Part Fifty Two – Examination of Titus & Philemon Ethiopian Tewahedo Orthodox and King James

Watch this on Rumble: https://rumble.com/v7h9ev2-part-fifty-two-examination-of-titus-and-philemon-ethiopian-tewahedo-orthodo.html

Opening – When Faith Becomes Action

Welcome back to Cause Before Symptom, where we don't chase symptoms—we test the cause against Scripture. Tonight we continue our examination of the Ethiopian Tewahedo Orthodox Bible alongside the 1611 King James Bible, and we have reached two of Paul's shortest letters: Titus and Philemon.

At first glance, these letters seem to address entirely different subjects. Titus concerns the organization of the church, the qualifications of its leaders, false teachers, sound doctrine, and good works. Philemon concerns a personal relationship involving an enslaved man named Onesimus, his master Philemon, and Paul's appeal for reconciliation.

But I believe there is a connection between these letters that deserves our attention.

In our examination of First and Second Timothy, Paul repeatedly instructed Timothy to guard what had been entrusted to him. He warned that people would depart from the faith, abandon sound doctrine, and maintain a form of godliness while denying its power. His final testimony was remarkably simple: “I have fought a good fight, I have finished my course, I have kept the faith.”

Now Paul writes to Titus, and the question changes slightly.

What does keeping the faith actually look like?

Paul begins Titus by describing the knowledge of truth that accords with godliness. He instructs Titus to appoint elders, confront false teachers, and teach believers how to conduct themselves. But throughout the letter, something becomes increasingly apparent. Paul refuses to separate sound doctrine from the behavior it produces.

In Titus 1:16, Paul describes people who profess to know God but deny Him through their works. That is a remarkable accusation. Their profession and their conduct contradict one another.

Then in Titus 2:7, Paul tells Titus to become a pattern of good works. In Titus 2:14, he describes Christ as redeeming and purifying a people zealous for good works. And in Titus 3:8, he insists that those who believe in God should be careful to maintain good works.

Yet Paul also says something that might initially sound contradictory.

In Titus 3:5, he declares that God saved us “not by works of righteousness which we have done, but according to His mercy.”

So which is it?

Are good works necessary, or are they not?

That is one of the questions we will examine by comparing the actual wording of our two biblical witnesses.

Then we reach Philemon.

Paul writes concerning Onesimus, a man whose relationship with Philemon involved slavery. Instead of merely issuing an order, Paul appeals to Philemon through love. He asks him to receive Onesimus not merely as a servant, but as a beloved brother.

And here our comparison becomes particularly interesting.

The Ethiopian translation uses the word “slave,” while the King James uses “servant.” Those words can create very different impressions for a modern audience. We need to understand the historical relationship before deciding what Paul's appeal means.

Did Paul command Philemon to free Onesimus? Did he ask him to forgive him? Was Paul challenging an existing social arrangement, or asking Christians to transform how they treated one another within it?

We will examine what the letter actually says without adding commands Paul never wrote.

And throughout tonight's examination, we will follow the same method we have established in this series. The Ethiopian Bible Restoration Project translation will stand beside the actual 1611 King James. Where the differences involve older English, we will explain them. Where wording changes the way a passage may be understood, we will examine that carefully.

Because Titus and Philemon bring us to a question that reaches beyond church leadership, theology, and religious arguments.

If someone could not hear what we say about Jesus Christ, would they recognize our faith by the way we live?

That is what we are examining tonight.

Not merely whether we know the truth.

But whether the truth has changed us.

Investigation 1 – Titus 1:1–9 – “Appoint Elders in Every City”

Paul begins his letter to Titus by identifying himself as a servant of God and an apostle of Jesus Christ. But notice how he describes the purpose of his calling. The Ethiopian translation connects faith with “the knowledge of the truth which accords with godliness.” The 1611 King James uses the expression “the acknowledging of the truth which is after godliness.” The language differs, but the connection is the same. Truth and godliness belong together. Paul does not describe knowledge as something separate from the life it produces.

He continues by speaking of the hope of eternal life, which God, who cannot lie, promised before the world began. Both witnesses preserve this remarkable declaration about God's character. Before Paul gives Titus any instructions concerning church government, he establishes that the message comes from a God who cannot lie. The reliability of the teaching rests upon the character of the One who promised it.

Paul then addresses Titus as his own son according to their common faith. The Ethiopian translation makes the relationship understandable to modern readers, while the King James uses the older expression “mine own son after the common faith.” This is spiritual fatherhood, not a claim that Titus is Paul's biological child.

Then we reach the reason Titus has been left in Crete. Paul tells him to set in order the things that remain unfinished and to appoint elders in every city. The King James uses the older expression “ordain elders in every city.” That difference deserves attention because modern readers may associate ordination with a particular ceremony or institutional structure. Both passages describe Titus being entrusted with establishing qualified leadership among the churches.

But what qualifications does Paul actually require?

He begins with the word “blameless.” The man must be the husband of one wife, with children who are faithful and not accused of disorderly living or rebellion. The Ethiopian translation and the King James preserve essentially the same requirements. Paul is not beginning with education, influence, wealth, or popularity. He begins with the man's character and household.

Then Paul moves from the word “elder” to “bishop.” The Ethiopian translation describes the bishop as a steward of God, while the King James uses the same basic description. This is important because Paul is discussing the same leadership appointment rather than introducing an entirely separate list of qualifications for another office.

And the word “steward” matters.

A steward manages something entrusted to him. He is not the owner. If a bishop is God's steward, the church does not belong to the bishop. It belongs to God.

Paul continues by describing what such a man must not be. He must not be self-willed, quick-tempered, given to wine, violent, or greedy for dishonest gain. Instead, he must be hospitable, a lover of good, sober-minded, just, holy, and self-controlled.

Then comes the qualification that connects this chapter to our entire investigation.

The Ethiopian translation says the overseer must hold firmly to the faithful word as he has been taught, so that he may encourage others through sound doctrine and convince those who oppose it.

The 1611 King James says he must hold fast “the faithful word as he hath been taught,” so that he may exhort by sound doctrine and convince “the gainsayers.”

“Gainsayers” is an older English word describing people who contradict or oppose what is being taught. The Ethiopian wording makes that meaning clearer for a modern audience. The central requirement is not that a leader win arguments. He must know the teaching well enough to explain it, defend it, and correct opposition faithfully.

That gives us our first important finding in Titus.

Paul does not separate sound doctrine from sound character. The same man who teaches truth must demonstrate self-control, hospitality, justice, holiness, and responsibility in his own household.

A man may know the Scriptures and still lack the character Paul requires of an overseer.

And a man may possess authority without being qualified to exercise it.

Paul's standard is not simply whether someone can lead.

It is whether that person can be trusted with something that belongs to God.

Investigation 2 – Titus 1:10–16 – “They Profess That They Know God”

Paul has just instructed Titus to appoint elders who are blameless, self-controlled, hospitable, and capable of defending sound doctrine. Now he explains why those qualifications matter. The Ethiopian translation says, “For there are many unruly and vain talkers and deceivers, especially they of the circumcision.” The 1611 King James preserves essentially the same warning. Paul is describing people who speak with religious authority but whose teaching produces deception rather than truth.

Then Paul makes a severe statement. The Ethiopian translation says these teachers “subvert whole households, teaching things which they ought not, for the sake of dishonest gain.” The King James describes them as teaching things they ought not “for filthy lucre's sake.” That older expression refers to shameful or dishonest financial gain. Here the Ethiopian wording helps a modern reader understand the accusation. These teachers are not merely mistaken. Paul says their teaching is damaging families, and financial motives are involved.

But notice something important. Paul does not condemn everyone who asks questions or disagrees with a church leader. His accusation concerns people who deceive, disrupt households, and exploit religion for gain. The behavior matters because it helps explain why Titus has been instructed to correct them.

Then we reach one of the most controversial statements in the letter. Paul quotes someone he identifies as a prophet of the Cretans themselves: “The Cretans are always liars, evil beasts, lazy gluttons.” The 1611 King James uses “slow bellies” instead of “lazy gluttons.” The Ethiopian wording communicates the insult more clearly to modern readers, while the King James preserves an older expression concerning idleness and excessive appetite.

The saying is traditionally associated with Epimenides, an ancient Cretan figure. But we need to distinguish Paul's use of the quotation from a claim that every person living on Crete possessed those characteristics. Paul is confronting a particular problem among the churches, and he introduces an existing criticism of Cretan behavior to reinforce his warning.

Then Paul says something even stronger: “This witness is true. Therefore rebuke them sharply, that they may be sound in the faith.” Both witnesses preserve this instruction. We should not soften what Paul wrote, but we should also notice the purpose of the rebuke. He does not say to rebuke them sharply so they can be humiliated or destroyed. He says the objective is that they become sound in the faith.

Correction is supposed to serve restoration.

Paul continues by warning against Jewish fables and commandments of men who turn away from the truth. This resembles what we examined in Timothy, where religious arguments, genealogies, and misused teaching threatened to replace the simplicity of the gospel.

