Titus Chapter 3

vs 9

Paul has talked about what is profitable, now he talks about what to avoid. Some interesting translating going on here. Genealogies is fair enough (although who wants to argue over them? Does this perhaps suggest that Gentiles were doing the same thing as modern people do, with comments like "Hey, these genealogies don't add up - how are we supposed to know how long ago the earth was made?" There's no evidence for that, although very early on there were questionings about how literal Genesis 1-3 could be). Arguments is literally 'strife'. The greek word for strife can be translated as quarrels, but then the NIV used quarrels to talk about the next term, so obviously they didn't want to repeat themselves. I wouldn't have used the word argument, because it is a more technical term, and in that way doesn't really bring for the heat and passion that is contained in the word strife.

Now the word they have translated "controversies" could have as easily been translated "debate". The word denotes an enquiry or a seeking, so Paul seems to have known well that people who are looking for the truth often ask stupid questions. Perhaps they don't know they are stupid when they ask them, but we know they aren't worth wasting time on. Of course, some of them will know that they are a waste of time, and are just asking these questions because theyt think these are the hard ones! Foolish is a good translation.

Finally, "quarrels about the law". "Quarrel" is fine - the word more means fight, but what is a quarrel other than a verbal fight? "The law" (or "the Law" as it's put in the NASB) can mean either legal stuff, or the OT Law, or so I am told. So what does Paul mean when he talks about fighting about the law? Just a few scant verses from now, this word is going to be used again, to describe "Zenas the lawyer". Does this actually mean that Zenas is a teacher of the Law? It may well do. I think from the context we have to assume that Christians were having fights over the OT, rather than over common law. I certainly hope so. What did they fight about? Who can say.

vs 10

Whatever they were doing, division in the church was not to be tolerated. If someone was asking questions and seeking, that was probably ok. But if they kept trying to be divisive, then they are warned twice, then basically excommunicated. It sounds harsh, but culturally that was a norm. Not only that, but the church is at a very tenuous stage of its development, and Paul would not brook the warping of theology by idiots and schemers. Remember, this was all before Christianity had any state privileges. This isn't big Roman Catholic church excommunicating via Pope, and stopping people from being able to buy food and trade. No, this is just "avoid that person". There's a story that John once went to a bathhouse, and a known heretic was there. Instead of going into the bathhouse, he left, saying to his friend "Quick, we should leave before the roof caves in on that heretic". It doesn't sound friendly, but protecting the theology of the church was more important to Paul.

So how do we do this now? I mean, I'm sure we all know Christians who like to waste their time on these foolish and stupid arguments. Hell, I'm guilty of that sometimes because I like to argue! If we simply warn them or stop spending time with them, they would no doubt go to a church that agrees more with their theology. Or perhaps stop going to church all together. Church changed so much with the influence of Constantine! This would never have been a question before the state got involved. Before Constantine, the church was a place for believers only. After, it was opened up to half-believers and non-believers to actively take part. Nowadays, we worry about what happens to someone when they leave our church. Back then, they either joined the church and took the membership seriously, or they left. Personally, I think people should go to churches that match their theology. I'm sure they would be more comfortable and friendly and useful there. But you'll never find a church where everyone agrees with everything you say and do. I guess we should strive to go to churches that match our theological understanding, and deal with those things we disagree with in a Christ-like manner. For those who don't deal with them in that way... I don't know. Perhaps it's a case-by-case thing.

vs 11

Paul's not finished yet. He says we can be sure such a person is warped and sinful! But our churches just aren't like that anymore! We don't kick sinful people out! I guess we can just look at these people who make these arguments, and keep them out of positions of authority? Treat them a little more like a seeker than a convert? But then do we want to have a class system in our churches? Modern times are complicated, and we don't want to import 1st century principles into our church - we want to import Christian principles. Ours isn't a 1st century church, nor can it be. Heaps too much is different. But Paul does tell us that those who argue and cause trouble in the way he has described are warped and sinful, and we should treat them accordingly.

vs 12

Paul doesn't even know who he is sending. But he wants to see Titus face to face.

vs 13

Ahh, our old friend Zenas the lawyer...
Let me tell you, from my own travelling around the place, that it is really wonderful when you get to a church and they look after everything you need - accomodation, food, drive you places - it's really great.

vs 14

In this statement, doing good (or works of good) accomplishes two things - one, it feeds you, and the other, it keeps your life productive, or fruitful. I think one is physical, and one is spiritual. I don't think Paul is talking about being financially fruitful - it just doesn't gel with providing for "daily necessities". I think he's saying "work so you can live, and live so you can serve God".

vs 15

We greet you. And send greetings. Greet others. And grace be with them.