The Cretan Problem

There were individuals in the churches in Crete who believed and promoted ideas that actually

contradicted the gospel of Jesus and sound doctrine, healthy doctrine as we defined it

last week, that actually produces spiritual fitness.

Paul said that they profess to know God, but their beliefs and their behaviors actually

deny the God that they say they know.

They were a threat to the health of the church, and they needed to be confronted at least,

and if necessary, excommunicated.

I'm calling this the Cretan problem, but we all know that the danger wasn't limited to Crete.

Assaults against the gospel are present in every church.

The Cretan problem is a Cornelius problem, and it will need to continually be addressed in churches

until the Lord returns.

This will always be an issue that we have to confront, maybe even sometimes confront in and of ourselves.

Now, if we're going to understand this text appropriately, we need to recognize Paul is not moving on to a new

topic of conversation here.

He's addressing the same subject that he's been covering in the last few verses,

just from a different angle.

He's dealing with the subject of faithful church elders,

but from the perspective of the false teaching that they will need to confront when it begins to come into the church.

We need to also recognize that Paul is not concerned, at least at this point,

he's not concerned with the pagan culture outside of the church.

He's not concerned with the antagonistic worldviews and behaviors of the culture that would assault the church externally.

He's concerned about that.

That's not irrelevant, but that's not his primary concern here.

Actually, his primary concern in this text is actually the assaults against the gospel that come from inside the church.

People who have taken the gospel of Jesus and distorted it, perverted it, maybe even marginally done so,

but to the harm of their own faith and certainly to the harm of others.

It's the situation of my friend on the bus.

He might have been a true believer, but even the marginal kind of detour from the truth of the gospel

that he was espousing, at least in that moment, was very harmful to others

who might have subscribed as a result of it to something that's not actually true.

So it was crucial for Titus then to take his task seriously.

His task to appoint faithful elders that would protect the flock of God, preserve the gospel of Jesus in its fullness,

and fight against any and all heresies that would contradict it.

Three primary things I want to point out to you in this text as we work through it.

The first thing is we see Paul describing the problem.

Paul is describing the problem.

Look at verse 10.

For there are many who are insubordinate, empty talkers, and deceivers, especially those of the circumcision party.

They must be silent since they are upsetting whole families by teaching for shameful gain what they ought not to teach.

One of the Cretans, a prophet of their own, said Cretans are always liars, evil beasts, lazy gluttons,

and this testimony is true.

Well, the opening four in verse 10 links the discussion back to the purpose and qualifications of an elder in verse 9.

Just look at verse 9 with me again.

That these elders must hold firm to the trustworthy word,

that they may be able to give instruction and sound doctrine,

and then also to rebuke those who contradict it.

And then immediately after that, Paul says,

For there will be many who are insubordinate to the gospel.

Titus needed to appoint men who knew their Bibles well,

who were committed to the fullness of the gospel message,

and were able and willing to rebuke anyone who contradicted those truths.

So the fundamental reason for healthy leadership in a church is rooted in the protection and preservation of God's people.

So we spent now, this would be the third week that we've been dealing particularly with this topic in Titus chapter 1.

Titus 1 · chapter mention

And you may say that all of this stuff about leaders and polity and the things that we're going through right now,

is it really all that important?

And it actually is very important, at least foundationally important, to the survival of the church.

When I say survive, I don't mean to take the future of the church out of the hands of the Lord and put it into the hands of man,

but that the Lord uses the actions of men in order to accomplish His sovereign purposes.

We see that many times in the Bible.

And it's necessary that there be faithful pastors established,

because there are many enemies of the gospel.

And these enemies will inevitably come from unsuspecting places,

even the church itself.

Jesus said this in Matthew chapter 7.

Matthew 7 · chapter mention

He said,

Beware of false prophets who come to you in sheep's clothing.

Inwardly, they're ravening wolves.

But that's not what they look like.

They won't be the people that you first suspect when they walk through the door of the church.

