Titus. Chapter 9. Motive

Titus

Chapter 9

Motive

January 2026

What about our motive?

I. Paul’s Three Key Passages on Purity, Liberty, and Conscience

(Romans 14; 1 Corinthians 8-10; Colossians 2)

These form a coherent Pauline doctrine, and Titus 1:15 belongs inside this constellation.

A. Romans 14. Purity and the Weak Conscience

1. The Issue

• Food laws
• Sacred days
• Scruples among believers

“There is nothing unclean of itself: but to him that esteemeth any thing to be unclean, to him it is unclean.” (Romans 14:14)

2. Key Principle

Purity is not ontological (in the thing itself, its existence, and nature). Purity is relational and conscientious. But Paul immediately adds: “He that doubteth is damned if he eat, because he eateth not of faith.” (14:23)

Faith + conscience govern moral permissibility.

3. Boundary Marker

Liberty is limited by:

• Love, the love that God exhibits, which is in the best interests of others’ well-being
• Edification
• The spiritual good of the weaker brother

“Destroy not him with thy meat, for whom Christ died.” (14:15)

So, motive alone is not sufficient; love must govern motive. Impartial love purifies the motive and intentions. Motives in themselves are neither good nor bad. Saints and sinners operate by motives.

B. 1 Corinthians 8-10. Knowledge, Love, and Idolatry

1. Chapter 8: Knowledge Without Love

“Knowledge puffeth up, but charity edifieth.”

• Food offered to idols is ontologically neutral
• But morally conditioned by:
  • Conscience
  • Communal impact

2. Chapter 9: Voluntary Self-Restriction

Paul limits his own liberty:

• Not because it is sinful
• But because it could hinder salvation for someone else.

This is critical. Paul treats liberty as subordinate to mission and love. If we love Christ, we will obey His commandments. Love is looking out for and advancing the highest good and well-being of our neighbor and God. We are to love God with all our heart, mind, and strength. That is the greatest commandment. Love is not sentimentalism and a gush of emotions.

3. Chapter 10: Absolute Moral Boundaries

Here, Paul draws a hard line: “Ye cannot drink the cup of the Lord, and the cup of devils.” (10:21). Yet this is precisely what many evangelical Christians believe and practice. They drink the cup of the Lord, and of devils both, and that doesn’t mean that they are unsaved.

So:

• motive does not sanctify idolatry
• Conscience does not redefine moral absolutes

4. Summary of 1 Corinthians

Category	Status
Created things	Neutral
Use of things	Morally conditioned
Idolatry	Always sinful
Love	Governing principle, always pure

C. Colossians 2. False Asceticism

1. The Problem

“Touch not; taste not; handle not” (2:21)

Paul attacks:

• Man-made purity rules
• Ascetic legalism

“Which things have a shew of wisdom indeed… but are of no value against the indulgence of the flesh.”

Asceticism cannot purify the heart. Repentance and faith do purify the heart.

2. Connection to Titus 1:15

• Legalists obsess over purity laws
• Their minds and consciences are defiled
• Even abstinence becomes sinful if rooted in pride or unbelief

II. Titus 1:15 in Later Antinomian Controversies

We now see why this verse became dangerous in the hands of the unskilled and carnal.

A. Early Church: Anti-Gnostic Use

Fathers used Titus 1:15 to argue:

• Creation is good
• Matter is not evil as the Gnostics taught (Didn’t Augustine also believe matter was evil?)
• Sin comes from the will

But the church fathers never excused immorality in those who profess faith in Christ.

B. Medieval Period

The verse was invoked to:

• Defend marriage
• Defend eating meat
• Reject dualism

Still:

• Always within a moral framework

C. Reformation-Era Antinomianism (living as though there was no binding moral law)

Some radical groups argued: “If the heart is pure, the act cannot be sinful.”

Reformed theologians responded sharply:

• Calvin: “The heart does not sanctify what God condemns.”
• Luther: distinguished Christian freedom from fleshly license

But if the heart is pure, then it does sanctify all things. A pure heart, by definition, only approves of those things which God approves of and never approves of what God has already condemned. A pure heart would never do anything that offended God.

The expression ‘love is love’ is often used today to sanctify the sins of homosexuality, fornication, and adultery. But a pure heart would never attempt to condone what God condemns. God calls this vile affection or vile love. See my article titled “Truth, Love and Vile Affection, on my website.

D. Modern Evangelical Abuse

Titus 1:15 is sometimes used to justify:

• Sexual libertinism, freedom to sin sexually
• Disregard for conscience
• Individual autonomy instead of being subject to the laws of God

Paul explicitly rejects this in v.16: “They profess that they know God; but in works they deny him.” Sin is a denial of God. Even so, almost all evangelicals believe that Christians never stop sinning in this life. Therefore, real Christians claim to have faith in God and deny Him at the same time. How much sense does that really make? This is the theology of the serpent.