Then comes another statement that requires careful attention: “Unto the pure all things are pure.” The Ethiopian translation and King James preserve essentially the same declaration. But Paul immediately contrasts this with people whose minds and consciences are defiled. He is not saying that every action becomes righteous merely because someone considers himself pure. The surrounding passage concerns corrupted teaching, hypocrisy, and a conscience that no longer judges things correctly.

And then we reach the sentence that may explain the entire chapter.

The Ethiopian translation says, “They profess that they know God; but in works they deny Him.” The King James preserves the same accusation.

Think about what Paul is saying.

These people have a profession of faith. They speak about God. They may possess religious knowledge and claim spiritual authority. Yet Paul says their conduct contradicts their profession.

This brings us directly back to the qualifications for church leadership. Paul did not begin with a man's ability to speak because speaking alone proves very little. He began with character, self-control, honesty, hospitality, and the management of one's household.

And now we understand why.

A person can teach about God without living as though he knows Him.

A person can defend doctrine while violating the very principles that doctrine teaches.

The Ethiopian translation and the 1611 King James agree on the central warning. The meaningful differences here are largely expressions such as “dishonest gain” and “filthy lucre,” or “lazy gluttons” and “slow bellies.”

But the message itself is unmistakable.

Paul is warning Titus that religious profession is not sufficient evidence of faithfulness.

Because according to Paul, a person can profess to know God while denying Him through the way he lives.

Investigation 3 – Titus 2:1–10 – “Speak the Things Which Become Sound Doctrine”

Paul has just warned Titus about people who profess to know God but deny Him through their works. Now chapter 2 begins with a direct contrast. The Ethiopian translation says, “But as for you, speak the things which are fitting for sound doctrine.” The 1611 King James reads, “But speak thou the things which become sound doctrine.” The older word “become” means to be suitable or appropriate. Both witnesses connect sound teaching with the conduct that should accompany it.

Paul begins with older men. The Ethiopian translation instructs them to be sober, dignified, self-controlled, and sound in faith, love, and endurance. The King James uses older expressions, including “grave,” “temperate,” “charity,” and “patience.” These are not necessarily competing doctrines. “Grave” describes seriousness or dignity, “charity” communicates love, and “patience” can include steadfast endurance. The Ethiopian wording makes Paul's expectations easier to understand without substantially changing them.

Then Paul addresses older women. The Ethiopian translation says they should be reverent in behavior, not slanderers, not given to much wine, and teachers of what is good. The King James uses the expression “in behaviour as becometh holiness” and warns against being “false accusers.” Again, the two witnesses are describing the same kind of character. But notice that Paul explicitly gives these women a teaching responsibility. They are to teach what is good and train younger women.

That brings us to Titus 2:4–5, where interpretation becomes more complicated. Paul instructs younger women to love their husbands and children, exercise self-control, maintain purity, and care for their households. The Ethiopian translation uses the word “homemakers,” while the King James says “keepers at home.” Those expressions can create different impressions today. “Keepers at home” may sound like a prohibition against women participating in life outside the household, while “homemakers” emphasizes responsibility for the home. Neither expression, by itself, establishes that Paul forbids every form of employment or activity outside the household.

But we should not ignore the rest of the instruction. Both witnesses also preserve the requirement concerning submission to their own husbands. Paul connects these household responsibilities with his concern that the word of God not be discredited. The passage reflects a particular social setting, but the text itself must remain visible before we attempt to decide how its instructions apply today.

Paul then addresses younger men, telling Titus to encourage them to be self-controlled. Interestingly, Paul gives younger men a shorter direct instruction here than he gives the other groups. But he immediately turns toward Titus himself, telling him to become an example of good works, sound teaching, seriousness, and speech that cannot reasonably be condemned.

The Ethiopian translation speaks of showing a pattern of good works. The King James also uses “a pattern of good works.” This connects directly with the warning in chapter 1. Titus must not become another religious teacher whose profession and conduct contradict one another.

Then Paul addresses servants. The Ethiopian translation and King James preserve instructions that servants should obey their masters, avoid answering back, refrain from stealing, and demonstrate faithfulness. This is a difficult passage because it addresses people living within an institution of slavery rather than directly commanding that institution's abolition.

We must distinguish what Paul actually instructs from what later generations have argued about slavery. The passage regulates conduct within an existing social arrangement. It does not, in these verses, explicitly command masters to release enslaved people.

Yet Paul ends this section with a remarkable purpose. Their conduct should “adorn the doctrine of God our Savior in all things.” Both witnesses preserve that expression.

The word “adorn” means to make something attractive or fitting through one's conduct. Paul is not suggesting that good behavior makes God's truth more truthful. He is saying that the way believers live can either commend the teaching they profess or bring it into disrepute.

That is the thread connecting every group in this chapter.

Older men must demonstrate maturity. Older women must demonstrate reverence and teach what is good. Younger women and younger men must exercise self-control. Titus must become an example. Servants are instructed to demonstrate faithfulness.

And all of it begins with the command to speak what is fitting for sound doctrine.

Paul's argument is that Christianity cannot remain merely a collection of correct statements. If the teaching is sound, the conduct of those who profess it should increasingly reflect that truth.

In the next passage, Paul explains why.

Because the grace of God does not merely offer salvation.

Paul says that grace also teaches us how to live.

Investigation 4 – Titus 2:11–15 – “The Great God and Our Savior Jesus Christ”

Paul has just instructed Titus concerning older men, older women, younger believers, and servants. Every group has been given instructions about conduct, self-control, and faithfulness. Now Paul explains what stands behind those instructions. The Ethiopian translation says, “For the grace of God that brings salvation has appeared to all men.” The 1611 King James reads, “For the grace of God that bringeth salvation hath appeared to all men.” The language has changed over four centuries, but the declaration remains the same. Salvation begins with the grace of God.

Then Paul says something that deserves our attention. The Ethiopian translation continues, “Teaching us that, denying ungodliness and worldly lusts, we should live soberly, righteously, and godly in this present world.” The King James preserves essentially the same instruction. Grace is not presented merely as forgiveness for what someone has already done. Paul describes grace as something that teaches believers how to live.

That matters because we have already encountered Paul's repeated emphasis on good works. He is not teaching that people purchase salvation through obedience. Instead, he describes God's grace as the foundation for a transformed life. The order matters. Grace appears, grace teaches, and believers are called to reject ungodliness and live differently.

Paul also makes the timing important. He says believers should live this way “in this present world.” He does not tell Titus to wait until Christ returns before righteousness becomes relevant. The transformation is supposed to begin now, in the world where believers actually live.

Then we reach Titus 2:13, one of the most important passages in this examination.

The Ethiopian translation reads, “Looking for that blessed hope, and the glorious appearing of our great God and Savior, Jesus Christ.” The 1611 King James reads, “Looking for that blessed hope, and the glorious appearing of the great God and our Saviour Jesus Christ.”

Notice the difference. The Ethiopian wording identifies Jesus Christ directly as “our great God and Savior.” The King James uses “the great God and our Saviour Jesus Christ,” an expression that can sound to modern ears as though two persons are being described.

But we must be careful. A difference in English phrasing does not automatically establish a difference in doctrine. The underlying Greek construction is commonly understood as referring to one person, Jesus Christ, under both descriptions. The King James wording can also be read that way. Therefore, we should not claim that one witness declares Christ's deity while the other denies it.

What we can say is that the Ethiopian translation makes the identification more immediately apparent to a modern English reader.

Then Paul continues with the words “Who gave Himself for us.” Both witnesses connect the appearing of Jesus Christ with His self-giving sacrifice. Paul says Christ gave Himself to redeem people from all iniquity and purify for Himself a people who belong to Him.

And then comes the phrase that connects the entire chapter together: “zealous of good works.”

The Ethiopian translation and the King James preserve this declaration. Christ did not merely redeem people so they could claim a religious identity. Paul says He redeemed and purified a people who would become eager to do what is good.

This brings us back to the question we raised in the opening. Are good works necessary, or are they not? Paul is beginning to answer that question by distinguishing the source of salvation from the life salvation is intended to produce. Grace is the source. Christ is the Redeemer. Good works are part of the transformed life Paul expects to follow.

Finally, Paul tells Titus to speak these things, exhort, and rebuke with all authority. He adds, “Let no man despise you.” The King James preserves the same charge. Titus is not being instructed to invent his own standards of righteousness. He is being told to teach what Paul has just explained.

And look at the progression.

The grace of God brings salvation. That grace teaches believers to reject ungodliness. Believers live in expectation of Christ's appearing. Christ gave Himself to redeem and purify a people zealous for good works.

That is Paul's understanding of the relationship between grace and obedience.

Grace does not make godliness unnecessary.

According to Paul, grace teaches us to become godly.

Investigation 5 – Titus 3:1–8 – “Not by Works of Righteousness”

Paul has just explained that the grace of God brings salvation and teaches believers to reject ungodliness. Now, in Titus chapter 3, he takes that teaching into public life. The Ethiopian translation begins, “Remind them to be subject to rulers and authorities, to obey, to be ready for every good work.” The 1611 King James says, “Put them in mind to be subject to principalities and powers, to obey magistrates, to be ready to every good work.” The older English refers to governing authorities, not spiritual principalities in this context. Both witnesses instruct believers to respect civil authority while remaining prepared to do good.

