As to internal features, we may notice, in the first place, that the Epistle to Titus has all the characteris- tics of the other Pastoral Epistles. See, for instance, TTiariiQ 6 Xoyof (iii, 8), iiyiannwaa SiSaaKaXia (i, 9; ii, 1; comp. i, 13; u,S), (jiij(f>povtiv, <Tt!j(f)pioi', moippiU'iijt; (\, 8 : ii, f>, 6, 12), (TMrijpioc, rrair/jp. (jioZw (i, 3, 4 ; ii. 10, 1 1 , 13; iii, 4, 5, 7), 'lovSa'iKoi /.li'^oi (i, 14; comp. iii, 9), tTrKpai'fia (ii, 13), liiatjSna (i, 1), tXtot,' (iii, 5: in i, 4 the word is doubtful). All this tends to show that this letter was written about the same time and under simi- lar circumstances with the other two. Put. on the oth- er hand, this epistle has marks in its |)hraseology and style which assimilate it to the general body of the E]iistles of Paul. Such may fairly be reckoned the fol- lowing: Kiipiiy^iari '<) tTrarrtv^)])' tyoj (i,3): the quota- tion from a heathen poet (ver. 12); the use of aCoiciixng (ver. 16) ; the "'going off at a word" (awrrjpog . . . liri- (pdi'7} yap . . . (Twri'ipiog . . . ii, 10, 11); and the modes in which the doctrines of the atonement (ver. 13) and of free justification (iii, 5-7) come to the surface. As to any difficulty arising from supposed indications of ad- vanced hierarchical arrangements, it is to be observed that in this epistle Trptcrfti'Tipog and ^ninKOTroQ are used as synonymous (Vra KaTaaTi^ayg TrptafivripuvQ . . . fit yap Tov tTnaKOTTov. . . . i, 5, 7), just as they are in the address at Miletus about the year A.D. 55 (Acts xx, 17, 28). At tlie same time, this epistle has features of its own, especially a certain tone of abruptness and se- verity, which probably arises partly out of the circum-
TITUS, EPISTLE TO
441
TITUS, EPISTLE TO
stances of the Cretan population [see Crete], partly out of the character of Titus himself. If all these things are put together, the phenomena sre seen to be very unlike what would be presented by a forgery, to say nothing of the general overwhelming difficulty of im- agining who could have been the writer of the Pastoral Epistles, if it were not Paul himself.
To the objections of the German critics, founded upon the difficulty of ascertaining the proper date of this epis- tle, the best reply will be furnished by ascertaining, if possible, when and where the epistle was written (see below); but even shouUl we fail in this, it would be strange were we to relinquish our conviction of the au- thenticity of an ancient writing simjily because, possess- ing very imperfect information as to many parts of the alleged author's history, we were unable to say with cer- tainty when he was in circumstances to compose it.
II. Date. — The only circumstances stated in the epis- tle itself calculated to aid us in determining this ques- tion are, that at the time it was written Paul had re- cently visited Crete (i, 5) ; that he was about to spend the winter in Nicopolis (iii, 12); and that ApoUos was abt)ut to visit Crete, on his way to some other place (ver. 13). There are three hypotheses that have been formed in order to meet these facts, especially the first, namely Paul's visit to Crete.
1. ^Ve learn from the Acts of the Apostles that Paul visited Crete on his voyage to Rome (xxvii,7); but the shortness of his visit at that time, the circumstances imder which it was made, and the improbability of his expecting to spend the ensuing winter at Nicopolis, place it out of the question to suppose that it was to this visit he refers in this epistle. As this is, however, the only visit recorded by Lidie, in rejecting it we are forced to suppose another visit, and to tind some period in the apostle's life when it was probable that such a visit was paid.
2. It has been thought by Ilug that the period re- ferred to in Acts xviii, 18, 19 admits of our placing this visit to Crete within it. Paul, at that time, was on his journey from Corinth to Palestine, but on some account or other laiuled at Ephesus. This leads to the sugges- tion that the apostle must either voluntarily have de- parted from the usual course in order to visit some place lying between Corinth and Ephesus; or that he must have been driven by stress of weather from the course he meant to pursue. In either case the probability of his visiting Crete at that time is strong. We tind, from the above statement made by Paul in this epistle, that Apollos, if at this time on his way from Ephesus to Corinth (Acts xviii, 24, 27; xix, 1), was to touch at Crete; wliich, it has been assumed, renders it not im- probable that it was customary for ships sailing between these two ports to call at Crete by the way; and Paid may have availed himself of this practice in order to visit Crete before going to Palestine. Or he may have sailed in a ship bound directly from Corinth to Pales- tine, and have been driven out of his course, shipwreck- ed on Crete, and obliged to sail thence to Ephesus as his only remaining method of getting to his original destination — a supposition which will not appear very improbable when we rememljer that Paul must have suffered several shipwrecks of which Luke gives no ac- coimt (2 Cor. xi, 25, 26) ; and that his getting to Ephe- sus on his way from Corinth to Palestine is a fact for which, in some way or other, we are bound to account. (Paul evidently, however, took that route as the only one of general travel, there being no vessel sailing di- rect from Corinth to Cresarea or Antioch.) It was while staying on this occasion at Ephesus that Hug supposes Paul to have written this epistle.