Getting It Right
But as for you, speak the things which are fitting for sound doctrine. Titus 2:1 NASB
Sound doctrine – Just how much paradigm interpretation is involved in translating and reading this text? The Greek, hygiainouse didaskalia, could be translated “healthy instruction.” How we translate the verse depends on our assumptions about Paul’s religious affiliation. For example, if we think Paul became a Christian and abandoned the rigors of the Jewish way of life, then we will probably translate didaskalia according to the Christian view of theology, namely, “doctrine.” But if we think that Paul remained faithful to his Jewish roots and lived a life of obedience to Torah, then we will translate didaskalia as “instruction,” a neutral term for Christians but a very important term for Jews. Instruction is Torah. If Paul uses the Greek didaskalia in this sense, then he is telling Titus to teach according to Torah.
After eighteen centuries of Christian influence, we don’t think too much about the differences between “doctrine” and “instruction.” That’s because we have grown up in a world where the faith is all about “sound doctrine.” But that concept isn’t part of the Jewish way of life. It wasn’t part of Jewish thinking in the first century and it isn’t part of Jewish thinking today. There is no Jewish systematic theology of doctrines for a reason. Western Christianity is above all else a doctrinal and creedal religion. But Jewish thinking moves on a different track. It is about how to live, not how to think, and the most important part of knowing how to live is to have an instruction book. That’s why Heschel can say, “A Jew without Torah is obsolete.”
By his own admission, Paul never left the Jewish way of life. Standing before Felix in his last public appearance he makes this claim. We should believe him. That means that he would exhort his followers to do the same—to take up the Jewish way of living under the Messiah, to apply all of Torah with the halacha of Yeshua as the guide. This is not having all the right answers. This is about making the right choices. If we believe what Paul says, then we must adopt Torah as understood by the Messiah. We can debate all the other stuff added during the last eighteen centuries, but if we don’t start with this foundation, then we won’t understand Paul. We will read him as if he were Augustine.
“Healthy instruction” carries a very different feeling than “sound doctrine.” Healthy instruction is about eating, praying, walking, selling, sleeping, dressing and a lot of very mundane things. It really doesn’t concern itself with “original sin,” “virgin birth,” “triune gods,” “pre-trib raptures” or “noetic falls.” It’s practical, not theoretical. Yes, I know, you who have grown up all your lives believing that religion is about getting it right will be disconcerted. There are many different ways to honor Shabbat but there is only one way to believe that God is three in one. The Church killed those who didn’t have the “right” doctrine. Fortunately, Jews just have another glass of wine and dance.
Topical Index: healthy instruction, sound doctrine, hygiainouse didaskalia, Titus 2:1
“This is not about having all the right answers. This is about making the right choices.”
Skip: That statement has so much truth in it !
On my way to finding Titus my bible opened to Psalm 119 so I read it. After verses 1-8 the psalmist finds 22 more ways to say the same thing;- keep my commandments, live my commandments, my Torah.
May I learn from Paul to do the same.
Thanks Skip this the best set up I could imagine for my favorite saying of Art Katz. A Jewish writer, teacher with prophetic insight. He wrote in his profound little book “The spirit of Truth” That the church (the Christian way) has succeed at being right but failed at being real”. Katz is a Jewish surname for the sons of Arron btw…I wish you had a chance to meet this mighty man of God. Not sure if the two of you would of hit it off or chalenged one another but the conversation I am sure would have been fascinating. We can only wait now for the end of time to find out.
I can’t agree more with you Mark. Art Katz truly was one of a kind. So glad they have preserved so much of his books and teachings.
I just read this a few minutes ago. Ties in with what we’re discussing here.
https://skipmoen.com/2011/09/clearing-the-way/
We don´t have to think much about it, we just need to know that by the time all this was written all they had was Torah, so what Paul is saying to Titus is to teach according to Torah, healthy instruction.
Benny, You speak plain, simple TRUTH. Amen!
Absolutely right on. So, the real question is: did Paul believe that Yeshua brought an END to Torah, thereby leaving him to start new religion? I think NOT! Praise YHVH for Tanakh. Think on this: He has preserved it TO THIS DAY… if we will only hunger and thirst after it, we will find it and learn how to live/learn how to DO (c)hesed. I praise YHVH that, through people like Skip, He “softened” me to question “paradigms.” Oh how freeing that is!!!!!
