Titus

by PSacramento 3 Replies latest watchtower bible

• 

  PSacramento

  Titus is part of what is reffered to as the "Pastoral Epistles" (1and 2 Timothy and Titus) and was written probably in the second century ( 100-150 AD) and, in the opinion of most scholars, not by Paul but in "Paul's name.

  Like the letters to Timothy, Titus may have been an original letter dictated by Paul that had been "altered" to asnwer the questions and different doctrine views that wer ebeing voiced as Paul's, at the time.

  Many scholars look at the differences in Vocabulary, Literary style, the situation of the apostle, and the theological charateristisc that seem to be moving towards the emerging "catholicisim", to base their view that Paul did NOT write ( at least not completely) the Pastoral Epistles in they way they have been handed down.

  That said, back to Titus that has some interesting points that I would like to discuss:

  The writer says that God is our Saviour, 1:3, and Jesus is our saviour, 1:4 and goes one to repeat this in 3:4 ( God is saviour) and 3:6 ( Jesus is saviour), The writer also adds the (controversial?) passage of 2:13 - waiting for our blessed hope, the appearing of the glory of our great God and Saviour Jesus Christ (ESV).

  The writer seems to be holding fast to that God and Jesus are/is our saviour, something that Paul himself says in the contecxt of Jesus is our saviour, for our salvation is through him, to God, but in a repetive mode, the writer seems to be either, contridicting himself or saying that BOTH are or, in the early Trinity sense perhaps, God and Jesus are (singular) our Saviour, they are one.

  Verse 2:13 can be interprested in two was, typically, that Jesus is God and Saviour or that the writer is reffereing to God AND Jesus.

  The first view is typically trinitarian, the second is not (Obviously) but the second interpretation has verse 14 to deal with:

  who gave himself for us to redeem us from all lawlessness and to purify for himself a people for his own possession who are zealous for good works.

  Verse 14 seems to continue with the motif of Jesus being the central figure in the preceeding verse.

  Thoughts?
• 

  jonathan dough

  There is only one Savior who grants eternal salvation, and both the divine Person of Christ and God are that Savior.

  God states at Isaiah 43:11 that “Besides me there is no savior.” Yet Jesus is also called our Savior at Titus 1:4, and again at Titus 3:6. Read together it is reasonable to conclude that since Jesus is a Christian’s savior, yet there is no savior besides God, then Jesus must be God. The Jehovah's Witnesses counter that just because a judge in Israel by the name of Othniel is also called savior (or deliverer) (Judges 3:9) that similarity does not make Othniel Jehovah (Reasoning, 413).

  Well, of course it doesn’t, but the Jehovah's Witnesses are making the same mistake by failing to ask “What kind of savior?” The unique savior of Isaiah 43:11 and Titus 1:4, 3:6 is a savior on a much grander scale, on an altogether higher spiritual and religious plane; a Savior who saves in supernatural ways unknown to men, who knows and predicts future events, (Isaiah 43:9), an only savior (Acts 4:10, 12) whose salvation is complete (Colossians 2:10), powerful (Jude 24, 25), authoritative (John 10:18) and universal (1 Timothy 4:10). This one-of-a-kind savior saves from wrath (Romans 5:9), sin (John 1:29) and death through the gift of eternal life (John 11:25, 26). Any parallels with Othniel are seriously misplaced. There is only one kind of “savior” at issue here, not secular saviors, deliverers, kings or judges who have made their mark on history.

  The Jehovah's Witnesses counter with Jude 25 and reason that God is a savior only through Jesus Christ (Reasoning, 413). Jude 25, however, is a doxology, a hymn or words of praise directed to God the savior through Jesus Christ:

  … to the only wise God, our Savior, be glory and majesty and might and authority, even now and forever, Amen. (Jude 25 Green’s Literal Translation)

  Jude is not saying that God is our only savior through Jesus as though he were some hollow tube. Christ offered up His life out of His own volition and he saves directly by Him, by His shed blood. Interestingly, a literal translation of Jude 25 makes no mention of Christ at all which lends credence to the argument that Jude 25 is a doxology directing praise to God, not a statement on Christ’s role as savior, as some type of conduit. Acts 4:12 makes it very clear that “…there is salvation in no one else… (RSV, Green’s Literal Translation, NKJV),” in Christ. Salvation in Christ and through Christ are not mutually exclusive terms.

  http://www.144000.110mb.com/trinity/index-5.html#25
• 

  PSacramento

  JD,

  Isaiah's verse is in regards to the old covenant and in the OC there is NO OTHER saviour but YHWH and IF the OC had been "correct" in it TOTAL teachings and not been "corrupted" by Man made Laws that took precedence, then there would have been no need for a New Covenant, just as Paul mentions a few times.

  In the NC, Jesus, in whom God dwells FULLY, is the Saviour, the judge, the redeemer. Jesus "assumed" the role(s) that God had in the OC not because he is God ( The father) but because in him all that God is, Jesus is.

  Yes, this can be viewed as Trinitarian ( though it doesn't have to be) but the core issue is that the NC makes it clear that Salvation is dependant on Jesus and no other. The WT "mistake" is to "forget" this and to continue to focus on the role of YHWH even though YHWH has made it clear that the path is through Jesus and IN Jesus.

  The WT seems to not acknoledge the NC and "live in the old" covenant.
• 

  cabasilas

  Verse 14 is important here in understanding verse 13.

  There's a great chart in this article: "Is Jesus Christ Our Great God?" which shows how the expressions in verse 14 are taken directly from the Septuagint. In the Septuagint, they are used of Jehovah, but the writer of Titus applies them to Christ:

  http://www.archive.org/details/AwaitAnti-jehovahsWitnessTract