But Paul does not stop with obedience. He says believers should speak evil of no one, avoid quarrels, demonstrate gentleness, and show humility toward all people. The Ethiopian translation uses “to avoid quarreling, to be gentle,” while the King James says “to be no brawlers, but gentle.” The meaning is essentially the same. Christianity should influence how believers speak, disagree, and respond to others.

Then Paul reminds Titus of something important. Christians were not always different from the people they might now be tempted to condemn. He says, “For we ourselves were once foolish, disobedient, deceived.” Both witnesses preserve this confession. Paul describes people enslaved by desires and pleasures, living in malice and envy, hateful and hating one another.

Notice that Paul includes himself. He does not place believers above everyone else as though they had never needed mercy. Instead, he reminds them of the condition from which they were rescued.

Then comes the turning point in Titus 3:4. The Ethiopian translation says, “But when the kindness and love of God our Savior appeared.” The King James uses the expression “the kindness and love of God our Saviour toward man appeared.” The wording differs slightly, but both describe salvation as originating in God's kindness rather than human achievement.

Now we reach Titus 3:5, one of the most important statements in the entire letter.

The Ethiopian translation says, “not by works of righteousness that we had done, but according to His mercy He saved us, through the washing of regeneration and renewing of the Holy Spirit.”

The 1611 King James reads, “Not by works of righteousness which we have done, but according to his mercy he saved us, by the washing of regeneration, and renewing of the holy Ghost.”

There is no substantial disagreement between these witnesses about the source of salvation. Both explicitly reject the idea that people save themselves through righteous works. Both attribute salvation to God's mercy. Both describe regeneration and renewal through the Spirit.

The differences are largely matters of English expression. “Holy Ghost” and “Holy Spirit” refer to the same Spirit. The words “by” and “through” express the means by which Paul describes God's saving work. Neither translation changes the central declaration.

But what does Paul mean by “washing of regeneration”?

The passage connects washing with regeneration, meaning new birth or renewal of life. Christians have historically debated the precise relationship between this language and baptism. Some understand the washing as directly referring to baptism, while others emphasize the inward cleansing accomplished by the Holy Spirit. Both translations preserve the expression, so the disagreement cannot be resolved merely by comparing their English wording.

Paul continues by saying that God poured out the Holy Spirit abundantly through Jesus Christ our Savior. Then he explains the result: believers are justified by grace and become heirs according to the hope of eternal life.

And now something remarkable happens.

After declaring that salvation does not come through works of righteousness, Paul immediately instructs those who believe in God to devote themselves to good works.

The Ethiopian translation says believers should “be careful to devote themselves to good works.” The King James says they should “be careful to maintain good works.”

This is not necessarily a contradiction. Paul is distinguishing the cause of salvation from the conduct that should follow it.

Good works do not purchase God's mercy. God's mercy calls believers into a new way of living.

This brings together everything we have examined in Titus so far. Paul expects leaders to demonstrate good character. He expects teachers to practice what they preach. He expects believers to live with self-control, kindness, and faithfulness.

Yet he insists that none of those things earns salvation.

The foundation is God's mercy.

The result should be a transformed life.

And perhaps that is the distinction Paul wants Titus to understand. Christianity is not a system in which people perform enough good deeds to persuade God to save them. It is a faith in which people receive God's mercy and are then instructed to live in a manner consistent with that mercy.

We are not saved because we have become righteous enough to deserve salvation.

According to Paul, we are saved by mercy, and that mercy should change how we live.

Investigation 6 – Titus 3:9–15 – “Reject a Divisive Person”

Paul has just explained that salvation comes through God's mercy, not through works of righteousness. Yet he immediately instructs believers to devote themselves to good works. Now, as he approaches the conclusion of his letter to Titus, he identifies another danger that can prevent a church from living according to that teaching.

The Ethiopian translation says, “But avoid foolish controversies, genealogies, dissensions, and quarrels about the law, for they are unprofitable and worthless.” The 1611 King James reads, “But avoid foolish questions, and genealogies, and contentions, and strivings about the law; for they are unprofitable and vain.”

Notice the differences. “Foolish controversies” replaces “foolish questions.” “Dissensions” corresponds to “contentions.” “Quarrels about the law” expresses what the King James calls “strivings about the law.” And the Ethiopian translation's “worthless” communicates the older English word “vain.”

These are differences in expression rather than substantial differences in teaching.

But we should ask what Paul is actually condemning. Is he telling Christians never to question religious authorities? Is he saying that examining Scripture is dangerous? Is he forbidding believers from investigating historical claims or challenging an interpretation?

The passage does not say those things.

Paul identifies disputes that have become foolish, contentious, and unprofitable. The problem is not the pursuit of truth. It is controversy that produces division without leading people toward truth or godliness.

Then we arrive at Titus 3:10, where the difference in wording becomes especially important.

The Ethiopian translation says, “Reject a divisive person after a first and second warning.”

The 1611 King James says, “A man that is an heretick after the first and second admonition reject.”

That word “heretick” deserves examination.

Today, many people associate heresy with holding a religious belief that differs from an established church's official doctrine. Throughout history, the accusation of heresy has sometimes been used to silence disagreement or punish people who challenged religious institutions.

But the Greek word behind this passage, *hairetikos*, is associated with factionalism and the creation of divisions. In the immediate context, Paul has been warning against quarrels and contentions that damage the community.

The Ethiopian translation's “divisive person” therefore makes the behavioral concern more apparent to a modern reader. The King James preserves an older English religious term whose meaning has developed considerably over time.

That does not mean Paul is indifferent to false teaching. The first chapter of Titus explicitly instructs elders to defend sound doctrine and correct those who oppose it. But here Paul is addressing someone who persists in creating harmful division despite correction.

And there is another detail we cannot overlook.

Paul requires a first and second warning.

He does not tell Titus to reject someone immediately because that person asks an uncomfortable question or disagrees with an elder. The instruction includes an opportunity for correction before separation.

Then Paul says such a person is warped, sinful, and self-condemned. The King James describes the person as “subverted,” sinning, and “condemned of himself.” The Ethiopian wording communicates the same judgment in more familiar English.

The emphasis is on persistent conduct after admonition.

Paul then turns from church conflict to ordinary responsibilities. He tells Titus that he intends to send Artemas or Tychicus and asks Titus to meet him at Nicopolis, where Paul has decided to spend the winter.

These details remind us that the letter was written within an actual network of believers who traveled, worked, and depended upon one another. This was not merely a collection of abstract theological statements.

Then Paul mentions Zenas the lawyer and Apollos, instructing Titus to help them on their journey so that they lack nothing.

And once again, good works return to the center of the discussion.

The Ethiopian translation says, “And let our people learn to devote themselves to good works to meet pressing needs, so that they may not be unfruitful.”

The King James reads, “And let ours also learn to maintain good works for necessary uses, that they be not unfruitful.”

This is a fitting conclusion to the letter. Paul has spent three chapters describing sound doctrine, qualified leadership, proper conduct, grace, mercy, and the danger of destructive controversy.

But his final practical instruction concerns meeting people's needs.

The church must not become so consumed with religious arguments that it neglects the people who require help.

Paul does not tell Titus to abandon doctrine in favor of good works. Nor does he tell him to defend doctrine while ignoring good works.

He insists upon both.

And perhaps the contrast between “heretick” and “divisive person” is one of the most useful discoveries in this chapter. It reminds us that an old religious word can acquire associations that go beyond the immediate meaning of the passage.

Before condemning someone as a heretic, we should examine what Paul actually describes: persistent factionalism, unprofitable disputes, and refusal to respond to correction.

Titus ends with greetings and a blessing of grace.

And that is where Paul leaves us.

Sound doctrine must be defended, but arguments must not become the purpose of the faith.

Because a church can spend its days winning disputes and still fail to meet the needs of the people standing outside its doors.

Investigation 7 – Philemon 1:1–7 – “The Sharing of Your Faith”

We have completed Paul's letter to Titus, where he repeatedly insisted that sound doctrine must produce good works. Now we turn to Philemon, one of the shortest letters in the New Testament. And something remarkable happens. Paul moves from instructing churches about how Christians should live to addressing a particular man whose faith is about to be tested through a personal relationship.

The Ethiopian translation begins, “Paul, a prisoner of Christ Jesus, and Timothy our brother, to Philemon our beloved friend and fellow laborer.” The 1611 King James introduces Paul as “a prisoner of Jesus Christ” and addresses Philemon as “our dearly beloved, and fellowlabourer.” The wording differs slightly, but the relationship is unmistakable. Paul is writing to someone he knows, respects, and considers a partner in the work of the gospel.

Notice that Paul introduces himself as a prisoner rather than emphasizing his authority as an apostle. That choice becomes important as the letter develops. He could appeal to his position, but instead he begins with a reminder of his circumstances and his relationship with Philemon.

Paul also addresses Apphia, Archippus, and the church meeting in Philemon's house. The Ethiopian translation calls Apphia “our sister,” while the King James uses the older expression “our beloved Apphia.” The Ethiopian text describes Archippus as “our fellow soldier,” and the King James preserves the same designation.