We are so thankful for you, Skip. Keep on keeping on, for our sakes, please!
I see you referred to “triune gods” as plural.
People who believe in the Trinity would write that as “Triune God,” …singular.
Believing right or living right. Right doctrine or right doing. One or the other? …..Or BOTH?
I don’t know how we can live right if we don’t believe right. There’s certainly more to living right than just believing right, for sure, and if we don’t live right, how can we say we walk in the light. Certainly not by just flappin’ at the mouth about right doctrine.
Truth is light and the light is truth, but if we see the light, we should also walk in the light and not in the night. Right?
We must walk the talk and not just talk the talk. But it must be HIS “talk” we walk. So, we SHOULD be “Getting it Right” when it comes to right theology and doctrine, but that also about practical theology.
In addition to that question, though, I have this question.
What does it mean “to take up the Jewish way of living under the Messiah, to apply all of Torah with the halacha of Yeshua as the guide”? Why don’t we talk about that?
What is the “Jewish way of living under Messiah” even mean? What does it mean “to apply the halacha of Yeshua as the guide”? Because, how can we look to “Jews” and their way of living if their way of living is NOT UNDER MESSIAH and they DON’T HAVE YESHUA AS THEIR GUIDE? Doesn’t “the Jewish way of living” include a lot of cultural traditions of man that are not even in written Torah and even sometimes against written Torah?
Take keeping Chanukah for example. That’s not part of the instructions of Torah. Some of the story behind Chanukah is likely only rabbinic myth to support political nationalism and the religion of Judaism. Where do they get a nine branch menorah anyways? It’s likely that a nine branch menorah was used in pagan religious practices, just like the Christmas tree in Christianity promoted by pastors who also promote some of the myths of that tradition just like the rabbis do in Judaism. And what about Purim? Much like Chanukah and Christmas and Easter. A man-made tradition, spiritualized by those holding to a form of religion. Why come out of Christianity just to go into another “way of living” that is not “under Messiah”, and doesn’t “apply all of Torah with the halacha of Yeshua as the guide”? We shouldn’t do the things the pagans do in the worship of their gods!
Do we need “to take up the Jewish way of living”? Or do we need to take up the Hebrew way of living? Isn’t the Hebrew way of living suppose to be the root of the Jewish way of living? How does the “Jewish” anything become so important when Judaism is only part of Israel? Even Yeshua had some problems with the Jewish way of living, didn’t He? Don’t get me wrong. I love Jewish people but the term “the Jewish way of living”, even qualified by the phrase “under Messiah”, or explained by the phrase “to apply all of Torah with the halacha of Yeshua”, at best, causes me confusion and, at worst, is misleading.
“If we believe what Paul says, then we must adopt Torah as understood by the Messiah.”
I come from an RCC background and I totally accept this statement! What do you disagree with?
Among many other things, I expect, I AGREE with living by Covenant Torah as taught by the Messiah.
However, to answer your negatively framed question, also, among many other things, not speaking in reference to you, because I do not know you, I disagree with being in and living according to any religion of man, as in any particular system of faith and worship, other than that of the Melchizedek priesthood of Messiah Yeshua. That includes Judaism and Christianity, including all the denominations I, myself, have previously been in and lived according to, as well as RCC, or especially RCC, I might say. I AGREE with the written instruction that we should “come out of her (Babylon}, My people”.
“Then I heard another voice from heaven saying, ‘Come out of her, my people, lest you participate in her sins and receive her plagues!'” [Rev 18:4]
Read all of Rev. 18. It ends with this, “And in her was found the blood of the prophets and kedoshim (devoted ones) and all those slaughtered on the earth.” [Rev 18:24] The blood of the prophets and kedoshim will be on the hands of even those of such religions.
Hi Jerry or Lisa,
Since Hanukkah (The Feast of Dedication) occurred in the inter testamental times, it is not mentioned in the Torah. But it IS found in the New Testament and Yeshua celebrated it. In John 10:22-23 we read, “Now it was the Feast of Dedication in Jerusalem, and it was winter. And, Yeshua walked in the temple, in Solomon’s porch.”