It may take some time to recognize exactly the condition and nature of their theology

and of their hearts, but beware, because it will happen.

There will be people that come into the church that do not actually belong to the flock,

and they will seek to destroy it.

That's a warning from Christ Himself.

Paul says it to the Ephesian elders in Acts chapter 20.

Acts 20 · chapter mention

I know that after my departure, fierce wolves will come in among you,

not sparing the flock.

And from among your own selves, these are the elders in the church.

He said there may even come a time where one of you start to speak twisted things

that actually turn people away from the gospel.

And what would be the motive in that?

Paul says to draw disciples after them to gain a following for themselves,

to build up a reputation for themselves at all costs.

Well, a pastor who doesn't know his Bible or isolates himself from the flock of God,

the people, will not be able to recognize these things.

He won't be able to confront these things because he won't know that they're there.

So Paul says, Titus, put faithful men there that know their Bibles,

men who smell like sheep, who are going to be with the people,

who recognize these things and will deal with them as they come.

That's precisely what was happening in Crete.

And it was Titus's responsibility to set things in order for the good of the church in the long term.

And then Paul tells him in the midst of this,

this is how you can spot these false teachers in the church.

And he gives four things, I think, here that are helpful.

Number one, he says, notice their talk.

Notice their talk.

Look at verse 10.

For there are many who are insubordinate, empty talkers and deceivers,

especially those of the circumcision party.

The first thing that must be examined is,

what are these people actually saying?

These people that are trying to influence you with their teaching and with their ideas,

listen to what they're saying.

What is their talk?

Paul doesn't describe, at least at this point, the precise error.

He deals with it more from a general teaching perspective.

And he names three things.

First, he says they're insubordinate,

which in this case is not a rebellion against leadership directly.

It's a rebellion against the truth of the gospel,

the full fundamental message of the truth of Jesus.

That's what they're insubordinate against.

False teachers rarely outright deny the gospel,

but they are never satisfied with the gospel either.

So watch for it.

They may be saying Jesus.

They may be saying baptism.

They may be saying all the things.

They're using all the words that you would like to hear,

but listen to what they're actually saying.

Are they satisfied with Christ alone,

or are they happy to accommodate Christ

so long as they can add their own kind of twist to it as well?

They're insubordinate to the gospel,

at least to the faithful message of the gospel.

He says they're empty talkers.

This is the idea of worthless, unhelpful speech.

The things that they talk about,

you might feel motivated,

or maybe because of their charisma,

it might help you feel a little bit better,

but you're not exactly sure what they actually said.

Just a cursory scroll through Facebook will show you many examples of this.

People kind of blindly share statements that don't really make any sense,

and they're very excited,

and you're not really sure why they're excited,

because you can't really understand what's actually happening,

what's being said here.

Well, the truth is nothing's really being said.

Donald Guthrie said they are empty-headed in their teaching,

doing much talking, but saying nothing.

They're empty talkers.

Then he says they're deceivers.

They're those whose doctrine leads people away from knowing the truth.

They're self-deceived,

and in many cases will be willing to fabricate lies to gain a following

or give the appearance of spiritual elitism.

We see this primarily in the cults.

The Joseph Smiths and the Mariette Bakers

and those who would fabricate entire lies

in order to gain a following that they can then domineer over,

that they can then establish for themselves,

not actually based on the truth of God.

Of course, there's other versions to see of that as well.

So we look at their talk.

Number two, he says, look at their effect.

Look at their effect.

Look again at verse 11, just the first part of it.

They must be silenced since they are upsetting whole families.

What's the effect of their teaching?

How does that affect the unity of the church?

There's only two other places in the New Testament

where this word or this phrase for upsetting is used.

One is in 2 Timothy 2.

Paul says that because they were teaching

that Jesus' second coming had already occurred,

that Hymenaeus and Philetus were upsetting the faith of some.

The second time it's used is in John 2 and verse 15,

when Jesus was flipping tables in the temple.