This tells us that the letter concerns more than one man's private beliefs. Philemon's household is also a gathering place for Christians. Whatever Paul is about to request will involve someone whose conduct is visible within a community of believers.

Then Paul offers his familiar greeting of grace and peace from God the Father and the Lord Jesus Christ.

In verse 4, Paul says he continually thanks God when remembering Philemon in his prayers. The Ethiopian translation expresses this directly: “I thank my God always when I remember you in my prayers.” The King James says, “I thank my God, making mention of thee always in my prayers.”

The difference is simply the older English construction. Both witnesses describe Paul praying for Philemon with gratitude.

And why is Paul thankful?

Verse 5 explains that he has heard of Philemon's love and faith toward the Lord Jesus and all the saints. The Ethiopian translation and King James preserve this testimony. Philemon is not introduced as a man without faith or compassion. Paul begins by acknowledging that this man already has a reputation for loving other believers.

Then we arrive at verse 6, where the comparison becomes especially interesting.

The Ethiopian translation says, “I pray that the sharing of your faith may become effective by the acknowledgment of every good thing that is in us in Christ Jesus.”

The 1611 King James says, “That the communication of thy faith may become effectual by the acknowledging of every good thing which is in you in Christ Jesus.”

At first glance, “communication of thy faith” might sound as though Paul is speaking about preaching, conversation, or explaining Christian beliefs to someone else.

But the older English word “communication” could express sharing or participation. The underlying Greek word, *koinōnia*, is also associated with fellowship, partnership, and participation.

The Ethiopian translation's “sharing of your faith” therefore helps a modern reader recognize a meaning that might otherwise be overlooked.

Paul is not merely interested in whether Philemon can communicate information about Christianity. He is praying that Philemon's participation in the faith will become effective through recognizing the good that belongs to life in Christ.

There is also a smaller difference worth observing. The Ethiopian translation reads “every good thing that is in us,” while the King James says “every good thing which is in you.” That difference in pronouns affects whether the statement sounds more collective or personally directed toward Philemon. It is a genuine wording distinction, although it does not change the letter's central appeal.

Then Paul says that Philemon's love has brought him great joy and consolation because the hearts of the saints have been refreshed through him.

Both witnesses preserve this beautiful testimony.

Philemon has already demonstrated kindness. Other believers have benefited from his love. Paul knows this, and he acknowledges it before introducing the difficult request that follows.

And that is what makes this opening so important.

Paul is not writing to someone who openly rejects Christianity. He is writing to a believer with a reputation for faith, love, and hospitality.

But the next part of the letter will reveal whether that love extends to a person whose relationship with Philemon has become complicated.

The question is no longer simply whether Philemon believes in Jesus Christ.

The question is whether his faith will influence how he treats another human being.

And that brings us directly back to Titus.

Sound doctrine must produce good works.

Now Paul is about to ask Philemon to demonstrate what that teaching looks like when forgiveness, personal interests, and another person's dignity are involved.

Investigation 8 – Philemon 1:8–16 – “No Longer as a Slave, but a Beloved Brother”

Paul has just praised Philemon for his faith, love, and the way he has refreshed the hearts of other believers. Now we discover why he has written this letter. A man named Onesimus stands at the center of a difficult situation, and Paul is asking Philemon to reconsider how he receives him.

The Ethiopian translation begins verse 8 by expressing Paul's confidence that he could be bold in Christ and command what is appropriate. The 1611 King James says, “Wherefore, though I might be much bold in Christ to enjoin thee that which is convenient.” The older word “convenient” means fitting or proper, not simply something easy or comfortable.

But Paul does not issue the command.

Instead, he says he would rather appeal on the basis of love. The King James reads, “Yet for love's sake I rather beseech thee.” The Ethiopian translation communicates the same decision in more familiar language.

This is our first important observation. Paul believes he has authority to direct Philemon, yet he chooses to appeal to his love rather than merely demand obedience.

He identifies himself as Paul the aged and a prisoner of Jesus Christ. His circumstances matter. He is writing from confinement, without the freedom to visit Philemon and resolve the matter in person. Yet he is using the influence he still possesses to advocate for someone else.

Then Paul introduces Onesimus.

The Ethiopian translation says, “I appeal to you for my child Onesimus, whom I have begotten in my imprisonment.” The King James uses the older expression, “I beseech thee for my son Onesimus, whom I have begotten in my bonds.”

Paul is describing a spiritual relationship. Onesimus has become his son in the faith during Paul's imprisonment. The language does not establish biological parenthood.

Then Paul makes a play on Onesimus's name, which is associated with usefulness or benefit. He says that Onesimus was formerly unprofitable to Philemon but is now profitable to both of them.

The Ethiopian wording communicates this contrast as usefulness, while the King James preserves the older terms “unprofitable” and “profitable.”

Paul is saying that something has changed in Onesimus.

But what exactly happened before this letter was written?

We must be careful not to claim more than Scripture tells us. Onesimus had been separated from Philemon, and Paul is sending him back. The letter later raises the possibility that Onesimus wronged Philemon or owed him something. Many readers have therefore understood Onesimus to have been a runaway enslaved man.

That is a plausible historical interpretation, but Paul does not give us a complete account of the circumstances. He does not tell us precisely why Onesimus left, how he encountered Paul, or whether money was actually stolen.

The text gives us a relationship in need of reconciliation, not a complete biography.

Paul then says he is sending Onesimus back, describing him as someone especially dear to him. The King James uses the remarkable expression “mine own bowels,” an older way of speaking about deep affection. The Ethiopian translation communicates that emotional meaning in modern English.

Paul would have preferred to keep Onesimus with him, especially because Onesimus could assist him during his imprisonment. But he refuses to act without Philemon's consent.

And then comes another important principle.

Paul says he does not want Philemon's goodness to be produced by compulsion, but willingly. Both witnesses preserve this distinction.

Think about that in relation to Titus. Paul has repeatedly commanded believers to perform good works. Yet here he shows concern for the willingness of the person doing good. He wants Philemon to act out of genuine love rather than merely surrender to pressure.

Then Paul suggests that perhaps Onesimus was separated from Philemon for a time so that Philemon might receive him forever.

The word “perhaps” matters. Paul offers a possible understanding of events, not a declaration that he knows every detail of God's hidden purpose.

And now we arrive at verse 16.

The Ethiopian translation says Onesimus should be received “no longer as a slave, but more than a slave, a beloved brother.”

The 1611 King James reads, “Not now as a servant, but above a servant, a brother beloved.”

This difference deserves serious attention.

The Greek word *doulos* can refer to an enslaved person or bondservant. In the social world of the Roman Empire, it could describe someone legally subject to another person's ownership. The King James word “servant” may sound less severe to a modern audience, while the Ethiopian translation's “slave” makes that historical reality more apparent.

But we must distinguish Paul's actual request from what we might wish the passage said.

Paul explicitly asks Philemon to receive Onesimus as more than a slave: as a beloved brother. He challenges the way Philemon understands and treats Onesimus. Yet this verse does not contain an explicit command to legally emancipate him.

That distinction matters because Christians have historically disagreed about the implications of this letter for slavery. Some have emphasized its recognition of spiritual brotherhood, while others have criticized the absence of an explicit demand for abolition.

What cannot be overlooked is Paul's insistence that Onesimus is no longer to be regarded merely through his social position.

He is a brother in Christ.

And Paul adds that Onesimus is especially dear to him, but should be even more dear to Philemon, both in the flesh and in the Lord.

The Ethiopian translation and the King James agree on that central appeal.

Here is where the letter becomes deeply personal.

Philemon has been praised for refreshing the hearts of the saints. Now Paul is asking whether that same love will extend to Onesimus.

It is one thing to love the people who have never wronged us.

It is another to welcome someone whose presence may remind us of a debt, a loss, or a broken relationship.

Paul has not yet finished his appeal. In the next passage, he will go further and offer to assume responsibility for whatever Onesimus may owe.

But already the central question is unmistakable.

If Onesimus is now Philemon's brother in Christ, can Philemon continue treating him as though his social status defines his worth?

Paul is asking Philemon to allow the gospel he professes to change the relationship standing directly in front of him.

Investigation 9 – Philemon 1:17–25 – “Put That on My Account”

Paul has just asked Philemon to receive Onesimus no longer merely as a slave, but as a beloved brother. He has appealed to Philemon's love rather than simply exercising his authority as an apostle. Now, in the closing verses of this short letter, Paul takes his appeal even further. He offers to become personally responsible for whatever Onesimus may owe.

The Ethiopian translation says in verse 17, “If then you count me as a partner, receive him as you would me.” The 1611 King James reads, “If thou count me therefore a partner, receive him as myself.”

The wording is remarkably close. The Ethiopian translation simply expresses the instruction in modern English.

But consider what Paul is asking.

Philemon already recognizes Paul as a fellow believer and partner in the gospel. Paul now asks him to extend that same welcome to Onesimus. He is not merely asking Philemon to tolerate the man's return. He is asking Philemon to receive him with the regard he would show Paul himself.

