It was whilst staying on this occasion at Ephesus that Hug supposes Paul to have written this epistle As confirmatory of this may be adduced the two other facts above referred to as mentioned in the epistle itself—viz. the visit of Apollos to Crete, and Paul's intention to winter at Nicopolis. From Acts xix. we learn that during the time Apollos was residing at Corinth, whence he had gone from Ephesus, Paul was engaged in a tour through the upper coasts (viz. Phrygia and Galatia ; comp. Acts xviii. 23), which ended in his return to Ephesus. This tour was commenced after the apostle had been at Jerusalem and Antioch (ch. xviii. 22). It appears, therefore, that Paul left Antioch much about the same time that Apollos reached Corinth. But Apollos went to Corinth from Ephesus, Paul went to Jerusalem from Ephesus. At this city, therefore, they must have met ; and be. fore leaving it St. Paul probably wrote this epistle and gave it to Apollos to deliver to Titus at Crete, on his way to Corinth.
Further, Paul went up to Jerusalem to keep the feast ; after which he visited Antioch, and then travelled for some considerable time in Upper Asia. He, therefore, probably spent the winter somewhere in Asia Minor. Now there was a town named Nicopolis, between Antioch and Tarsus, near to which, if not through which, Paul must pass on his way from Antioch to Galatia (Strabo, lib. xiv. p. 465, ed. Casaubon, fol, 1587). May not this have been the very place referred to in Tit. iii. I2 ? In such a locality it was quite natural for Paul to desire to spend the winter ; and asTitus was a native of Asia it would be well known. to him, especially if he knew what route the apostle designed to pursue. All this supports the hypo thesis that Paul wrote this epistle before leaving Ephesus to go to Syria.
Another circumstance in favour of this hypothesis is the close resemblance in sentiment and, phra seolog,y between this epistle and the First Epistle to Timothy. This resemblance is so close, and in some particulars so peculiar, that we are naturally led to conclude that both must have been written whilst the same leading ideas and forms of expres sion were occupying the apostle's mind. Now the First Epistle to Timothy was most probably writ ten after Paul had left Ephesus the second time to go into Macedonia [TIMOTHY, EPISTLES T0]—that is, about two years and a half after the period when Hug supposes the Epistle to Titus to have been written. To some this may appear too long a time to justify any stress being laid upon the similarity of the two epistles in this question of their respec tive dates ; but when it is remembered that during the interval Paul had been dealing at Ephesus with very much the same class of persons, to whom a great part of both epistles refer, and that both are addressed to persons holding the same peculiar office, the force of this objection will be weakened.
Such is Hug's hypothesis. To us it appears worthy of all respect. If it be rejected, we must either suppose some visit to Crete during the apostle's long subsequent residence at Ephesus (Acts xix. 8, to ; xxi. 31), or we must refer this epistle, with the Second Epistle to Timothy, to the interval between the first and a second imprison ment of St. Paul at Rome. This last opinion is adopted by Benson, Pearson, Paley, and others. It it be adopted, we must adopt along with it the hypothesis that the First Epistle to Timothy belongs to the same date ; for the affinities of the two are such that we are constrained to believe they must have been written at newly the sarne time. To this date. however, for the First Epistle to Timothy, we have seen there are grave objections. If Hug's hypothesis be not untenable, it must on this account claim the preference.
The task which Paul had committed to Titus, when he left him in Crete, was one of no small difficulty. The character of the people was un steady, insincere, and quarrelsome ; they were given to greediness, licentiousness, falsehood, and drunkenness, in no ordinary degree ; and the Jews who had settled among them appear to have even gone beyond the natives in immorality. Among such a people it was no easy office which Titus had to sustain when commissioned to carry forward the work Paul had begun, and to set in order the affairs of the churches which had arisen there, especially as heretical teachers bad already erupt in among them. Hence Paul addressed to him this epistle, the main design of which is to direct him how to discharge with success the duties to which he had been appointed. For this purpose the apostle dilates upon the qualifications of elders, and points out the vices from which such should be free (ch. i,) He then describes the virtues most becoming in aged persons, in the female sex, in the young, in servants, and in Christians generally (ch. ii.) From this he proceeds to enjoin obedience to civil rulers, moder ation, gentleness, and the avoidance of all idle and unprofitable speculations (iii. 1- t). He then invites Titus to join him at Nicopolis, commends to him certain brethren who were about to visit Crete, and concludes with the apostolic benediction (ver. 12-15).
Commentaries.—Most of those who have written commentaries on the Epistles to Timothy have written also on that to Titus. The following works are on Titus alone : Taylor, Commentary on the Epistle of St. Paul written to Tztus, Cambridge, 4to, 1612, fol. 1658 ; P. von IIaven, Commentatio Analyt. in E..p. Pauli cid Titum,Hamb. 4.to, 1742. —W. L. A.