And it's this same word for upsetting.

The idea here is that the teaching of these people,

what they're doing, maybe in the things that they're saying

or maybe in the way that they're saying it,

it's like flipping over the faith of people in the church.

It's destructive.

It doesn't edify the church.

It doesn't unite the church around the person and the work of Christ.

It actually divides the church.

It's destructive.

Then he says, check their motives.

What do their motives seem to be in their teaching?

What are they trying to accomplish?

Well, Paul says they're upsetting whole families

by teaching for shameful gain what they ought not to teach.

The implication being they know it isn't true.

They know they shouldn't teach it,

but they're teaching it anyways to benefit themselves in some way.

Paul had warned Timothy that there would come a time

when the churches would accumulate to themselves

teachers having itching ears

that will scratch whatever their particular itch was.

that he would teach them whatever was accommodating

to their desires and passions.

And here he says there's going to come men

who take advantage of that situation,

who will recognize that there are people

that just want to be taught what they want to be taught,

and they're only going to find the people who will do it,

and they'll pay good money for those who will.

These people will abuse the church.

Brian Chappell said this expression

communicates their mercenary intent.

What drives such men is the base motive

of selfish advantage.

They're taking advantage of the people of God

rather than actually seeking to shepherd the people of God.

Finally, he says look at their model.

Look at their model.

Verse 12, this is where he makes the statement

quoting, I can't remember the man,

if I tried to pronounce his name,

it would probably be wrong,

but this prophet from Crete,

about 600 years BC, made this statement,

Cretans are always liars,

evil beasts, lazy gluttons,

and this is true.

That seems to be a bit of a departure

from what Paul is saying, isn't it?

Like where does this come from in the text?

Why is he actually making this statement

at this particular time,

and why does it seem to be so insulting?

Well, he's saying that what I've just described

to be true of these false teachers

is actually showing that they're modeling

their lives after the culture around them,

not actually after the scriptures

and the things that Christ has modeled for us.

He says this is true because it was true.

Cretans were known for their lies.

Their most famous lie was that

they possessed the tomb of the god Zeus.

They were known so much for their lies

that there's a Greek word established

hundreds of years before Christ

that came from the word Crete,

and it means to lie.

The Greek language was shaped around the fact

that Cretans were known to be liars.

He says they're evil beasts.

Crete was known to not actually have

any wild animals on it.

It's an island.

Didn't have wild animals.

But other people, even secular,

non-Christian writers of that time,

acknowledged that though they did not have wild beasts,

I think this was Plutarch said this,

though they did not have wild beasts,

the people themselves took the responsibility

of behaving like wild beasts.

It's what they were known for as a culture.

Paul says this is exactly what these

false teachers are like.

Cretans are liars,

and he's already called the false teachers deceivers.

Cretans are evil beasts.

False teachers are upsetting whole families.

They're ravaging the flock.

Cretans are lazy gluttons.

False teachers were,

they're just concerned about shameful gain.

You say, well, what does this mean for us

in Cornelius, North Carolina?

Well, we have our own culture.

We can identify its markers.

Materialism is one of them.

Pride and arrogance would be another.

We can start to establish this is all the things

that would identify the Western American culture

that we live in.

And then we start to look at the teachers

that we've put,

the influencers that we've allowed

to come into our homes and into our churches.

And we say, what is their life

and ministry actually modeled after?

Does this look like Christ?

Or does this actually look like the world

in which we live?

He says, this is an identifying marker.

You need to watch out.

Well, there's many enemies of the gospel.

Identifying markers are the same.

Churches need faithful shepherds

who will help God's people recognize error

and confront these teachers

when they assault the gospel.

That's the point here.

So he describes the problem.

Second, he tells us how to deal with the problem.

How to deal with the problem.

Paul says the only proper way of dealing with it

is direct confrontation.

Something that most of us probably are loathe to do.

I mean, who really likes confrontation?

You're weird if you like confrontation.

That's not normal.

