating meat that was sacrificed to an idol. In any event, because we interpret those the apostle had in mind as Jewish Christians who do not accept the apostolic doctrine with respect to the rituals of the Mosaic law or that they are the false brothers, then their defilement or corruption implies that they are incapable of teaching the truth and feel guilty that they are perhaps at odds with the apostolic doctrine that they rejected. They also probably felt that they would be wrong in conforming to the apostolic doctrine with respect to rituals that involve food. The point is that those described as having corrupt consciences are either Jewish believers who advocate compliance to rituals of the Mosaic Law or they are the false brothers who were presumably Jewish unbelievers that infiltrated the church.
The apostle continued to describe these false teachers or Jewish unbelievers that infiltrated the church in blistering manner. He described them as those whose claim of being believers is questionable. We are at a disadvantage of knowing the true inner state of a person. By this, I mean that there is no way we can look at a person and tell that the individual is regenerated. We could guess but we cannot be certain that a person is spiritually alive or not by casual observation of an individual. It is only God who knows this with certainty, as the Holy Spirit conveyed through Apostle Paul in 2 Timothy 2:19:
Nevertheless, God’s solid foundation stands firm, sealed with this inscription: “The Lord knows those who are his,” and, “Everyone who confesses the name of the Lord must turn away from wickedness.”
Therefore, the only way left for us to declare a person to be saved is based on the lifestyle of the individual who claims to believe in Christ. It is this test that the apostle used in a negative manner to describe those he had in mind in the passage we are studying for he writes in the first sentence of Titus 1:16 They claim to know God, but by their actions they deny him.
Those the apostle was concerned made public confession of their relationship with God. The idea of public confession is implied in the Greek word (homologeō) translated “claim” in the NIV. The Greek word means to acknowledge something often publicly, with several nuances. The word may mean “to make an emphatic declaration, often public, and at times in response to pressure or an accusation”, that is, “to declare, to assert”, as the word is used by the apostle in his defense before Governor Felix in Acts 24:14:
However, I admit that I worship the God of our fathers as a follower of the Way, which they call a sect. I believe everything that agrees with the Law and that is written in the Prophets,
Some English versions use the word “confess” instead of “admit” of the NIV in this passage of Acts 24. The Greek word may mean “to express openly one’s allegiance to a proposition or person” so means “to profess, to confess.” It is especially used in confessing Christ or the teaching of the church, as the word is used in confessing Christ in Romans 10:9:
That if you confess with your mouth, “Jesus is Lord,” and believe in your heart that God raised him from the dead, you will be saved.
The Greek word may have the meaning of “to praise”, as that is the sense of the word in its usage in Hebrews 13:15:
Through Jesus, therefore, let us continually offer to God a sacrifice of praise—the fruit of lips that confess his name.
The word “confess” may be translated “praise” as suggested by the standard Greek English Lexicon of BADG that recommend the sentence the fruit of lips that confess his name be translated the fruit of lips that praise his name. In our passage of Titus 1:16, the sense of the word is that of public, emphatic declaration so that it can be translated “to profess” or “to claim.”
The apostle indicates that those he had in mind profess or claim to be in a personal relationship with God as indicated in the verbal phrase to know God. The word “know” is translated from a Greek word (oida) that may mean “to know” in the sense of possessing information about someone or something. Consequently, the word is used to describe a well-known fact that is generally accepted; such as information concerning the law, as the word is used in Romans 3:19:
Now we know that whatever the law says, it says to those who are under the law, so that every mouth may be silenced and the whole world held accountable to God.
The Greek word may mean “to know” in the sense of grasping the meaning of something, that is, to understand or to come to know. This is the sense in which the apostle used it in his apostolic prayer for the Ephesians to grasp or to come to know of blessings of salvation in Ephesians 1:18:
I pray also that the eyes of your heart may be enlightened in order that you may know the hope to which he has called you, the riches of his glorious inheritance in the saints,
The Greek word may mean “to respect” as that is the sense of the word in the instruction given to believers with respect to their spiritual leaders in 1 Thessalonians 5:12:
Now we ask you, brothers, to respect those who work hard among you, who are over you in the Lord and who admonish you.
The expression to respect those who work hard among you is more literally to know those laboring among you which does not make much sense since the Thessalonians already knew who these were, but it makes better sense for the apostle to be instructing the Thessalonians to respect those who work hard among them. The word may mean “to be intimately acquainted with or stand in a close relation to” someone, as the word is used negatively to describe those that God will punish in the future because they have no personal relationship with Him, as stated in 2 Thessalonians 1:8:
He will punish those who do not know God and do not obey the gospel of our Lord Jesus.
Of the various usages of the Greek word translated “to know” in Titus 1:16, it is the meaning of to be intimately acquainted with or stand in a close relation to someone that is intended in our passage. Thus, those the apostle had in mind claimed to be in personal relationship with God, meaning that they claim to be believers in the Lord Jesus Christ.
As we indicated previously, it is difficult to know the truth of a person’s claim with respect to Christ or of being saved without seeing evidence of such a claim. It is this truth the apostle stated regarding those he had in mind. They make claims, but their lifestyles do not bear out their claims as the apostle stated in the clause but by their actions they deny him. The word “deny” is translated from a Greek word (arneomai) that, no doubt, means to deny but “to deny” may mean to state that something is not true as it is used to describe liars as those who have not accepted the truth that Jesus is the Christ, as per 1 John 2:22:
Who is the liar? It is the man who denies that Jesus is the Christ. Such a man is the antichrist—he denies the Father and the Son.
