There is an argument you often hear, made by many Christians in our day, that Titus 2:3-5 must be interpreted according to 21st century cultural norms. This novel idea also extends to other scriptures that have historically been thought to be define what Biblical womanhood should look like. But this assertion is dangerous and wrong. It is a diabolical way to give women a “Biblical” reason to disobey what the Bible clearly teaches. Here are 8 reasons Titus 2:3-5 cannot be interpreted culturally.
First, let’s look at Titus 2:3-5.
3 the older women likewise, that they be reverent in behavior, not slanderers, not given to much wine, teachers of good things— 4 that they admonish the young women to love their husbands, to love their children, 5 to be discreet, chaste, homemakers, good, obedient to their own husbands, that the word of God may not be blasphemed.
Now for the 8 reasons Titus 2:3-5 cannot be interpreted culturally:
1. The letter to Titus, written by Paul, is authoritative.
We see this clearly in verse 3 of Chapter 1. God has committed His word to Paul “according to the commandment of God our Savior”.
Paul establishes its authority here in Titus 1:1-3
1Paul, a bondservant of God and an apostle of Jesus Christ, according to the faith of God’s elect and the acknowledgment of the truth which accords with godliness, 2 in hope of eternal life which God, who cannot lie, promised before time began, 3 but has in due time manifested His word through preaching, which was committed to me according to the commandment of God our Savior;
Just to refresh: Paul is an apostle, writing God’s truth, a God who cannot lie, in the hope of eternal life which God promised before time began. This is a pretty clear indication that what follows in the entire letter cannot be limited by the time it was written or the cultural norms of the first century unless clearly warranted itself as an exception (see reason 2, below).
Additionally, this entire letter has been recognized as authoritative since the early days of the church, as seen by its inclusion in the Pauline epistles of the New Testament canon.
2. There is nothing in the text of Titus 3:3-5 to warrant a interpretation shaped by 21st century cultural norms.
If those making the argument for a cultural interpretation say they hold to a position of biblical inerrancy, (as also defined in 2 Timothy 3:16,) they have a problem. The burden of proof is on them to defend their position from the text.
What do they point to in the text that has been hidden from commentators throughout the history of the New Testament?
Answer: nothing. Crickets.
The only way their view could be valid is if the Apostle Paul was so limited by his time and culture that the words he wrote to Titus have been rendered useless or even harmful by time and cultural change. This is of course problematic from the standpoint of Biblical inerrancy.
And this brings up another issue and that is inspiration of scripture. Those who subscribe to a different 21st century cultural interpretation cannot really believe that our omniscient God breathed out every word of scripture through human instruments.
Do they actually believe that God Himself didn’t understand what 21st cultural norms would be when He inspired Paul to write these words in the 1st century?
If those making the argument really believe this about Paul and God, they are not in the camp of Christian orthodoxy.
We could actually stop here. But because this idea of a 21st century cultural interpretation is ubiquitous these days, here are some further questions and observations.
3. Are any of the character traits and behaviors listed in Titus 2:3-5 outdated or limited to a specific culture, time or geography?
- Older women are to be
- reverent
- not slanderers
- not given to much wine
- teachers of good things
- older women are to teach younger
- Younger women are to be
- discreet
- chaste
- homemakers,
- good
- obedient to their own husbands, that the word of God may not be blasphemed.
Those who make the case for a cultural interpretation do not seem to be bothered by all these virtues: only the ones about obedience to husbands and homemakers (keepers at home). This begs the question: why just these two virtues? What warrant do they have to single just those two out, vilify them, relegate them to the dustbin of history?
My answer is that these two virtues really rile up the feminist gods. The battle is not against flesh and blood.
The other point to make is that the virtues not under attack are a whole lot harder to pursue in a home that is not cherished and cared for. So you get the woman to ignore her home and all the virtues listed fall on hard times. This is a harmful departure from what God has said to women in these verses.
In other words, I maintain (from experience!) that the virtues under attack are the hardest for a sinful woman to stomach, and the ones that are most foundational to the others.
4. Is there a historical basis in orthodox commentary for Titus 2:3-5 to be interpreted differently according to our modern culture than according to the plain sense of it?
Again, the burden of proof is on those who wish to make the case that this scripture conflicts with sound historical interpretation or with the overarching theology of the Bible.
In all probability, someone somewhere can find a more feminist interpretation from history, but it is not to my knowledge found in any of the the solid, orthodox reformed commentators.
Also, to those who would argue for a modern interpretation, why would the interpretation change only now? Why not in the Middle Ages, the Reformation, the Great Awakening, the Industrial Revolution or the Civil War?
What is it about 21st century western culture that is so powerful that it can change the way the Bible has been read and understood for centuries?
On the contrary, here are many arguments for taking it at face value from commentators and scholars whose works have stood the test of time.
- The inclusion of Paul’s letter to Titus in the canon of holy Scripture
- Orthodox interpretation in church history. Here are a few of commentaries from the past.
Were Calvin, Henry and Spurgeon all wrong?
I don’t think so!
Now we move on to a few observations.
5. The interpretation of Titus 2:3-5 according to 21st century cultural norms is an error that amounts to liberalism. This is a departure from the doctrine of Biblical inerrancy and inspiration.
Those espousing it must necessarily depart from a position of Biblical inerrancy. Here is a great article by Wayne Jackson that explains this.
Here is an excerpt from it:
“It reflects what is known as the “historical critical” approach to biblical interpretation and is based upon an “existential” attitude toward the scriptures.