Modern sensibilities would push against

Paul's methods and language here.

But we need to understand what's at stake.

He wasn't advocating for arrogance.

He's not advocating harshness.

But he knew that tolerating error

would destroy the church, not preserve it.

That's what's at stake.

We look at the big picture here of Titus.

Paul's concerned that this church will survive,

that the gospel will be preserved in the long term,

not just in the time of the apostles.

A friend of mine wisely, I think, said a few years ago,

avoiding hard conversations doesn't preserve unity.

It fakes it.

It doesn't preserve unity.

It fakes it.

The lowest common denominator idea of doctrinal fidelity

is not the path to unity in the church.

It's not going to actually produce unity in the long run.

Error needs to be confronted.

And the text provides two ways for us to do it.

The first way is redemptive rebuke.

Redemptive rebuke.

Look at verse 13.

Therefore, rebuke them sharply, he says,

that they may be sound in the faith,

not devoting themselves to Jewish myths

and the commands of people who turn away from the truth.

It's interesting, in this instance,

Paul, he's coming short of demanding excommunication.

That's different from how he commanded Timothy

in 1 Timothy in dealing with the false teachers there.

That suggests that the issue in Crete

wasn't quite as developed as it was in Ephesus.

But Titus was to rebuke these false teachers

and their doctrines with urgency and with authority.

We see the authority actually in chapter 2.

Look at verse 15 of chapter 2.

Declare these things, Titus.

Exhort and rebuke with all authority.

Let no one disregard you.

So there was a spirit with which Titus was to lovingly,

graciously, but firmly, authoritatively

deal with these false teachers in the church.

This was going to set a pattern for these elders

that he was establishing.

Something that would be intended by Paul then

to continue on in the way that error is dealt with.

But there's two questions that I think have,

that we need to consider as we think about this idea of rebuke

and especially sharp rebuke.

The first question is this.

We need to ask, what merits rebuke?

What actually, that's a strong word.

And the way that Paul uses it here, rebuking sharply,

is that he's using rebuke in the most severest sense possible.

So what actually merits this?

What is it that we should be concerned

to rebuke in this way?

And I think the first answer is we have to acknowledge

that not every disagreement necessitates

the kind of rebuke intended in this text.

In fact, I think we'd all agree that

not every disagreement requires rebuke at all

or dressing at all.

It's not the Bible's way of giving us permission

to just let everybody know what we don't like about them

and how they need to be more like us.

I tell Julie all the time, if everybody was just like me,

that's not really what's happening here.

Sometimes we will take passages like this

and we'll kind of use this as an excuse

to just constantly confront people.

That's the weird people that like confrontation

for some reason.

That's not really what he's saying to do.

In fact, too much division happens

when self-appointed watchdogs

castigate other believers

for disagreements that are unrelated to the gospel.

If there's anything we've learned

in the last two and a half years,

it's that Christianity is prone to this.

Taking things that are not directly related to the gospel

and elevating them to the level of the gospel

so that we start to castigate,

even publicly through social media,

all the things we don't like

about what all the other Christians are doing

that actually doesn't have anything to do with Christ.

Some of you are in the medical field

and you understand what medical triage is.

Medical triage is a pattern.

It's a systematic way of looking

and assessing a patient's needs

to determine which order

and with what level of urgency

those needs need to be met.

It prevents us from looking at someone

with a broken finger

and treating them with the same kind of urgency

as timing as someone who has cardiac arrest.

Okay, there's a difference.

You understand that.

Al Mohler routinely encourages churches

to institute what we would call

spiritual triage or theological triage

where we systematically,

with a disciplined effort,

look at the controversies that are around,

that we look at the issues that arise in the church

and we helpfully and prayerfully discern

which thing needs urgent attention,

which thing needs attention,

but maybe not urgently,

which things don't need really attention at all.

They're going to be fine.

They're going to heal themselves over time.

I think we would be helped to do this as churches.

We would be helped to do this as believers.