III. Conscience Across Traditions

Now to the core moral mechanism.

A. Patristic View

Conscience:

• Participates in reason
• Can be malformed
• Must be trained by virtue

Purity = rightly ordered love, according to God’s word.

B. Catholic Moral Theology

Conscience:

• Binds, even when mistaken
• Must be formed by truth from the word of God

Motive:

• Necessary
• Never sufficient by itself

Three criteria:

1. Object
2. Intention. (But how is that different from motive? Intentions and motives can be either pure or impure.)
3. Circumstances

C. Reformed Theology

Conscience:

• Freed by the gospel,

But in what way does the gospel free the conscience in Calvinism? Please don’t buy it because they claim all Christians sin daily, which binds and sears the conscience. It doesn’t free the conscience.

• Bound by God’s law.

In what way is this true if all of us sin daily?

Liberty exists:

• Only where God has not spoken

But telling Calvinists that they will be preserved and taken to heaven even when they sin daily sets this claim aside because God has spoken against sin, yet they want us to believe genuine Christians sin daily. Their actual liberty is to sin daily against God with no eternal consequences. I am not talking about the loss of rewards or position in heaven. The gift of God is eternal life, and the wages of sin are death, eternal death.

D. Arminian/Wesleyan

Conscience:

• Sensitive to the Spirit
• Oriented toward holiness

Motive = love perfected

I claim that “Purity means that the motive is central to determining the morality or immorality of any act.” According to ChatGPT, “This is almost right, but Paul would refine it: Motive is central, but Motive is not sovereign. Motive can be pure or impure”.

That is correct. Sinners and saints alike have motives for all that they do. Sinners act with impure motives, while saints act with pure motives.

The New Testament framework is this:

Element	Role
Object of the act	Must not be intrinsically evil
Motive	Must be faith and love (disinterested benevolence)
Conscience	Must be respected
Neighbor	Must be edified
Glory of God	Must be the aim

Paul never allows:

• Good intentions can never sanctify evil acts. Good motives, by definition, mean that the act can’t be sinful and must be God-pleasing.
• Pure conscience to override God’s commands
• Liberty to harm others

Final Synthesis (Paul + Fathers)

Purity is not rule-keeping. Purity is not intention alone. Purity is a heart rightly ordered toward God, expressed through love-governed obedience. Or in Pauline terms: “All things indeed are pure; but it is evil for that man who eateth with offense.” (Rom 14:20)

How does this apply today?

What follows is a full Pauline and patristic moral framework, applied to (1) modern ethical disputes, (2) sexual ethics specifically, and (3) how this framework guards against both legalism and libertinism. Everything is anchored in Scripture, interpreted as the early Church read it, and then shows how later Christian traditions either preserved or distorted the balance.

I. Applying Paul’s Framework to Modern Ethical Disputes

We begin with Paul’s five-fold moral grammar, already implicit in Romans 14, 1 Corinthians 8-10, Colossians 2, and Titus 1:

Element	Question
Object	What is the act itself?
Motive	Why am I doing it?
Conscience	Am I acting in faith?
Neighbor	Does this harm or build others?
God	Is this to His glory? (and pleasing to Him?)

Modern ethics tends to reduce morality to motive alone (“I meant well”), but Paul never does so. A well-meaning child wants to please their parents. It was never meant to convey that a child could do well something expressly forbidden by the parents. It could never be that I stole to feed my family because God has prohibited theft. It could never mean that love is love. How could the love of two men or women be wrong? It is wicked because God has already condemned such relationships. The motive is impure from the start. A pure motive is pure and acceptable before God.

A. Alcohol, Media, Cultural Participation

1. Object

• Alcohol: morally neutral in itself
• Media: morally mixed (some neutral, some corrupting)

“All things are lawful for me, but all things are not expedient.” (1 Cor 6:12)

2. Motive

• Enjoyment, gratitude = potentially legitimate
• Escape, domination, indulgence = morally corrupting

3. Conscience

• If conscience condemns, the act becomes sinful for that person (Rom 14:23)
• A “pure” heart does not override conscience, nor does the conscience condemn a pure heart or motive

4. Neighbor

• Causing another to stumble = sin
• Liberty is never private in Paul

5. God

• If the act cannot be offered in thanksgiving, it fails Paul’s test (1 Cor 10:30-31)

Conclusion: Titus 1:15 applies only to created goods, and only when used in faith, love, and restraint.