Also…The first Jewish menorah was the one with 7 branches that was lit by Kohanim (priests) at the Holy Temple during Biblical times in Jerusalem. On the Chanukah menorah, eight of the arms are for the candles which represent the 8 miracle days, and the ninth arm is for the candle used to light the others.
Many Messianics view that ninth (tallest) candle as the Light of Yeshua, from which all the other candles are lit.
Hanukkah can be a wonderful way for believers to share their understanding of the Jewish Messiah with their non believing Jewish friends.
Hello. It’s Jerry AND Lisa. Yes, we have already known these things. As we understand it, “Chanukah”, or the “festival of dedication”, was likely made an ordinance by man and we know it was not established by a word of instruction/commandment/law from YHWH. It has become a religious, nationalistic tradition of man in “the Jewish way of living”, and “Messianics” would likely say they keep it “under Messiah”. We personally doubt that Messiah would participate in the traditions of Chanukah, at least as they have come to be “observed”, or Purim, especially (Can you imagine Him wearing a silly costume, shouting “Booo!” when the name of Haman is read in the book of Ester, and getting drunk on Morgan David? Isn’t that the Jewish way of living, even “under Messiah” by “Messianics”?).
But “the Jewish way of living”, even with the caveat of “under Messiah” is a muddy concept and phrase, which is confusing and misleading. How about we stick with, maybe, the Hebraic-, Torah-, Messiah-, or Apostolic-way of living, or “the way of the Prophets” concept and phrase. The “Jewish way of living” though? That’ll have you going and saying prayers and bowing before the “western wall” at the “temple mount”, at first, and then eventually submitting to their Levitical high priest after the order of Aaron and paying homage to “G-d”, “Hashem”, through their sacrificing of animals for the atonement of your sins in their new (probably ecumenical temple – where eventually the abomination of desolation will likely occur), and denying Messiah Yeshua as your Great High Priest after the order of Melchizedek.
Why are those in “the Jewish way of living” acknowledging the “western wall” as though it is the remains of the temple, when Messiah said, “not one stone would be left upon another”? How could it be the western wall? And it’s not the temple mount! But it’s where “the Jews”, at least those of the “Temple Institute” and many Messianics, and even many “Jew-honoring” Christians, want to build their next temple and make their sacrifices under their Aaronic high priest (whoever they determine qualifies, in part by DNA testing) with the services of their Levitical priesthood. Still a nation WITH priests, instead of a nation OF priests. John the Immerser was the last of that line, who Messiah said would be least in the kingdom, because he was after the order of Aaron and not Melchizedek.
Actually (possibly being only slightly dramatic), We think if Messiah were present today at a Chanukah event, He would likely tip over the nine-branch, “Jewish menorah”, like He did the table of the money changers in the temple when He was present there at that time. Nine branches? Eight for the eight days of miracle oil and one for Messiah? How do the Jews explain the ninth branch? Not as representing the Messiah, but Messianics are going to spiritualize it like Christians do the evergreen treen? It’s our understanding that the miracle is likely just a rabbinic myth. Sorry to dishonor anybody’s sacred cow here, but where’s the proof. It’s not even in Scripture. And let’s not get started about an egg on the Pesach plate. At best, we think, Chanukah may have been an “acceptable” holiday (not a “holy” day) and a tradition of man, at first, though that is a far cry from being equal to Torah and His moedim. And Messiah’s presence there in the temple was neither a stamp of approval nor a pronounced repudiation of it. He didn’t speak in favor of it, but He did bring correction by emphasizing His preeminence over it. In fact, He rebuked the Judean leaders there at the time celebrating Chanukah, saying, “You are not my sheep.” They kept Chanukah, but they didn’t believe in or obey Him as Messiah. Do you really think He cares about people keeping Chanukah if they don’t believe in Him or obey Him? I don’t. He cares about being known and obeyed as Messiah. And He said, “Obedience is more to be desired than sacrifice.” And He doesn’t need our clever ideas of how to make Him known to Jews, I.e. via a nine-branch menorah or a Christmas tree or an Easter bunny and eggs.