Maybe before you decide to rebuke somebody,

maybe here's some questions you could ask.

Does their belief or behavior deny or distort the gospel?

Is it a gospel issue here?

And if it is, it needs to be dealt with.

It has to be confronted.

If it's not confronted, they may be okay,

but everybody that's listened to them will not be okay.

For the good of the church

and for the good of the preservation of the gospel,

those things must be dealt with.

Is the disagreement a secondary issue that's important,

but doesn't necessitate a sharp rebuke?

Maybe a passionate discussion,

but not a sharp rebuke.

We need to be able to discern the difference in those things.

Are they committed to willful, blatant sin against God?

That's a gospel issue.

Those things need to be confronted.

We have plenty of help in the New Testament to discern that.

Is the issue a matter of conscience?

Or is it plainly revealed to us in the Bible?

And by plainly revealed,

I don't mean you have to jump through three or four hoops

to get to your position.

I mean, it's just like the main things are the plain things

and the plain things are the main things, right?

Is the Bible actually very plain that this is wrong,

that they have a wrong position on this?

And it's not just that we disagree

in the way that we've come to our conclusions.

We need to ask ourselves that.

Are they leading people away from Christ?

Needs confrontation.

Is it a speck and beam type situation?

Remember when Jesus talked about judgment,

he said, some of you are going around,

you're trying to take the speck out of people's eyes

and you got this log coming out of your head.

He says, go deal with the log that's in your head

and then you can come and deal with other people's issues too.

You're trying to clean everybody else's closets.

Barry Bond said one time, he said,

you're trying to clean up everybody else's closet.

You need to go clean your own closet first,

then you can go deal with somebody else's closet.

He said, he's a great theologian, Barry Bonds.

Maybe the last question would be,

do I really understand what's happening?

Do I have a full understanding of exactly

what this person thinks and is doing

and is participating in?

Or am I kind of just making some assumptions

that I probably shouldn't make

before I create division and contention?

Those things will be helpful to us, won't they?

In the context of this passage,

sharp rebuke is reserved for anything

that contradicts verse nine,

the trustworthy word of the gospel

and sound doctrine that produces spiritual fitness.

Those are the things that require the rebuke.

That's the measure that Paul gives us

for the things that we actually need to confront.

So that's the first question,

and we need to think about it.

What merits this kind of rebuke before we do it?

The second question is this.

What's actually the goal of our rebuke?

What are we trying to accomplish in this?

Well, Paul helps us here.

Look again at verse 13.

Therefore, rebuke them sharply

that they may be sound in the faith.

Notice the redemptive purpose of the rebuke.

It served the purpose of restoring these individuals

to soundness in the faith.

It was to rescue them from devotion

to Jewish myths and commands.

In other words, it wasn't rebuke for rebuke's sake.

The purpose of the one confronting the error

should not be merely to win an argument

or to demonstrate authority.

His heart's desire should be the restoration

of the one who has fallen.

Every time we see confrontation in the New Testament,

even in the harshest forms of church discipline

in the New Testament,

the spirit of the confrontation,

the end goal of what is happening

is not just to gain a victory over one person,

but to win them for Christ.

To win them to the gospel,

to restore them to faithfulness.

Brian Chappell wrote,

to love the gospel, to fight for it,

and at the same time desire

that its truths capture the hearts of our enemies

is what God requires of those

who would differ from the world.

The world understands hating those who oppose you.

What contrasts those true to the Savior

is the desire that all,

even our opponents,

would come to the knowledge of the truth.

Now, I have to remind myself of this routinely.

That when something comes up

and I want to fire off a pulse about it

or whatever it is,

or want to deal with something

or pick a fight with somebody

that I'm in a discussion with,

a theological discussion with,

I have to fight against my own spirit in it.

Like, what am I actually trying to do here?

Am I actually trying to hurt this person?

Am I trying to just,

is this a prideful action on my part?

Or am I truly loving this person here,

loving them by wanting to restore them to faithfulness?

