I'd love to hear some explantions of 1 timothy 2:5, I don't have to take this verse out of context or read anything to it, it clearly draws a distinction between God and Jesus and clearly states that the mediator between God and man is a man. If Paul wanted us to know that Jesus is God then the mediator between God and man is another God. Don't give me the trinity answer, read the verse and the context and tell me what this is really saying.
-
Starting today August 7th, 2024, in order to post in the Married Couples, Courting Couples, or Singles forums, you will not be allowed to post if you have your Marital status designated as private. Announcements will be made in the respective forums as well but please note that if yours is currently listed as Private, you will need to submit a ticket in the Support Area to have yours changed.
1 timothy 2:5
- Thread starter daviddcbud
- Start date
- Status
While docetists argued that Jesus' humanity was an illusion and that His actual nature was exclusively divine, this is not the teaching of Scripture. The Bible says that God became a man and dwelt among us [John 1:14]. In fact, those who deny the humanity of Christ are not speaking for God [1 John 4:2-3]. Jesus was a real human being with an independent will, yet His human will was always subject to His divine will [Matthew 26:39]. Even though He could experience any and every temptation, He never gave in to temptation [Hebrews 4:15]. Jesus died physically [Mark 15:37]. He was buried physically [Mark 15:46]. He rose physically [Luke 24:39]. And He ascended physically, just as He will one day physically return [Acts 1:11]. Jesus was and is the Theanthropos...the God/Man.
Upvote
0
Actually, the verse does need to be read in context to grasp the full understanding of what the author is trying to say.
The chapter is about the need to pray for all people. The chapter starts with praying for leaders--good or bad. There must have been some debate over this which the author is compelled to emphasis that this is a good thing to do because God desires all people to be saved.
Then we come to the verse in question. At first glance, it would suggest that God and the "man Christ Jesus" are separate individuals--one leads to another. That phrasing is unusual. He doesn't just say "Christ", "Christ Jesus" or "Jesus Christ" as how he is typically called, but "man Christ Jesus". I'll come back to that in a bit.
If you continue on to verse 6, this "man Christ Jesus" is quantified with a reason for him being the "mediator", that is because he "gave himself as a ransom for all", which refers to Christ's death on the cross, which symbolizes the Jewish sacrificial requirement for the atonement of sin, but with Jesus, it was an over encompassing and everlasting sacrifice for all and for all eternity all to reunite man to God (salvation).
Obviously, as God, Jesus Christ, is divine and is alive. But for that moment, the physical man that served as the embodiment of Jesus Christ, had to die a physical death. It was the power of the Father and the divine nature of Jesus Christ that he was able to be resurrect back to life, but the physical man of Christ died. I can only surmise that is why the phrase of "man Christ Jesus" was quantified in such an explicit manner.
And it is through the physical death of human embodiment of Jesus Christ that serves as the testimony for which to bring people to salvation.
The chapter is about the need to pray for all people. The chapter starts with praying for leaders--good or bad. There must have been some debate over this which the author is compelled to emphasis that this is a good thing to do because God desires all people to be saved.
Then we come to the verse in question. At first glance, it would suggest that God and the "man Christ Jesus" are separate individuals--one leads to another. That phrasing is unusual. He doesn't just say "Christ", "Christ Jesus" or "Jesus Christ" as how he is typically called, but "man Christ Jesus". I'll come back to that in a bit.
If you continue on to verse 6, this "man Christ Jesus" is quantified with a reason for him being the "mediator", that is because he "gave himself as a ransom for all", which refers to Christ's death on the cross, which symbolizes the Jewish sacrificial requirement for the atonement of sin, but with Jesus, it was an over encompassing and everlasting sacrifice for all and for all eternity all to reunite man to God (salvation).
Obviously, as God, Jesus Christ, is divine and is alive. But for that moment, the physical man that served as the embodiment of Jesus Christ, had to die a physical death. It was the power of the Father and the divine nature of Jesus Christ that he was able to be resurrect back to life, but the physical man of Christ died. I can only surmise that is why the phrase of "man Christ Jesus" was quantified in such an explicit manner.
And it is through the physical death of human embodiment of Jesus Christ that serves as the testimony for which to bring people to salvation.
Upvote
0
There is no other answer to be had. You cannot understand the implications of 1 Timothy 2:5 without also considering the context of other relevant Scriptures. I have to wonder if perhaps this is another attempt by yet another agnostic to engineer textual contradictions where none exist....
Upvote
0
textual contradictions? don't get me started, here are just a few, I've got many more than thisThere is no other answer to be had. You cannot understand the implications of 1 Timothy 2:5 without also considering the context of other relevant Scriptures. I have to wonder if perhaps this is another attempt by yet another agnostic to engineer textual contradictions where none exist....
1. 2 Samuel 24:10-14 and 1 Chronicles 21:8-13. 2Samuel says it was 7 years of famine, Chronicles says 3 years of famine
2. 1 Chronicles 20:5 says that Jair killed the brother of Goliath but 2 Samuel 21:19 says that Jair killed Goliath
3. 2 Samuel 8:3-4 says David captured 1700 horsemen, 1 Chronicles 18:3-4 says it was 7,000. The NKJV says translates 2 Samuel 8:4 as 700 horsemen
4. 2 Chron 9:25 says Solomon had 4,000 stalls but 1 Kings 4:26 says it was 40,000
5. 2 Kings 8:25-26 says Ahaziah became king at age 22, 2 Chron 22:2 says he was 42 (the Hebrew text and the NKJV says 42, NASU translates it as 22). His father became king at age 32 and died 8 years later (2 kings 8:17) so it seems that Ahaziah was 22 not 42
And my favorite is trying to reconcile the resurrection accounts
Resurrection Morning, can you reconcile the gospel accounts?
Read Matthew 28:1-10 and then answer these questions
- Who are the women Matthew is referring to in verse 5?
- Who is the “they” in verse 8 that ran to tell the disciples?
- Who is the “they’ in verse 9 that held the resurrected Jesus’ feet and worshiped Him?
Matthew tells us the answer to all these questions in verse 1, it was Mary Magdalene and the other Mary. Now we do know based on the other gospels that there were more women than that at the tomb but Matthew has chosen to focus on only these 2 women so “they” must include Mary Magdalene
a. What did Mary Magdalene do after seeing the stone was removed from the tomb?
b. What does Mary think has happened to Jesus?
c. read verses 11-15, does this sound like a woman who has seen the resurrected Jesus (in matthew’s account Mary not only got information from an angel of what happened to Jesus but she also held his feet and worshiped Him)?
Read the entire Matthew’s account and John’s account of the resurrection morning a few times and try to reconcile them, both accounts do not harmonize. Read mark’s account in 16:1-8 and notice how Mark says the women were so afraid of the Angel that they told no one about it. Read Luke 24:1-12 and see how Luke’s account does not harmonize either.
Upvote
0
- Feb 4, 2006
- 46,773
- 10,976
- Country
- United States
- Gender
- Male
- Faith
- Protestant
- Marital Status
- Single
- Politics
- US-Others
The KJV is riddled with errors of translation due mainly to 'interpretive' translation by the scholars. These errors have been passed on to other translations as well. In Acts the word pascha is translated Easter. This because of the overwhelming belief in the Easter tradition of the translators. They just couldn't help themselves.
I have just done a fairly careful reading study of the scriptures relating to the 'fullness of the gentiles' and discovered some really gross mistakes in translation that has left most in error on this subject.
We just have to work through these things. Not to worry. God is still on his throne, and all is well up there.
owg
Upvote
0
- Status
Similar threads