This is a significant request within the social structure of the Roman Empire. Onesimus occupies a position of far less power than Paul or Philemon. Yet Paul places his own relationship with Philemon alongside the reception of Onesimus.

Then comes verse 18.

The Ethiopian translation reads, “But if he has wronged you or owes you anything, charge that to my account.”

The King James says, “If he hath wronged thee, or oweth thee ought, put that on mine account.”

Here we have one of the clearest examples of modernization without a meaningful change in doctrine. “Oweth thee ought” means owes you anything. “Put that on mine account” and “charge that to my account” communicate the same promise.

But notice the conditional language.

Paul says “if” Onesimus has wronged Philemon or owes him anything. He does not provide an inventory of offenses. He does not explicitly accuse Onesimus of stealing money, nor does he tell us precisely what occurred before their separation.

Some historical interpretations describe Onesimus as a runaway slave who may have caused financial loss. That interpretation is possible, but we should not turn the possibility into a documented fact.

What Scripture actually gives us is Paul's willingness to assume responsibility for any outstanding wrong or debt.

Then Paul makes his promise unmistakable.

The Ethiopian translation says, “I, Paul, am writing with my own hand: I will repay.” The King James similarly declares, “I Paul have written it with mine own hand, I will repay it.”

Paul is not merely offering sympathetic words. He is putting his own name behind the promise.

This is where the relationship between forgiveness and restitution becomes important.

Paul is asking Philemon to welcome Onesimus, but he does not simply dismiss the possibility that Philemon has suffered a genuine loss. Instead, he offers to bear that loss himself.

That does not mean every act of forgiveness requires a financial payment. Nor does it mean Paul is establishing a universal rule that someone else must assume every debt. In this particular situation, Paul voluntarily offers to make things right so that the relationship can be restored.

Then he adds a striking reminder: Philemon owes Paul even his own self.

The text does not explain the complete history behind that statement. It strongly suggests that Philemon has received an extraordinary spiritual benefit through Paul, but we should not invent a detailed conversion story that the letter itself does not provide.

Paul's point is relational. He is reminding Philemon that their connection is deeper than an ordinary financial transaction.

In verse 20, Paul asks Philemon to refresh his heart in the Lord. Earlier in the letter, Paul praised Philemon because the hearts of the saints had been refreshed through him. Now Paul asks Philemon to demonstrate that same love in his treatment of Onesimus.

The repetition is important.

Paul is asking Philemon to become the kind of person Paul has already praised him for being.

Then verse 21 says Paul writes with confidence in Philemon's obedience, knowing he will do even more than Paul asks.

What does “even more” mean?

Some readers have understood it as a possible suggestion that Philemon might release Onesimus from slavery altogether. That is a possible interpretation, especially in light of Paul's appeal for brotherhood. But the text does not explicitly say that Philemon emancipated Onesimus, and we should not present that outcome as an established historical fact.

Paul leaves the precise response unstated.

Then he asks Philemon to prepare a guest room because he hopes, through their prayers, to be restored to them. That request adds another dimension to the letter. Paul anticipates the possibility of seeing Philemon again. His appeal is not detached from an ongoing relationship.

The letter closes with greetings from Epaphras, Mark, Aristarchus, Demas, and Luke, followed by a blessing of the grace of the Lord Jesus Christ.

Both witnesses preserve these closing relationships and the final blessing. The differences are primarily older and newer English expressions.

But the central lesson is much larger than a comparison of vocabulary.

Paul has taken the teachings we examined in Titus and placed them into a real human situation.

In Titus, believers are instructed to be gentle, to avoid quarrels, and to devote themselves to good works.

In Philemon, Paul demonstrates what those principles can require when someone has been wronged and another person needs to be welcomed.

He does not deny that a debt may exist.

He does not demand that Philemon pretend nothing happened.

Instead, he offers to carry the cost himself so that reconciliation can become possible.

There is a powerful Christian principle here. Forgiveness does not require pretending that wrongdoing has no consequences. Reconciliation may involve truth, responsibility, restitution, and a willingness to restore dignity to someone whose relationship with us has been damaged.

And Paul's words also invite a comparison with the gospel itself. Christians have long seen an illustration of Christ's reconciling work in Paul's willingness to bear another person's debt.

That is a theological application of the passage, not an explicit statement that Onesimus represents every sinner or that Paul literally occupies the role of Christ.

We should preserve that distinction.

But the application remains meaningful.

Paul is willing to sacrifice something of his own for the sake of another person's restoration.

And that brings us to the question at the center of Philemon.

What does Christian love look like when it becomes costly?

It is easy to speak about forgiveness when nothing has been taken from us.

It is easy to praise reconciliation when we are not the ones who must surrender a claim.

But Paul does more than teach Philemon about love.

He demonstrates love by offering to bear the cost.

And perhaps that is why this small letter belongs beside Titus.

One letter explains that sound doctrine must produce good works.

The other shows us a man putting that doctrine into practice.

Not merely through words.

But through a willingness to pay the price of reconciliation.

Investigation 10 – Overall Comparison – “Can Sound Doctrine Exist Without Love?”

We have now examined all three chapters of Titus and the complete letter to Philemon, comparing the Ethiopian Bible Restoration Project's English text with the 1611 King James Bible. And after examining the wording, the instructions, and the relationships described in these letters, I believe one central question emerges. What good is sound doctrine if the person teaching it refuses to live according to it?

That question begins in Titus chapter 1. Paul instructs Titus to appoint elders in every city, but he does not begin by asking how many followers they have, how eloquently they speak, or how much religious knowledge they possess. He begins with character. The overseer must be blameless, hospitable, self-controlled, just, holy, and faithful to the teaching he has received.

In Titus 1:9, the Ethiopian translation describes those who oppose sound teaching, while the King James calls them “gainsayers.” The older word means those who contradict or speak against something. The difference helps modern readers understand Paul's instruction, but it does not establish a different doctrine.

Then Paul warns about people who profess to know God but deny Him through their works. Both witnesses preserve that accusation. And it establishes a principle that continues through both letters: religious knowledge and religious conduct cannot be separated without creating hypocrisy.

In Titus chapter 2, we encounter several examples of language changing across the centuries. The Ethiopian translation uses “love” where the King James uses “charity,” and “endurance” where the King James uses “patience.” These are largely differences in English expression. The underlying expectations of maturity, self-control, and faithfulness remain recognizable in both witnesses.

Then comes Titus 2:5. The Ethiopian translation uses “homemakers,” while the King James says “keepers at home.” This difference deserves more attention because modern readers may draw different conclusions from the expressions. Both concern responsibility within the household, but neither English phrase alone settles every question about women's work, family responsibilities, or the application of Paul's instructions in a different historical setting.

In Titus 2:13, we encounter one of the most theologically significant comparisons. The Ethiopian translation speaks of “our great God and Savior, Jesus Christ,” while the King James reads “the great God and our Saviour Jesus Christ.”

The Ethiopian wording identifies Jesus more directly as both God and Savior for a modern English reader. But we must not exaggerate the difference. The King James wording can also refer to Jesus Christ under both descriptions. The comparison does not demonstrate that the King James denies Christ's deity.

Then chapter 3 brings us to the relationship between salvation and good works.

Paul explicitly says that God saved believers not because of works of righteousness they had performed, but according to His mercy. The Ethiopian translation uses “Holy Spirit,” while the King James uses “holy Ghost.” These are different English expressions for the same Spirit.

Yet immediately after declaring that salvation comes through mercy, Paul tells believers to devote themselves to good works.

That is not a contradiction when the order is understood.

Good works are not presented as the price of salvation. They are presented as conduct appropriate to people who have received God's mercy.

Then Titus 3:10 introduces another important comparison. The Ethiopian translation says to reject a “divisive person” after a first and second warning. The King James uses the word “heretick.”

Here the modern wording can prevent a misunderstanding. Paul's immediate concern includes persistent factionalism and destructive controversy. The passage should not be reduced to a license for religious authorities to punish anyone who asks questions or challenges an interpretation.

But the comparison must also preserve Paul's concern for sound doctrine. He does not teach that every belief is equally true. He calls for faithful teaching while warning against disputes that destroy fellowship.

Then we arrive at Philemon.

In verse 6, the Ethiopian translation speaks of “the sharing of your faith,” while the King James refers to “the communication of thy faith.” The older English word “communication” could mean sharing or participation. The modern wording helps reveal the connection between faith and fellowship.

And then we reach Onesimus.

The Ethiopian translation says Philemon should receive him “no longer as a slave but more than a slave—a beloved brother.” The King James says, “Not now as a servant, but above a servant, a brother beloved.”

This is one of the most consequential differences for modern understanding. The word “servant” can obscure the reality of slavery in the Roman world. The Ethiopian translation makes that social condition more explicit.

Yet neither wording gives us permission to invent an outcome. Paul appeals for Onesimus to be received as a beloved brother, but the letter does not explicitly record his legal emancipation.

Finally, Paul offers to repay anything Onesimus owes. The Ethiopian translation says, “charge that to my account.” The King James says, “put that on mine account.”