Well, and routinely,

it's not love that I have primarily in mind.

We need to think about that.

So Paul says there's two ways

to deal with the confrontation.

The first way is that we have to rebuke them sharply.

It's necessary.

We need to do it.

Secondly, he says,

gospel instruction is the other part.

Gospel instruction.

So in verse 14,

he reveals two facets of the Cretan heresies.

Both had to do with those

who converted to Christianity from Judaism.

One referred to myths or speculations

that were at least unhelpful,

and at most were Gnostic,

which would be the idea

that a secret knowledge could be attained

that would alter your standing before God.

It would come to further development after this time,

but there were early notions of it then.

The second facet was human traditions, commandments.

Part legalism, part asceticism,

things that were being encouraged in the church.

The commonality between the heirs

is that they both prominently featured the idea

that religious ritual,

human merit,

was essential

and part of the core of one's relationship to God.

They didn't deny that Jesus was necessary for salvation.

They taught that he alone wasn't sufficient for salvation.

That was the difference.

They're happy with Jesus.

They knew Jesus needed to be a part of it.

They just taught that Jesus wasn't all of it.

That our human works also determine our standing with God.

And by the way,

if we're going to compare this to current belief systems,

this is essentially the same exact view

of salvation taught in Roman Catholicism.

That it's not a denial of Christ,

but it's not all Christ.

That it is God's grace and human works

would be their language

that actually produces salvation

and alters a standing before God.

That's not a new heresy.

That's a heresy as old as the gospel.

If you'll allow me for just a moment,

I think this can subtly belong to us

at times.

At times when maybe

in our presentations of the gospel,

we don't mean to contradict

the fullness of it,

but we may inadvertently do it.

Here's what I mean.

Sometimes we can treat

something like repentance

in an explanation of the gospel

as if it is a work

that is done before

Christ will accept us.

I was listening to a podcast

with Bob Lapine this week

and he told a story

that he knew about Tim Keller

who if you're familiar

at all of his writings,

you know he pastored in New York City

for many years.

He developed this habit

of after his sermons on Sundays,

he would invite people

to come to the front

and he would host Q&As

and it would be open.

They could ask him

whatever question they wanted to ask

and he would answer it

for a few minutes

after the service.

And this invited all kinds

of skeptics and doubters

in Manhattan

to come to these services

and they would hear the gospel.

It was really quite amazing.

I don't think I'm brave enough

to do that,

but he did it routinely.

One Sunday,

there was a lady

who had been there

for a few weeks

and she,

I don't know if they used

a mic or what,

but she said it at least

loud enough

where others could hear.

She said her name

and she says,

I've been coming to the church

now for a few weeks.

Since I'm a lesbian

and I live with my lesbian partner,

I think that I want to buy into this

and I want to join the church.

Do I need to leave my partner

and abandon this situation

before I can be a part of the church?

And you can imagine

the silence that probably entered

the room about that time.

They knew what Keller's position

on homosexuality was,

that it's a sin

that must be repented of

and that the Lord

is not pleased with it.

They knew all of those things.

That's why she's asking the question.

But his response

is actually helpful,

I think,

helpful in considering the gospel.

He says,

I think you're asking

the wrong question.

The question is not

what do I have to do

before I come to Christ?

The question is,

is Jesus who he claimed to be,

who we've said that he is

in the weeks

that you've been coming

to the church?

And if he is,

you need to believe him,

trust him,

follow him as Lord,

and then deal with the implications

that come along with that.

In other words,

the repentance

that Keller was emphasizing

in that moment

is kind of a sweeping repentance

where we are turning

from one direction

and going in the other way.

We're not listing out

all the things

that we're doing wrong

and making sure

we clean ourselves up

before Jesus will accept us.

We're making a sweeping turn

towards Christ

and then in our faith,

acknowledging that

we're going to deal

with whatever implications

come along with that.

Do you see the subtle difference

in that?