To deny could mean “to repudiate, to disown, either in word or in action”, as it is used in disowning Christ in 2 Timothy 2:12:
if we endure, we will also reign with him. If we disown him, he will also disown us;
It is in the sense of refusing to acknowledge or recognize that the word is used in our passage of Titus 1:16. The context suggests that those the apostle described as denying God, that is, refusing to acknowledge Him, do so through how they live by following the rituals of the Mosaic Law rejecting what God has done in Christ. A person who believes in the work of Christ denies Him if such a person gets involved in rituals that the death of Christ has rendered unnecessary or if a person lives in sins for which Christ died. The apostle’s emphasis is probably on the fact that the persons he had in mind reject the apostolic doctrine that puts into correct perspective believers’ attitude toward the rituals of the Mosaic Law. This, of course, does not mean that they did not live a lifestyle that is incompatible with the teaching of Christ. For it is difficult to reject the truth of God’s word and be free from sinful conduct, as implied in those described in 2 Timothy 3:5–8:
5 having a form of godliness but denying its power. Have nothing to do with them.
6 They are the kind who worm their way into homes and gain control over weak-willed women, who are loaded down with sins and are swayed by all kinds of evil desires, 7 always learning but never able to acknowledge the truth. 8 Just as Jannes and Jambres opposed Moses, so also these men oppose the truth—men of depraved minds, who, as far as the faith is concerned, are rejected.
That aside, it is our assertion that the apostle’s emphasis is on the fact that those he had in mind through their actions of holding to rituals of the Mosaic Law continually reject the death of Christ on the cross although they profess to have believed in Him. In any event, the apostle described those he had in mind as those who profess faith in Christ but primarily by their practice of the rituals of Mosaic Law fail to acknowledge Christ or the work of God in Christ. Of course, rejection of one truth leads to rejection of others so that the lifestyle of those in question would also be such that their lifestyle is sinful one.
In any case, what the apostle says next about those he had in mind is subject to three possible interpretations. This is because the word “are” used in the first part of second sentence of Titus 1:16 They are detestable, disobedient is translated from a Greek participle that literally reads “being.” Here it could be interpreted as describing the means of refusing to acknowledge God or providing the reason for their denial of God or as stating further facts about those in view. It seems that these interpretations apply. By this we mean that the first interpretation of means of refusing to acknowledge God or the second interpretation of reason for denying God apply to the first part of the second sentence while that of stating additional fact apply in the second part of the second sentence. We mean that the sentence They are detestable, disobedient of the NIV that literally reads being detestable and disobedient answers the question of how and why those in view demonstrate that they deny or refuse to acknowledge God through their actions. Then the second expression unfit for doing anything good or literally and with respect to every good work worthless provides an additional fact about those the apostle had in mind.
Those the apostle had in mind denied or refused to acknowledge God by being disobedient to the apostolic instruction. We say this because of the phrase detestable, disobedient in the NIV or literally detestable and disobedient describes the disobedience of those the apostle had in mind. The literal translation indicates the Greek used a word translated “and” to connect the two words “detestable” and “disobedient.” However, the Greek conjunction translated “and” in the literal translation is used to explain or clarify what is meant by detestable. You see, the word “detestable” is translated from a Greek word (bdelyktos) that appears only here in the Greek NT and it pertains to a person or a thing that stirs up feelings of repugnance hence means “abhorrent, detestable.” The Septuagint used it to describe God’s view of miscarried justice in Proverbs 17:15:
Acquitting the guilty and condemning the innocent— the Lord detests them both.
The verbal phrase detests them both reads in the Septuagint as unclean and abominable. It is difficult to understand what is meant that those who refuse to acknowledge God or deny Him evidence that by being detestable. Consequently, the apostle explained what that means using a second word “disobedient” so that we should understand that “detestable” has the sense of “disobedience” our passage of Titus 1:16. This should not be difficult to accept because the apostle used the Greek word (apeithēs) translated “disobedient” in the NIV in describing the characteristics of people in the last days in 2 Timothy 3:2:
People will be lovers of themselves, lovers of money, boastful, proud, abusive, disobedient to their parents, ungrateful, unholy,
These people were also described as denying the power of godliness in 2 Timothy 3:5:
having a form of godliness but denying its power. Have nothing to do with them.
Those who deny God by their actions are in some sense not different from those who deny the power of godliness or devotion to God. Hence, we contend that the word “disobedient” is used to explain the word “detestable” in Titus 1:16. Thus, it is by disobedience that those the apostle had in mind show that they deny God or refuse to acknowledge Him since they reject the apostolic doctrine that gives the correct perspective of how Gentile Christians should view the rituals of the Mosaic Law.
In any case, the second expression of Titus 1:16 and unfit for doing anything good or literally with respect to every good work worthless is a description of those the apostle had in mind. The apostle indicates that they are unqualified to promote anything good in the spiritual life. They are not qualified to teach others truth because they have rejected the apostolic doctrine. Furthermore, because of their disobedient lifestyle they are incapable of doing anything that God would consider good. For, a person who is disobedient to God’s word cannot be control by the Holy Spirit, consequently, such a person cannot produce any good work that God approves. The point is that those who reject apostolic doctrine are not capable of honoring or glorifying the Lord and so are unqualified to teach others about God. In any event, the third point we have considered is that being sound in the faith involves freedom from the rituals of the Mosaic Law. Thus, it is the responsibility of pastors or overseers of a local congregation to ensure soundness of faith by rebuking of prevailing vices of the people of a local congregation, avoidance of myths and requiring freedom from rituals of the Mosaic Law.
[1] Stalker, J. (1915). Conscience. In J. Orr, J. L. Nuelsen, E. Y. Mullins, & M. O. Evans (Eds.), The International Standard Bible Encyclopaedia (Vol. 1–5, p. 702). Chicago: The Howard-Severance Company.