There is no meaningful theological difference in those expressions.

But there is an extraordinary example of faith becoming action.

Paul does not merely instruct Philemon to love Onesimus. He offers to assume a financial obligation himself to help make reconciliation possible.

So what have we actually discovered?

Across Titus and Philemon, the two English witnesses agree on the central teachings. Their differences frequently involve modernization, changes in familiar word meanings, or choices that make particular implications more apparent. Some differences deserve serious interpretation, especially “heretick” and “divisive person,” or “servant” and “slave.” But none of the comparisons we have examined establishes a fundamentally different gospel between these two English texts.

There is also an important boundary to our findings. Comparing these editions tells us what their English wording says. It does not, by itself, independently establish the textual history or Geʽez ancestry of every reading in the Ethiopian restoration edition. Those questions require examination of the underlying manuscripts.

And that distinction is part of doing this investigation responsibly.

Now return to our original question. Can sound doctrine exist without love?

A person can possess accurate information about doctrine while failing to practice love. Paul himself warns about people whose works deny the God they profess to know.

But can that kind of faithfulness satisfy the standard Paul sets before Titus and Philemon?

These letters suggest that it cannot.

Titus teaches that grace should transform conduct. Philemon demonstrates that Christian love may require forgiveness, humility, and personal sacrifice.

One letter explains what a faithful Christian life should look like.

The other places that teaching inside a difficult human relationship.

And perhaps that is the most important discovery of Part Fifty Two.

The truth of Scripture does not become true because we practice it. God's truth does not depend upon our performance.

But when we claim to believe that truth, our conduct becomes evidence of whether we have taken its teaching seriously.

Paul did not ask Philemon merely to agree that Onesimus was his brother.

He asked him to receive Onesimus as his brother.

And there is a world of difference between those two things.

Conclusion – “Faith That Can Be Seen”

Tonight, we have completed Part Fifty Two of our examination of the Ethiopian Tewahedo Orthodox Bible Restoration Project's English translation alongside the 1611 King James Bible. We have examined Titus and Philemon, two short letters that address very different circumstances but arrive at a remarkably similar understanding of the Christian life.

Titus is concerned with establishing faithful leadership, preserving sound doctrine, correcting destructive teaching, and instructing believers in godly conduct. Philemon is concerned with a personal relationship involving Paul, Onesimus, and a man who must decide how his Christian faith will influence his treatment of another human being.

One letter addresses the responsibilities of a church. The other addresses the responsibilities of a believer.

And both bring us back to the same question.

What happens when the faith we profess must become the life we actually live?

Throughout Titus, Paul repeatedly connects sound doctrine with good works. He does not tell Titus to appoint elders merely because they understand theology. He requires men whose character demonstrates self-control, hospitality, honesty, and faithfulness.

He warns about people who profess to know God but deny Him through their works. That statement should concern every Christian, including me. It is possible to become so occupied with defending what we believe that we neglect to examine whether our conduct reflects those beliefs.

And Paul does not leave the answer uncertain.

He explains that the grace of God brings salvation and teaches believers to reject ungodliness. Then, in chapter 3, he makes it clear that salvation is not earned through works of righteousness. It comes through God's mercy.

That distinction matters.

I cannot purchase salvation through good behavior. I cannot accumulate enough righteous acts to place God in my debt. But neither should I treat the mercy of God as permission to disregard the way I live.

Paul describes a grace that changes people.

Then we turned to Philemon, where the teaching became personal.

Paul writes to a man known for his love and faith. He acknowledges the good that Philemon has already done for other believers. But now that love is being tested through Onesimus, a man whose relationship with Philemon involves slavery, separation, and the possibility of an outstanding wrong or debt.

Paul asks Philemon to receive Onesimus as a beloved brother.

And when the possibility of financial loss enters the conversation, Paul offers to repay it himself.

That is a remarkable moment.

Paul could have written a letter filled with instructions about forgiveness while leaving someone else to carry every consequence. Instead, he offers something of his own to help restore a relationship.

There is a difference between explaining love and demonstrating it.

And that difference may be the most important lesson in these two letters.

Our comparison also revealed how older English expressions can influence the way modern readers understand Scripture. Words such as “gainsayers,” “charity,” “heretick,” “communication,” and “servant” deserve examination in their historical context. Sometimes a modern expression makes the meaning clearer. Sometimes a wording difference raises an interpretive question that requires more careful study.

But across Titus and Philemon, we did not find two fundamentally different messages about salvation, faith, or Christian responsibility.

We found two English witnesses repeatedly emphasizing the relationship between God's mercy and the conduct of those who profess to belong to Him.

And that brings me to something I want to leave with you tonight.

I have spent a great deal of time examining Scripture, comparing translations, asking questions, and trying to understand what the biblical authors actually wrote. I believe that work matters. Truth matters. Sound doctrine matters. Paul himself tells Titus to hold firmly to faithful teaching.

But I do not want the pursuit of being correct to become more important than the command to love my neighbor.

Because understanding a passage and obeying its teaching are not the same thing.

I can explain forgiveness and still refuse to forgive.

I can teach generosity and still ignore someone in need.

I can defend the dignity of every human being in a discussion and still fail to show dignity to the person standing in front of me.

And I can speak about the grace of God without extending grace to someone who has disappointed me.

That is why Philemon is such a fitting companion to Titus.

Titus tells us what sound doctrine should produce.

Philemon asks what happens when producing it becomes personally costly.

And perhaps that is the question I should carry into tomorrow.

Not whether I can win another argument.

Not whether everyone agrees with my interpretation.

Not whether I can demonstrate how much Scripture I know.

But whether the truth I have learned is changing the way I treat people.

Jesus taught His disciples to love one another. Paul instructed believers to demonstrate that love through their conduct. And these letters remind us that Christian faith was never intended to remain confined to words.

So tonight, I want to leave you with one final question.

If someone could not hear what we profess to believe, if they never listened to our sermons, never read our articles, and never heard us explain our understanding of Scripture, would they recognize Jesus Christ in the way we treated them?

Would they see patience?

Would they see mercy?

Would they see forgiveness?

Would they see a willingness to help someone who could offer us nothing in return?

Because sound doctrine should not merely produce people who know how to describe the love of God.

It should help produce people who know how to demonstrate it.

And that is where I will leave Part Fifty Two.

Until next time, remember why this program is called Cause Before Symptom.

We do not chase symptoms. We test the cause against Scripture.

And sometimes the cause we need to examine most carefully is not somewhere out in the world.

Sometimes it is within our own hearts.

God bless you, and good night.

Bibliography

• The Ethiopian Bible Restoration Project. The Ethiopian Bible: Geʽez to English. 2025. https://jamescarner.com/.
• The Holy Bible, Conteyning the Old Testament, and the New: Newly Translated out of the Originall Tongues. London: Robert Barker, 1611.
• Barclay, William. The Letters to Timothy, Titus, and Philemon. Revised edition. The Daily Study Bible Series. Philadelphia: Westminster Press, 1975.
• Bruce, F. F. The Epistles to the Colossians, to Philemon, and to the Ephesians. New International Commentary on the New Testament. Grand Rapids, MI: Eerdmans, 1984.
• Dunn, James D. G. The Epistles to the Colossians and to Philemon: A Commentary on the Greek Text. New International Greek Testament Commentary. Grand Rapids, MI: Eerdmans, 1996.
• Fee, Gordon D. 1 and 2 Timothy, Titus. New International Biblical Commentary. Peabody, MA: Hendrickson Publishers, 1988.
• Fitzmyer, Joseph A. The Letter to Philemon: A New Translation with Introduction and Commentary. Anchor Bible 34C. New York: Doubleday, 2000.
• Guthrie, Donald. The Pastoral Epistles: An Introduction and Commentary. Tyndale New Testament Commentaries. Leicester, England: InterVarsity Press, 1990.
• Harrill, J. Albert. Slaves in the New Testament: Literary, Social, and Moral Dimensions. Minneapolis: Fortress Press, 2006.
• Knight, George W., III. The Pastoral Epistles: A Commentary on the Greek Text. New International Greek Testament Commentary. Grand Rapids, MI: Eerdmans, 1992.
• Marshall, I. Howard, with Philip H. Towner. A Critical and Exegetical Commentary on the Pastoral Epistles. International Critical Commentary. Edinburgh: T&T Clark, 1999.
• Mounce, William D. Pastoral Epistles. Word Biblical Commentary 46. Nashville: Thomas Nelson, 2000.
• O'Brien, Peter T. Colossians, Philemon. Word Biblical Commentary 44. Waco, TX: Word Books, 1982.
• Towner, Philip H. The Letters to Timothy and Titus. New International Commentary on the New Testament. Grand Rapids, MI: Eerdmans, 2006.
• Wall, Robert W., and Richard B. Steele. 1 & 2 Timothy and Titus. Two Horizons New Testament Commentary. Grand Rapids, MI: Eerdmans, 2012.
• Witherington, Ben, III. The Letters to Philemon, the Colossians, and the Ephesians: A Socio-Rhetorical Commentary on the Captivity Epistles. Grand Rapids, MI: Eerdmans, 2007.
• Witherington, Ben, III. A Socio-Rhetorical Commentary on Titus, 1–2 Timothy and 1–3 John. Letters and Homilies for Hellenized Christians, Volume 1. Downers Grove, IL: IVP Academic, 2006.