Christianity has done a similar thing with Christmas trees and Christmas as Judaism has done with Chanukah and the menorah, though the Christmas tree was not originally used in the temple as the menorah was, and then perverted. It did it the other way around. But it’s like changing the sabbath from the 7th day to Sunday. Man cannot make something “holy” that YHWH has not made “holy”. Neither a nine-branch menorah or an evergreen tree or a day of the week…..or a PIG, for that matter. You can’t pray over bacon and expect it to make the pig from which it came, “clean”. Only YHWH determines what is “holy”, including objects, animals, people, and times and seasons. Man doesn’t. So why should we elevate man-made holidays and traditions to be as though they are as important as the Sabbath, the Feast Days, the Torah, and above all, Messiah? Trying to use something of man as a “wonderful way for believers to share their understanding of the Jewish Messiah” smacks of humanism to us. It’s almost like saying that using Santa Claus is a wonderful way to share about Yeshua. We don’t think so.
Go ahead and give a “thumbs down” if you believe this is not the truth. It’s not a bad thing at all, and I’m personally not at all offended to have you disapprove or disagree, but please have the love and courage to speak the truth and identify yourself, if you believe you know the truth, and please represent Messiah and His kingdom as best you can. I can and desire to be corrected, if I’m wrong. Otherwise, maybe your objections are unfounded and only based on humanism and the religions of man, instead of the Ruach HaKodesh, His Word, and historical facts.
The miracle of Chanukah is about the LIGHT. God miraculously kept the lights going for eight days. That, in my opinion, is worth celebrating. Apparently Yeshua felt so as well.
Re: your concern about the “thumbs down,”…don’t know who gave it, but it’s certainly their prerogative to remain anonymous. That needs to be understood on this website. If someone wishes to dialog with you, they can do so. If they wish to give a anonymous thumbs down…they can do so. To demand they identify themselves sounds like something an insecure bully would say.
Judi, we’re not trying to offend or bully anyone here, though this may pop an illusion bubble that you and maybe some others here have about Chanukah. Disillusionment can be hard, we know. We’ve experienced it often ourselves, but it’s not a bad thing. It’s the “dissing” of an illusion and an illusion is not the real truth. So it’s the illusion that’s the bad thing. Disillusionment, though, gives opportunity for entrance to the Truth and the Truth sets us free from lies and leads to abundant life, and for those who have received a love of the truth, THAT’s worth celebrating, though not by lighting a NINE branch menorah! We, ourselves, actually celebrate and give thanks for being set free from the religions of man – Christianity AND Judaism – including their false moedim (appointed times).
Have you found evidence that the “miracle of Chanukah” actually happened? Is it even in the book of the Maccabee’s? Don’t think so. And by the way, Yeshua was also present when the money changers were doing their thing in the temple. His presence doesn’t connote His agreement, or His celebration of something. Neither does His silence. But In fact, He was not silent. He rebuked the Judean leaders celebrating Chanukah there at the time, saying, “You are not my sheep.”
Not all that’s Jewish (glitters) is gold. Are we to go out of Christianity (frying pan) and into Judaism [Judi-ism] (the fire)? Might as well get out the artificial Christmas tree (phallic symbol) along with the Chanukah menorah and celebrate that phony holiday, too.
We have to ask, what’s the matter? Are not His weekly Sabbaths and the other moedim enough for us to celebrate? Apparently Messiah thinks so. It wasn’t He who ordained Chanukah.
We ought not just believe what we are told or just do what others are doing. That’s like the blind leading the blind. We ought to do a little research. Here’s something to help start the removing of the hook, line, and sinker you seem to have swallowed.
“The miraculous-oil story seems to be a rabbinic invention transmitted hundreds of years after it allegedly occurred.” [“Five Myths about Hanukkah” – Washington Post – December 2, 2015 – Jennifer Bleyer, senior editor at Psychology Today]
And regarding the thumbs down. Really? We said, “Go ahead…” and “please….”. We welcomed disagreeing and disapproving, we appealed for open disclosure about the person disagreeing and for discussion about the ideas, and we shared our opinion about what not doing so MAY mean, and you call that demanding, then begin name calling? Insecure bully? Sounds like some projection may be going on there.