B. Political, Social, and Cultural Engagement

Modern Christians often justify actions based on intention alone (“I’m fighting for justice”).

Paul would ask:

• Does the means contradict Christ’s character?
• Does it deform the conscience?
• Does it destroy unity?
• Is it expressly forbidden

A pure motive cannot sanctify:

• Lies
• Dehumanization
• Hatred
• What God has already condemned and called sinful

“The wrath of man worketh not the righteousness of God.” (James 1:20)

II. Sexual Ethics: Where Paul Draws an Absolute Line

Here we must be very clear: Titus 1:15 does not apply to sexual immorality, and Paul is explicit about this.

A. Paul’s Sexual Boundary Texts

• 1 Corinthians 6:9-20
• Romans 1:24-27
• Ephesians 5:3-6
• 1 Thessalonians 4:3-8

Paul consistently treats sexual immorality (porneia) as:

• Intrinsically disordered
• Not morally neutral
• Always sinful
• Not redeemable by motive, because it is impure in God’s eyes

“Know ye not that your body is the temple of the Holy Ghost?” (1 Cor 6:19)

B. Why Motive Cannot Redeem Sexual Sin

1. The Object Is Corrupt

Unlike food or drink:

• Sexual acts involve personal union
• They signify covenant, fidelity, and self-gift

Thus:

• The act itself carries moral meaning
• Intention does not redefine the act

2. The Early Fathers Are Unanimous Here

Chrysstom:

“No one sins with the body alone; the soul is first corrupted.”

Augustine:

Sexual sin disorders love by severing pleasure from covenant.

In sexual ethics, Paul refuses flexibility precisely because the body participates in holiness.

C. Modern Misuse of Titus 1:15

Today, the verse is often used to say: “If my heart is pure, my sexual choices are pure.”

Paul would reply: “They profess that they know God; but in works they deny him.” (Titus 1:16)

Purity of heart is demonstrated, not declared. And it is a delusion to claim that your heart is pure when both the Word of God and your conscience condemn your sexual choices.

III. How This Framework Protects Against Legalism and Libertinism

Now we bring it together.

A. Protection Against Legalism

Legalism says:

• External conformity = purity
• Rules purify the heart

Paul says:

• Rules cannot cleanse the conscience (Col 2:23)
• Asceticism can coexist with pride
• External purity without love and pure motive is corruption

“The letter killeth, but the Spirit giveth life.” (2 Cor 3:6)

Titus 1:15 dismantles legalism and cheap grace at the root.

B. Protection Against Libertinism

Libertinism says:

• Inner intention, if unholy, sanctifies any act
• Freedom has no limits

Paul responds:

• Freedom is for service
• Liberty is bound by love and God’s commandments
• Some acts are inherently incompatible with Christ

“Shall we continue in sin, that grace may abound? God forbid.” (Rom 6:1-2)

Titus 1:15 exposes libertinism, cheap grace, and unconditional salvation as self-deception.

C. The Integrated Pauline Position

Error	What It Gets Wrong
Legalism	Treats purity as external
Libertinism	Treats purity as subjective
Paul	Purity is objective, internal, and grounded in the character of God.

Purity is:

• Not ritual or rule-based
• Not feeling-based
• But love-shaped obedience flowing from faith in God and His laws

IV. Final Comments

ChatGPT tells me that “Your original instinct was deeply Pauline, once properly framed: Motive is central — but never autonomous.”Paul’s complete moral vision is this: A pure heart produces pure discernment, which expresses itself in love-governed obedience, for the glory of God and the good of others. Or, as early Augustine crystallized it: “Love God, and do what you will.” —but only because God’s truth has formed love itself.”

This is only true if a person’s love of God is in accordance with the truth of God and His holy character. Love can be vile love and affection (Romans 1). See my article, “Truth, Love, and Vile Affection.

Final Comments on Chapter 9Top of FormBottom of Form

It is incredible how clever and ruthless “Christian” sinners are in justifying their sins. If we are not vigilant, we will be deceived. Motive alone expresses nothing about the quality or virtue of the motive. A pure motive must conform to the character of God, the self-revealed truth about God, and the absolute moral standards of the Word of God. Our conscience will also either approve or disapprove of our reasons.

Love promotes the best interests and well-being of God first, and then of our neighbor. That kind of love or charity is pure. According to the word of God, to love God is to hate and reject all sin in ourselves and others. That concept is foreign to most evangelical Christians today, who think Christians never stop sinning in this life. That means they never fully love God but still think they are going to heaven.

 Titus tells us that the grace of God teaches all of us to deny ungodliness and to live soberly and righteously in this present age (not the age to come). How few Christians actually believe a word of this message from Titus.