And where we might be tempted,

I know I would be tempted,

to in that moment say,

yeah,

abandon your homosexuality

and then things will be good.

You can come then.

But Jesus doesn't actually

tell anybody to do that.

The very act of coming

to Christ genuinely in faith

is to turn away

from all the other pursuits

of your life,

not just your homosexuality,

but every other belief system,

every other selfish thing

that would exalt itself

against the knowledge of God.

I'm not pursuing myself anymore.

I'm not pursuing

my belief systems anymore.

I am turning away

from all of it

in order that I might

pursue Christ

and then I'm going to deal

with the implications

so that as the Holy Spirit

indwells me

and I open up my Bible

and I see what the Bible says

about this particular thing,

I will submit

to the leadership

of the Lord Jesus Christ

in my life

because he has redeemed me

from these things.

Do you see?

The other end of that

is the come as you are dynamic

where you just come as you are,

the implication being

that Jesus accepts you

no matter where you are

and what you are

and he's happy to love you

and there's no real

transformative work

that's happening.

You don't really have

to acknowledge the sinfulness.

You just come

and receive his love

and things are good.

Sinclair Ferguson says,

Jesus doesn't say

come as you are.

He says come in spite

of who you are.

So we're not cleaning ourselves up

before Christ will accept us.

Neither are we coming

in faith to Christ

expecting to remain the same.

The gospel is

that Jesus has done

everything necessary

to forgive our sins

that in his perfection

he perfectly fulfilled the law

that we will never

be able to fulfill

and he doesn't say

do all of these things

and clean yourself up

and then I'll accept you.

He says no,

come to me

and I will change you.

There's a transformative work

of the gospel

but that's what he does for us.

It's his work

in us.

Verse 15

To the pure

all things are pure.

To the defiled

and unbelieving

nothing is pure

but both their minds

and their hearts

or their consciences

are defiled.

So confronting

legalist anesthetics

Paul said that

those who have been

made pure

by the righteousness

of Christ

are no longer

made impure

by eating certain foods

or going through

ceremonial cleansings.

They are no longer

bound by the law.

They are under grace.

Because these legalists

and these ascetics

were saying

yeah, Jesus is great

but you need to be

circumcised too.

Jesus is the doorway in

but if you want to stay in

you're going to have to do

all the Jewish things.

You're going to have to

afflict yourself

in a certain way.

If you really mean it

this is why

it's going to happen.

Paul says no.

No.

To the pure

to the one

who has been

made clean by God

all things are now pure.

you don't have to worry

about the things

you're eating.

It's not going to

make you unclean.

The external things

are not what defile us.

And then he says

believers are no longer

under the law

because Jesus

perfectly fulfilled it.

Therefore all who

come to Christ

are justified

by faith alone

apart from any human work.

Do you remember

in Romans chapter 10

Romans 10 · chapter mention

Paul wrote

that Christ

is the end

of the law

for righteousness

to everyone

who believes.

Doesn't mean

that Jesus

was doing away

with the law

that the law

is irrelevant

as far as our

obedience to God

is concerned.

But the law

has no role

in our righteousness.

Christ has brought

an end to that

because he

perfectly fulfilled it.

It is by faith

that he applies

our righteousness

to us.

His righteousness

to us.

Paul then reminded

the Cretans

that no amount

of religious observance

could make them

right with God.

To the defiled

and unbelieving

nothing is pure.

Everything they do

is tainted

by their sinfulness.

Their minds

and their consciences

are defiled.

Jesus dealt

with this.

Remember the Pharisees

came to him

and they said

why don't your disciples

follow the traditions

of the elders?

Why aren't they

washing their hands

before they eat?

And Jesus

says what comes

out of a person

is what defiles him.

For from within

out of the heart

of a man

come evil thoughts

and sexual immoralities

and theft

and murder

and he goes on.

All these evil things

come from within.

They defile a person.

It's not whether or not

your hands are washed

whether you're

ceremonially clean.