Endnotes

1. Titus 1:1. Paul identifies himself as a servant of God and an apostle of Jesus Christ. Both the Ethiopian restoration edition and the King James connect his ministry with faith, truth, and godliness.
2. Titus 1:1. The Ethiopian translation's “knowledge of the truth” corresponds to the King James expression “acknowledging of the truth.” Both connect knowledge of God with godly living.
3. Titus 1:2. The declaration that God cannot lie establishes the reliability of His promise of eternal life.
4. Titus 1:2–3. Paul distinguishes the promise of eternal life from its manifestation through the preaching entrusted to him.
5. Titus 1:4. The expression “mine own son after the common faith” describes Paul's spiritual relationship with Titus, not biological parenthood.
6. Titus 1:5. Paul's instruction to appoint elders in every city places Titus in a position of responsibility for establishing church leadership in Crete.
7. Titus 1:5. The King James expression “ordain elders” and the Ethiopian edition's similar wording should be interpreted in the context of appointing qualified leaders. The passage does not describe a detailed ordination ceremony.
8. Titus 1:6. The qualification “blameless” introduces Paul's concern for the character and reputation of church leaders.
9. Titus 1:6. “The husband of one wife” is preserved in both witnesses. Christian traditions differ over its precise implications for marriage history and eligibility for church office.
10. Titus 1:6. The requirement concerning faithful children and accusations of disorderly behavior places responsibility for household conduct among the qualifications for leadership.
11. Titus 1:7. Paul moves from “elder” to “bishop” within the same discussion of church appointments. The relationship between these offices developed differently in later Christian traditions.
12. Titus 1:7. The description of a bishop as God's steward emphasizes entrusted responsibility rather than personal ownership of the church.
13. Titus 1:7. Prohibitions against anger, violence, drunkenness, and dishonest gain establish ethical requirements for religious leadership.
14. Titus 1:8. Hospitality, justice, holiness, and self-control are presented as positive qualifications for an overseer.
15. Titus 1:9. The Ethiopian translation's “those who oppose” corresponds to the King James word “gainsayers,” an older English term for opponents or contradictors.
16. Titus 1:9. The Greek verb associated with contradiction is antilegō. The passage concerns the elder's ability to defend sound teaching and answer opposition.
17. Titus 1:9. Paul's instruction joins personal character with doctrinal competence. Neither is presented as sufficient without the other.
18. Titus 1:10. Paul warns about unruly speakers and deceivers, particularly among those associated with the circumcision.
19. Titus 1:11. The Ethiopian expression “dishonest gain” explains the King James phrase “filthy lucre,” which refers to shameful or improper financial profit.
20. Titus 1:11. Paul's accusation concerns teachers who disrupt households and teach improper things for financial gain.
21. Titus 1:12. The saying about Cretans is traditionally associated with Epimenides. Its attribution and surviving literary history should be distinguished from the biblical text itself.
22. Titus 1:12. The Ethiopian translation's “lazy gluttons” corresponds to the King James “slow bellies.” Both express an accusation involving idleness and excessive appetite.
23. Titus 1:12–13. Paul's use of a critical saying about Cretans occurs within a specific argument about false teachers. It should not be transformed into an independent factual judgment about every member of an ethnic or regional population.
24. Titus 1:13. Paul instructs Titus to rebuke sharply so that those being corrected may become sound in the faith. The stated purpose includes correction and restoration.
25. Titus 1:14. The warning against Jewish fables and human commandments concerns teachings that turn people away from the truth.
26. Titus 1:15. “Unto the pure all things are pure” must be interpreted alongside Paul's warning about defiled minds and consciences, rather than as permission for unrestricted behavior.
27. Titus 1:16. Both witnesses preserve Paul's accusation that certain people profess to know God but deny Him through their works.
28. Titus 1:16. The contrast between profession and conduct establishes one of the principal themes connecting Titus and Philemon.
29. Titus 2:1. The King James expression “things which become sound doctrine” uses “become” in the sense of being fitting or appropriate.
30. Titus 2:2. The Ethiopian edition's “dignified” corresponds to the older King James expression “grave.”
31. Titus 2:2. The Ethiopian terms “love” and “endurance” correspond to the King James “charity” and “patience.” These are primarily differences in English expression.
32. Titus 2:3. Older women are instructed to demonstrate reverent behavior and avoid slander and excessive drinking.
33. Titus 2:3–4. Paul's instruction that older women teach what is good assigns them an explicit role in instructing younger women.
34. Titus 2:4. The command to love husbands and children occurs within Paul's broader instructions concerning household conduct.
35. Titus 2:5. The Ethiopian translation's “homemakers” corresponds to the King James expression “keepers at home.”
36. Titus 2:5. The underlying Greek vocabulary concerns domestic responsibility. Its precise implications for modern employment and household arrangements remain matters of interpretation.
37. Titus 2:5. Both witnesses preserve Paul's instruction concerning submission to husbands. The historical setting and later Christian applications should be distinguished from the wording itself.
38. Titus 2:5. Paul connects household conduct with concern that the word of God not be discredited.
39. Titus 2:6. Younger men receive a direct instruction concerning self-control.
40. Titus 2:7. Titus himself is commanded to become an example of good works and integrity in teaching.
41. Titus 2:7–8. Sound speech and honorable conduct are intended to leave opponents without legitimate grounds for accusation.
42. Titus 2:9–10. The passage addresses bondservants within the social structures of the Roman world. The historical institution of slavery should not be confused with ordinary modern employment.
43. Titus 2:9–10. Paul's instructions concern obedience, faithfulness, and conduct within an existing arrangement; these verses do not explicitly command emancipation.
44. Titus 2:10. The expression “adorn the doctrine of God our Savior” connects outward behavior with the reputation of Christian teaching.
45. Titus 2:11. The Ethiopian translation describes God's grace as appearing and bringing salvation to all people. The King James preserves the same central declaration.
46. Titus 2:12. Paul presents grace as instructing believers to deny ungodliness and worldly desires.
47. Titus 2:12. The command to live soberly, righteously, and godly “in this present world” places Christian ethical responsibility within ordinary earthly life.
48. Titus 2:13. The Ethiopian translation reads “our great God and Savior, Jesus Christ,” while the King James reads “the great God and our Saviour Jesus Christ.”
49. Titus 2:13. The Greek construction is commonly interpreted as applying both descriptions to Jesus Christ. The English difference should not be represented as proof that the King James denies Christ's deity.
50. Titus 2:13. The passage connects the blessed hope of believers with the anticipated appearing of Jesus Christ.
51. Titus 2:14. Christ's self-giving is described as redemption from lawlessness and purification of a people belonging to Him.
52. Titus 2:14. The phrase “zealous for good works” identifies good works as an expected characteristic of those redeemed by Christ.
53. Titus 2:15. Paul instructs Titus to teach, encourage, and rebuke with authority. That authority is exercised in connection with the teaching already presented.
54. Titus 3:1. The King James refers to “principalities and powers” and “magistrates,” while the Ethiopian translation uses “rulers and authorities.”
55. Titus 3:1. The immediate context concerns obedience to governing authorities, not an identification of spiritual principalities.
56. Titus 3:1. Readiness for good works is included among the responsibilities of believers in public life.
57. Titus 3:2. The Ethiopian instruction to avoid quarreling corresponds to the King James command to be “no brawlers.”
58. Titus 3:2. Gentleness and humility toward all people are presented as positive Christian obligations.
59. Titus 3:3. Paul includes himself among those who were formerly foolish, disobedient, deceived, and controlled by destructive desires.
60. Titus 3:3. This recollection of former conduct provides context for the command to treat others with gentleness.
61. Titus 3:4. Salvation is introduced through the appearance of God's kindness and love.
62. Titus 3:5. Both witnesses explicitly deny that salvation originates in works of righteousness performed by human beings.
63. Titus 3:5. The Ethiopian translation attributes salvation to God's mercy, preserving the central teaching of the King James.
64. Titus 3:5. “Washing of regeneration” is preserved in both witnesses. Christian interpreters differ concerning its relationship to baptism and spiritual renewal.
65. Titus 3:5. The Ethiopian “Holy Spirit” and King James “holy Ghost” refer to the same Spirit.
66. Titus 3:5–6. Paul associates regeneration and renewal with the Spirit poured out through Jesus Christ.
67. Titus 3:7. Justification by grace is connected with becoming heirs according to the hope of eternal life.
68. Titus 3:8. Paul instructs believers to devote themselves to good works immediately after denying that righteous works are the source of salvation.
69. Titus 3:5–8. The sequence supports a distinction between salvation through mercy and the conduct expected to follow salvation.