This is beginning to be like “In-Your-Facebook” drama, here. Pretty sure that is not what Skip, or YHWH intended for Today’s Word. It seems that our intentions to speak what we think is the Truth in hopes of provoking others to His “love and good deeds” has instead provoked some to works of the flesh. Time for self-reflection and to pray the prayer of the Psalmist – “Search my heart and see if there be any wicked way in me.” Shalom.
J and L… That Scripture clearly states Yeshua went into the Temple for the Feast of Dedication is all the proof I need.
I’m not sure why you find the idea of praising God for this miracle so offensive. As I said in another post…for me and many others, it’s an opportunity to remember God’s miracle, to ask Him to shine His light in and through us…to expose anything that is not of Him…a time of rededicating ourselves to Him…a time to renew our love for Yeshua, the Light of the World, and ask that any scales be removed from our eyes so we can be filled with light. It’s about remembering…remembering something our God did long ago…and remembering that He was, is and always will be the Light of the world.
Clearly we disagree on this issue. I have no further interest in dialoging with you about it.
Yeshua only went to Jerusalem for important events. The Synoptic gospels present him in Jerusalem only in the final days of his ministry. John, on the other hand, gives an account of Yeshua in Jerusalem on four different occasions, two during a Passover (John 1:13, 12:12), one during an unnamed festival (John 5:1) and one at the Feast of Dedication which is Chanukah (John 10:22). A third Passover is mentioned in relation to the feeding of the 5,000 in John 6:4.
Apparently Yeshua thought Chanukah was important or he would not have been in Jerusalem at that time. In fact, it was very important since, if the temple had not been re-dedicated by the Maccabees, there may not have been any temple, which Yeshua called his Father’s house, for the Messiah to worship in and for some of the events that designated him to be the Messiah to occur. Even though it was not a festival mandated by the Torah, it was still important to Yeshua and apparently he didn’t regard it as “A man-made tradition, spiritualized by those holding to a form of religion”.
As far as the “Jewish way of living” it is very clear from Scripture that both Yeshua and the apostle Paul practiced Judaism their whole lives. Judaism is the Jewish way of living. Of course it was given it’s proper interpretation by Yeshua. Granted the Judaism of today is not the same as first century Judaism, but there are more similarities than differences. I know it’s fashionable among Messianics today to dismiss the rulings of the rabbi’s as man made traditions. But from what Yeshua told his disciples in Matthew 23:1-3 he had a different opinion. In verse 3 he says “Therefore pay attention to what they tell you and do it. But do not do what they do, for they do not practice what they teach.” He apparently only had a problem with their behavior (or lack of it) and not with what they were teaching.
I have heard the concept of first century discipleship described as “the art of imitation”. The disciple was supposed to follow his rabbi or teacher closely and try to imitate and emulate him. If this is true, it would follow that the responsibility of those who are Yeshua’s disciples to imitate his practice of Judaism, which is the Jewish way of living, albeit also acknowledging him as Messiah. This is what the early disciples did, including the gentiles who were known in the NT as God-fearers. God-fearers represented a group of gentiles who shared religious ideas with Jews, to one degree or another. However, they were not converts, but a separate gentile community, engaged in Judaic religious ideas and practices. From what can be determined from Scripture and other sources, all the early disciples in the Yeshua movement practiced the Messianic form of Judaism and followed the teachings of our Master.
Correction: How does the “Jewish” anything become so important when JUDAH (the Jews) [not Judaism] is only part of Israel?
JEWISH PRIDE and Jewish idolatry (idolizing Jews or the “Jewish” way of living) is as bad as REPLACEMENT THEOLOGY, and maybe is part of the reason replacement theology even came into being, as well as why there isn’t much of a “ONE NEW MAN” being represented by both Jew and Gentile.
I would agree that “sound doctrine” may not be the best translation for hygiainousē didaskalia. While a bit of interpretation is inescapable in translating one language to another, I try to translate as ‘bald’ as possible. Hence, I agree that “healthy instruction” is better, though I’d prefer “sound teaching” or a conflation of these two. But, given that this verse sets the stage for what follows, is it really about “tak[ing] up the Jewish way of living under the Messiah”?