It's has God

given you a new heart

through the work

of Jesus Christ

and if you haven't

got a new heart

through the work

of Jesus Christ

you're defiled

and all of your goodness

is defiled.

Everything about you

is defiled

and there's nothing

you can do to change it.

That's his point here.

What's Paul doing?

He's giving gospel instruction.

He's rebuking the error

and then he's teaching

the truth.

Titus

rebuke the error

and then teach the truth.

It's not enough

just to tell them

that they're wrong.

You have to teach them

the truth

that salvation

is not earned

by what a man does

but it is received

by faith

and what Christ

has already done

and the cleansing

that Jesus provides

is full

and it's complete.

So he describes

the problem.

He deals with the problem

and then finally

and I'll finish

I'm sorry.

Let's look at the danger

inherent to the problem.

The danger of the problem.

Verse 16.

They profess to know God

but they deny him

by their works.

They're detestable,

disobedient,

unfit for any good work.

This is the most scathing

section here.

Earlier Paul seems

to encourage rebuke

to restore

an errant believer

but here he suggests

that the promoters

of the false doctrine

are not believers at all.

the reality is

that both types of people

will inevitably

become a problem

in the church.

You see,

that's what makes

these false teachers

and their doctrines

so dangerous.

It always masks itself

as a friend of Christ

not an enemy.

They profess

to know God.

They say the things

that you would expect

them to say

but the true nature

of their hearts

will ultimately

be revealed

in their behavior.

Two things

that it reveals itself in.

First,

their works are revealed

in how they respond

to the rebuke.

If they're being unfaithful

to the gospel

and somebody takes

their Bible

and sits down

and says,

I think you're wrong here.

This is what the gospel says.

What do they do with that?

Because the Bible teaches

that anyone who knows Christ

has the indwelling presence

of the Holy Spirit

who enlightens us

to his truth

and he fashions us

into the likeness of Christ.

And if I have

the Holy Spirit

and somebody's taking

the sword of the Spirit

and they're saying,

here's the truth.

Look at the truth.

The Spirit's gonna do

this work in me.

I'm gonna turn away

from the error

in order to pursue the truth.

That's a work.

That's a fruitfulness

of the life

that Christ is now doing

in me

of the sanctification

he's doing in me.

He says,

so watch how they

respond to the rebuke.

But then there's

a second part to this.

Remember,

belief always affects behavior.

Paul says,

their behavior

is detestable.

It's disobedient.

It's unfit

for any good work.

Jesus says,

you'll know them

by the fruitfulness

of their lives.

Does their fruit

match their profession?

Beware of false prophets,

Jesus said,

who come to you

in sheep's clothing.

You'll recognize them

by their fruits.

Are grapes gathered

from thorn bushes

or figs from thistles?

So every healthy tree

bears good fruit,

but the diseased tree

bears bad fruit.

We'll recognize them

by their fruits.

Commitment to the gospel

will always result

in godliness.

Always.

Progressive?

Yes.

But it will always

progress forward.

Distortion of the gospel

will always result

in a life characterized

by unrepentant sin.

The individuals are dangerous

because they're so deceptive.

Their doctrines are dangerous

because they lead you

on a path of sin

and unbelief

rather than faith

and godliness.

Now step back

and consider the big picture

of the book now.

What's Paul driving at

in this letter?

You need healthy structures

that emphasize the gospel

because belief affects behavior.

And as the gospel is preserved,

it will produce godliness

in God's people.

But if you start

to let error in,

you're going to see a change

in the way

that God's people live.

They may say the right things,

but what's the fruitfulness

of their lives?

Are they content

to live in sin?

Are they content

to be disobedient

to the Lord?

The Cretan problem

has been and will

be a problem

for every church

and every age.

That's why it's crucial

for churches

to encourage

and appoint

faithful elders.

They'll be committed

to the gospel.

They'll be products

of godliness,

producing godliness

in their teaching.

They will rebuke

promoters of error.

They will rebuke

promoters of error.