70. Titus 3:9. The Ethiopian translation's “foolish controversies” corresponds to the King James “foolish questions.”
71. Titus 3:9. The Ethiopian expressions “dissensions” and “quarrels about the law” correspond to the King James “contentions” and “strivings about the law.”
72. Titus 3:9. Paul's criticism concerns disputes he identifies as unprofitable and worthless, not every form of questioning or investigation.
73. Titus 3:10. The Ethiopian translation reads “Reject a divisive person after a first and second warning.”
74. Titus 3:10. The King James reads, “A man that is an heretick after the first and second admonition reject.”
75. Titus 3:10. The Greek adjective hairetikos is associated with factionalism and divisiveness. Its meaning should be considered within the surrounding warning about destructive disputes.
76. Titus 3:10. The later history of the English word “heretic” includes doctrinal and institutional associations that may extend beyond the immediate emphasis of this passage.
77. Titus 3:10. Paul's instruction requires admonition before rejection, indicating that correction precedes separation.
78. Titus 3:11. The King James describes the person as “subverted” and “condemned of himself,” while the Ethiopian translation uses language of being warped, sinful, and self-condemned.
79. Titus 3:12. Artemas, Tychicus, and Nicopolis appear in Paul's travel instructions. These details locate the letter within a network of personal relationships and ministry responsibilities.
80. Titus 3:13. Zenas the lawyer and Apollos are to receive practical assistance for their journey.
81. Titus 3:14. The Ethiopian translation speaks of devoting oneself to good works to meet pressing needs, while the King James refers to maintaining good works for necessary uses.
82. Titus 3:14. The closing instruction connects Christian fruitfulness with practical assistance to others.
83. Titus 3:15. The letter concludes with greetings and a blessing of grace.
84. Philemon 1:1. Paul identifies himself as a prisoner of Christ Jesus rather than introducing the letter by emphasizing his apostolic office.
85. Philemon 1:1. Timothy is named alongside Paul in the opening greeting, although Paul speaks personally throughout the appeal.
86. Philemon 1:1. The Ethiopian expression “beloved friend and fellow laborer” corresponds to the King James “dearly beloved, and fellowlabourer.”
87. Philemon 1:2. Apphia and Archippus are included among the recipients, together with the church meeting in Philemon's house.
88. Philemon 1:2. The Ethiopian edition calls Apphia “our sister,” while the King James reads “our beloved Apphia.” The different expressions should not be treated as evidence of different individuals.
89. Philemon 1:2. Archippus is called a fellow soldier, indicating participation in the wider Christian community.
90. Philemon 1:3. The greeting of grace and peace is attributed to God the Father and the Lord Jesus Christ.
91. Philemon 1:4. Paul describes his prayers for Philemon with thanksgiving.
92. Philemon 1:5. Philemon is praised for love and faith associated with the Lord Jesus and the saints.
93. Philemon 1:6. The Ethiopian translation reads “the sharing of your faith,” while the King James reads “the communication of thy faith.”
94. Philemon 1:6. The Greek noun koinōnia can express sharing, fellowship, partnership, or participation. The modern meaning of “communication” should not be imposed uncritically upon the older English translation.
95. Philemon 1:6. The Ethiopian edition reads “every good thing that is in us,” while the King James reads “every good thing which is in you.” This is a genuine difference in the English witnesses' pronouns.
96. Philemon 1:7. Paul praises Philemon because the hearts of the saints have been refreshed through his love.
97. Philemon 1:8. Paul indicates that he possesses sufficient authority to command what is proper.
98. Philemon 1:9. Rather than simply issuing a command, Paul chooses to appeal on the basis of love.
99. Philemon 1:9. Paul's description of himself as aged and imprisoned contributes to the personal character of his appeal.
100. Philemon 1:10. Paul describes Onesimus as his spiritual child, begotten during imprisonment.
101. Philemon 1:11. The contrast between Onesimus being formerly unprofitable and now profitable involves a wordplay associated with the meaning of his name.
102. Philemon 1:12. Paul describes Onesimus as his own heart, expressing deep personal affection.
103. Philemon 1:13. Paul would have preferred to retain Onesimus as a helper during his imprisonment.
104. Philemon 1:14. Paul refuses to act without Philemon's consent, explaining that he wants the good deed to be voluntary rather than compelled.
105. Philemon 1:15. The word “perhaps” introduces a possible interpretation of Onesimus's separation rather than an explicit declaration of God's hidden intentions.
106. Philemon 1:15. The letter does not provide a complete account of why Onesimus became separated from Philemon.
107. Philemon 1:16. The Ethiopian translation reads “no longer as a slave but more than a slave—a beloved brother.”
108. Philemon 1:16. The King James reads “Not now as a servant, but above a servant, a brother beloved.”
109. Philemon 1:16. The Greek noun doulos can designate an enslaved person or bondservant. The legal and social context of Roman slavery is essential to interpreting this passage.
110. Philemon 1:16. The English word “servant” may suggest modern voluntary employment, whereas the Ethiopian edition's “slave” more explicitly conveys the historical condition.
111. Philemon 1:16. Paul appeals for Onesimus to be received as a beloved brother, but this verse does not explicitly command legal emancipation.
112. Philemon 1:16. The expression “both in the flesh and in the Lord” connects the practical human relationship with the spiritual relationship between believers.
113. Philemon 1:17. Paul asks Philemon to receive Onesimus as he would receive Paul himself.
114. Philemon 1:17. The appeal depends upon Philemon's recognition of Paul as a partner in the faith.
115. Philemon 1:18. The Ethiopian translation says, “But if he has wronged you or owes you anything, charge that to my account.”
116. Philemon 1:18. The King James says, “If he hath wronged thee, or oweth thee ought, put that on mine account.”
117. Philemon 1:18. The conditional wording does not establish the precise nature of any wrongdoing or debt. Claims that Onesimus certainly stole money go beyond what this verse explicitly states.
118. Philemon 1:19. Paul's statement that he writes with his own hand reinforces his personal promise to repay.
119. Philemon 1:19. Paul's reminder that Philemon owes him his own self suggests an important spiritual relationship, although the letter does not narrate its complete history.
120. Philemon 1:20. Paul asks Philemon to refresh his heart, recalling the earlier praise that Philemon had refreshed the hearts of the saints.
121. Philemon 1:21. Paul expresses confidence that Philemon will do even more than requested.
122. Philemon 1:21. Some interpreters understand “even more” as possibly implying emancipation, but the letter does not explicitly record Onesimus's release from slavery.
123. Philemon 1:22. Paul's request for a guest room indicates his hope of visiting Philemon following his imprisonment.
124. Philemon 1:23–24. Epaphras, Mark, Aristarchus, Demas, and Luke are named in the closing greetings.
125. Philemon 1:25. The letter concludes with a blessing invoking the grace of the Lord Jesus Christ.
126. Titus 1:16; 2:7, 14; 3:8, 14; Philemon 1:6–7, 16–21. Read together, the letters repeatedly connect professed faith with visible conduct, practical responsibility, and relationships within the Christian community.
127. Titus 3:5–8; Philemon 1:17–19. The letters distinguish salvation through divine mercy from good works expected of believers. Paul's offer to assume Onesimus's debt has often invited theological comparison with Christ's reconciling work, but that symbolic interpretation should be distinguished from the explicit historical claims of the passage.
128. Ethiopian Bible Restoration Project, The Ethiopian Bible: Geʽez to English (2025); The Holy Bible, Conteyning the Old Testament, and the New (London: Robert Barker, 1611). The comparisons in this examination concern the wording of these English witnesses. Establishing the precise manuscript ancestry of the Ethiopian restoration edition would require a separate examination of its Geʽez sources, textual apparatus, and translation history.
129. Titus 1–3; Philemon 1. The overall comparison reveals substantial agreement in the central teachings of these letters. Differences involving “gainsayers,” “keepers at home,” “heretick,” “communication,” and “servant” can affect modern interpretation without necessarily establishing differences in the underlying theology.
130. Titus 1:16; 3:5–8; Philemon 1:16–21. The concluding question concerning whether others can recognize Christian faith through a believer's conduct is a practical application drawn from the combined teaching of these letters, rather than a direct quotation from either text.

#CauseBeforeSymptom #EthiopianBible #KingJamesBible #KJV1611 #Titus #Philemon #Onesimus #ApostlePaul #SoundDoctrine #ChristianLove #FaithAndWorks #GraceOfGod #GoodWorks #BiblicalTruth #ScriptureComparison #BibleStudy #ChristianFaith #Forgiveness #Reconciliation #BrotherhoodInChrist #HolySpirit #SalvationByGrace #LoveYourNeighbor #BiblicalTeaching #EthiopianOrthodox #ChristianLiving #FaithInAction #JesusChrist #BibleRestorationProject #Part52

CauseBeforeSymptom, EthiopianBible, KingJamesBible, KJV1611, Titus, Philemon, Onesimus, ApostlePaul, SoundDoctrine, ChristianLove, FaithAndWorks, GraceOfGod, GoodWorks, BiblicalTruth, ScriptureComparison, BibleStudy, ChristianFaith, Forgiveness, Reconciliation, BrotherhoodInChrist, HolySpirit, SalvationByGrace, LoveYourNeighbor, BiblicalTeaching, EthiopianOrthodox, ChristianLiving, FaithInAction, JesusChrist, BibleRestorationProject, Part52