Let’s back up a few verses to where these same two words are used (though adding one more article in between the two words to the one that precedes this phrase in 2:1), specifically, verse 1:9. This verse finishes off the thought begun in 1:5, in which Paul provides his specific instructions regarding the appointing of elders (sing. presbyteros, episkopos) They are to hold fast to that which accords with the teaching of the faithful word (kata tēn didachēn pistou logou) in order that they may be able to exhort others with sound teaching (en tȩ̄ didaskalia̧ tȩ̄ hygiainousȩ̄) and to refute those opposing.
So far, this sounds right in line with this part of the OP. However, this changes in the very next verse, which begins with “for” (gar): “For there are [also] many rebellious people, those with empty words, and deceivers, especially those of the circumcision (hoi ek tēs peritomēs) [group]”. Who were “those of the circumcision [group]”? Circumcision is a requirement of Torah (the Law of Moses). We also know that Yeshua Himself was circumcised (Luke 2:21). Yet Titus was not circumcised (Gal 2:3). This is apparently in accordance with the Jerusalem Council (Acts 15), which declared it was not applicable to Gentiles.
Though “those of the circumcision [group]” could be unconverted Jews, given the context, it is most likely referencing Christian converts (the same phrase is used of Christian converts in Acts 10:45; 11:2; Gal 2:12; Col 4:11). Evidence for this is that Paul further instructs the elders to “therefore, refute them sharply, so that they may be sound (healthy) in the faith” (hygiainōsin en tȩ̄ pistei) (1:13). Paul goes on: “not paying attention to Jewish myths and commandments of men who turn away from the truth” (1:14). Turn away from what “truth”? [Verse 3:9’s “disputes about the Law” may also be part of this train of thought.]
Given the larger context of Titus as explained in the above, I disagree that Paul is here “exhort[ing] his followers…to take up the Jewish way of living under the Messiah, to apply all of Torah with the halacha of Yeshua as the guide”.
See gci dot org /law/circumcision
Craig, I’m not sure your understanding of “circumcision” is on point, considering that circumcision was used as a euphemism or circumlocution for strident Rabbinics (or a particular sect associated therewith), believing Jews, unbelieving Jews, conversion to Judaism, or a commitment to a particular halakhah, depending on the context [which we don’t fully know because we only have half the dialogue]. Reading circumcision as applying only to the act of cutting the flesh is a fundamental Christian misinterpretation of the text. It is simply not true that Paul did not believe that Gentiles could not or should not be circumcised. If that were the case, Timothy fell from grace and Paul was a hypocrite. Nowhere does it say that Titus was NOT circumcised. The text says he was not COMPELLED to be circumcised in Jerusalem. We don’t even know whether that means he was not expected to join the next Jewish catechism class or whether there was a group doing under garment inspections that were prohibited from doing so. If Jesus was teaching a way of living that was outside the Torah, then he not only was NOT the Messiah, but Jesus’ claims to represent the Father’s commandments were certainly hollow.
Paul,
In order to properly engage my argument above, you’ll need to carefully re-read Acts 15. The context clearly indicates that the Jerusalem Council deemed circumcision, among other things, not mandatory for Gentiles (see especially 15:1, 5, 19-21, 28-29).
Also, while I have a number of Greek-English lexicons, to include BDAG, not one provides such a wide definition as the one you claim. The BDAG in particular accounts for all Jewish texts contemporaneous with NT Scripture. It certainly seems logical that if such a divergent meaning can be applied to term (believing Jews – unbelieving Jews) that the texts would qualify the term.
I had to laugh after listening to liberal Christian scholar Paula Fredriksen state at the end of one of her presentations on Paul that one of the ways we can describe Paul’s gospel to the Gentiles is to say that it is “law free”. Interestingly, she also discounted Luke’s account of Paul’s admissions in Acts as inauthentic because they didn’t square with Paul’s statements in his original compositions [like Romans and Galatians]. Amazing how our worldview affects our interpretations to the point of rewriting history. At least Fredricksen recognized that Acts is in direct conflict with the standard Christian interpretation of Romans and Galatians. For years I thought Paul was just CHA (aka CYA) to make himself look good to the unbelieving Jews. I never imagined that he could be speaking plainly and truthfully. And then, enlightenment….