This interpretative theory was popularized by radical theologians like Rudolph Bultmann. It suggests that the Bible is principally the result of the formative influence of the life-situation of the early church.
In other words, the New Testament is merely the record of how the primitive Christians, consistent with their subjective inclinations, adapted the broad principles of the religion of Jesus to their unique life styles.
This view contends, therefore, that what was true for the first-century church may not be true for today’s church. Christianity is viewed as a rather “plastic” religion. It may alter its forms of expression to fit the mood and tempo of any given culture and historical circumstance.”
This historical critical approach appeared before the 21st century, and has always been associated with the approach of theological liberals. It is simply re-emerging here.
6. There is no theological basis to interpret Titus 2:3-5 as belonging to a past era.
- First: scripture, because God has breathed it, is outside of time.
- However, we do affirm that there is warrant to see some Old Testament scripture differently, through the lens of the greater revelation in the New Testament of salvation through Christ.
- However, Titus is not in this category of scripture. God gave Titus 2 to the Christian church after the resurrection of Christ. It is not in the Old Testament.
- Furthermore, the 21st century does not represent any kind of new Biblical epoch.
7. The 21st century cultural interpretation of Titus 2:3-5 does not interpret scripture with scripture. It ignores many other scriptures like these:
She watches over the ways of her household,
And does not eat the bread of idleness.
28 Her children rise up and call her blessed;
Her husband also, and he praises her:
29 “Many daughters have done well,
But you excel them all.”
30 Charm is deceitful and beauty is passing,
But a woman who fears the Lord, she shall be praised.
31 Give her of the fruit of her hands,
And let her own works praise her in the gates.
Wives, submit to your husbands, as is fitting in the Lord.
Wives, submit to your own husbands, as to the Lord. For the husband is the head of the wife even as Christ is the head of the church, his body, and is himself its Savior. Now as the church submits to Christ, so also wives should submit in everything to their husbands. Husbands, love your wives, as Christ loved the church and gave himself up for her, that he might sanctify her, having cleansed her by the washing of water with the word,
1 Peter 3:1
Likewise, wives, be subject to your own husbands, so that even if some do not obey the word, they may be won without a word by the conduct of their wives,
34 Let your women keep silence in the churches: for it is not permitted unto them to speak; but they are commanded to be under obedience as also saith the law.
35 And if they will learn any thing, let them ask their husbands at home: for it is a shame for women to speak in the church.
36 What? came the word of God out from you? or came it unto you only?
37 If any man think himself to be a prophet, or spiritual, let him acknowledge that the things that I write unto you are the commandments of the Lord.
8.The 21st century cultural interpretation of Titus 2:3-5 also ignores scriptures that tie male and female roles to creation order:
9in like manner also, that the women adorn themselves in modest apparel, with propriety and moderation, not with braided hair or gold or pearls or costly clothing, 10but, which is proper for women professing godliness, with good works. 11Let a woman learn in silence with all submission. 12And I do not permit a woman to teach or to have authority over a man, but to be in silence. 13For Adam was formed first, then Eve. 14And Adam was not deceived, but the woman being deceived, fell into transgression. 15Nevertheless she will be saved in childbearing if they continue in faith, love, and holiness, with self-control.
8 For man is not from woman, but woman from man. 9 Nor was man created for the woman, but woman for the man. 10 For this reason the woman ought to have a symbol of authority on her head, because of the angels. 11 Nevertheless, neither is man independent of woman, nor woman independent of man, in the Lord. 12 For as woman came from man, even so man also comes through woman; but all things are from God.
The linking of the different roles of men and women to creation makes a 21st century cultural interpretation impossible.
So in closing, the big important question is:
What do you want to believe?
Here, the rubber meets the road.
The truly regenerate woman will long for the word of God like a baby longs for milk. She has a high view of God and scripture, and a low view of herself. In fact, she hates her sin and is in a constant battle to mortify it.
As a result, she is not looking for an “out” in obeying a scripture she does not like. On the contrary, she lets the Bible read her! She welcomes the Holy Spirit’s conviction of sin and guidance into all righteousness.
Let me state again here that obeying Titus 2″3-5 is not easy for me. I will be fighting this battle until I go to glory. Submission does not come naturally to our sinful selves. But keep in mind that every Christian is called to it in some form.
As a result, this means you. Me. All people. Children, men and women.
(For some reason we don’t have a problem agreeing with the command for husbands to love their wives as Christ loves the church!)
Bottom line, this death to self is not an option if we are to follow Christ. We need to fearlessly allow the Bible to show us what that looks like on our path.
But good news! We have the love and comfort of the Holy Spirit as we deny ourself, take up our cross and follow Christ. And we have the joy when we grow in this obedience. So many blessings promised! Let this obedience be one of your offerings out of your pure love for Christ.
So the next time someone tells you this scripture is not for today…here are…
8 Reasons Titus 2:3-5 cannot be interpreted culturally.
And I’m sure there are whole lot more!
Note: I am indebted to Boyd Wayne Jackson for writing the article Command or Culture. His article, cited in this blog, was extremely helpful. However, this does not indicate support of everything he wrote or believed.
One way to cultivate joy in the boundaries of the dominion described in Titus 2 is to explore the opportunities outlined in Proverbs 31:10-31. Read all about in What is a proverbs 31 homestead?
Want to learn more? Check out Resources !!!
Leave a Reply