Posted on 12/03/2010 4:14:50 PM PST by bibletruth
1 Timothy 2:5 ...one mediator between God and men, the man Christ Jesus.
There is NO debate here: God's Word clearly points out who the mediator is between God and men: i.e., Christ Jesus
If you believe in God's Word, who is Christ Jesus: The Word of God, then 1 Timothy 2:5 will be easily be understood as Christ the mediator.
Well the Lord does take it all seriously no matter which side of the aisle one is on.
Exactly!
Gee, a twofer. You are making a personal post about me AND dragging issues from thread to thread. Do y-u believe that y-u are somewhat exempt from the rules because you possess a godly word processor?
"I do not think that membership in the ROMAN "church" confers salvation."
You are right on that on, but even a blind squirrel finds an acorn once in a while. Membership does not confer anything, but adherence to the dogma does. The Church merely guides and facilitates our own personal path to Salvation.
Unlighten us on what this means from your perspective please.
I have been commanded to preach the Gospel. If someone takes offense to the Holy Word Yah'shua said: Congeniality and ecumenism is not the Good News. It is not my job to persuade. Sorry Artie
shalom b'SHEM Yah'shua HaMashiach
of G-d that is their loss. Mat 10:34 "Do not think that I came to bring peace
Please review Matthew 10:32-42
on the earth; I did not come to bring peace, but a sword.
That is the job of the Ru'ach HaKodesh.
Phrases were not the issue....and you would not have made this comment were you not already familiar with these terms being applied to Christ...so again what is your intent in asking for the scripture references since you appear to already be aware of them?
As have we all. Move along, this street corner is already taken.
"Congeniality and ecumenism is not the Good News."
So Jesus and the Apostles were only joking when they said to treat your brothers and sisters with love, respect and humility? Is the Second Greatest Commandment a trick question that requires dropping all of the vowels from the decryption key to solve?
"That is the job of the Ru'ach HaKodesh."
Sad to see you refuse to allow the Holy Spirit to work through you. That probably has something to do with your rejection of the concept of the Trinity.
I never heard the phrases applied to Christ.
Thayer's Lexicon defines NT use of the word [philosophy here as
a) used either of zeal for or skill in any art or science, any branch of knowledge. Used once in the NT of the theology, or rather theosophy, of certain Jewish Christian ascetics, which busied itself with refined and speculative enquiries into the nature and classes of angels, into the ritual of the Mosaic law and the regulations of Jewish tradition respecting practical life
It is clear that Apostle Paul was referring to his rivals headed by St. James in Jerusalem, who followed the Law. This happens more than once in his letters. He was referring to Jewish traditions [of men], not Greek.
However, as the first century drew to a close, some 50 years after Paul, Christians not only [by necessity] embraced Greek philosophy (Platonism), but early Christian apologetics, such as St. Justin Martyr, in his work First Apology, used the similarity of Christian briefs and teachings to that of Roman and Greek pagan beliefs and teachings as a justifiable raison d'etre for Christianity. Here is an example [my emphasis]:
Let's not forget the critical Hellenic influence on Christian thinking exerted by the first century Alexandrian Jewish scholar, Philo, mainly credited for introducing the idea of Plato's Logos (i.e. the Word) into Christian thinking. One can appreciate the scope of his influence by the fact the first Church historian, Eusebius of Cesarea (third century), refers to Philo as "St. Philo" (even though he is not reocngized as a Chirstian saint)!
Finally, if Paul's words to Colossian (2:8) were to be applied to Greek philosophy, and pagan religion, then John's Gospel becomes null and void. After all, it is St. John who, at the end of the first century, refines Philo's suggestions and Hellenizes Christianity (for reasons that correposnd to the reality of that time period) by identifying Jesus with Logos, in a complete break with the Jewish tradition of who the anointed one (i.e. the Jewish "meshiyah", or "christos" in Greek) is supposed to be.
First I do not give much credence to the KJV because of it'sshalom b'SHEM Yah'shua HaMashiach
contamination by Jerome and the translation into Latin.NAsbU Luke 22:19 And when He had taken some bread and given thanks,The Bread is blessed and shared at a Passover Seder.
He broke it and gave it to them, saying,
"This is My body which is given for you; do this in remembrance of Me."
It is then described as a metaphor for our understanding.NAsbU Luke 22:20 And in the same way He took the cup afterThe pouring out of the cup of wine is again a metaphor
they had eaten, saying,
"This cup which is poured out for you is the new covenant in My blood.
for His blood as the Lamb of G-d to cover sins.We are commanded to continue to celebrate Passover
breaking the bread and pouring out the wine in remembrance.It is blasphemous to many to have a magic show
claiming to change a matzoh and Passover wine
into the creator of the universe.
There is no essential difference between the KJV and your preferred version, in fact they are word for word for the most part on this passage - so leave the red herring in the refrigerator. Quite frankly, in any translation, Jesus is referring to Himself and not commanding the celebrating the passover, your preferred versions state the same.
"This is My body which is given for you; do this in remembrance of Me."
The Bread is blessed and shared at a Passover Seder. It is then described as a metaphor for our understanding.
Sorry Uriel, there is absolutely NO evidence that the Jews recognized bread in the passover seder to symbolize someone's body prior to Jesus. Jesus uses the possessive "MY" body and in rememberance of ME.
"This cup which is poured out for you is the new covenant in My blood.
Similar possessive MY blood. Again, no Jewish interpretation prior to Jesus. In both cases Jesus is presenting something NEW.
We are commanded to continue to celebrate Passover breaking the bread and pouring out the wine in remembrance.
Rememberance of WHAT Uriel? The Passover? No, Jesus is very clear in the passage - it was a rememberance of HIM.
It is blasphemous to many to have a magic show claiming to change a matzoh and Passover wine into the creator of the universe.
That is not germaine to this discussion (nor am I Catholic). I could care less if you believed in the flying spagetti monster. Words mean things and the passage - even in your prefered version - makes it clear. The celebration was no longer about the Passover - or a command to celebrate the passover - but that Jesus' sacrifice (a "new testiment") has replaced the old Jewish Passover. To try to make it say such forces an interpretation upon the passage that doesn't exist there.
I would further add the words Paul wrote to the Corinthians on this same subject, decades before Luke was written - it is no longer the Passover - it is the Lord's supper (1 Cor 11) and is one of the earliest statements of Christian faith accounting for the practice within years of Jesus' resurrection and acension. It is further indicated that it occured far more often than annually, but as often as every week.
The scriptures speak plainly - this is not a command by Jesus to observe Passover - it is a command to remember His sacrifice EVERYTIME we break bread and share wine in rememberance of it.
If I understand you correctly your new god jesus created a new religion ?
That's cute uriel - can't deal with the context of a passage, so you start getting snarky about the Person of Jesus. Jesus bought with His blood the fulfillment of the old law. God provided the old covenant, God provided the new covenant. That Jesus said it was HIS new covenant makes Jesus God as well doesn't it.
I don't think so. Yah'shua's blood covered our sins against His Covenant. Since you brought up the New Covenant, My friend you have been misled. Jesus ended YHvH's permanent covenant ?
shalom b'SHEM Yah'shua HaMashiach
check out Jeremiah 31:31-37
and find out what is YHvH's New Covenant.
Check your thinking then.
Yah'shua's blood covered our sins against His Covenant.
Poor understanding of atonement of Jesus - cleanses from all sin and completely fulfills the law.
Since you brought up the New Covenant, check out Jeremiah 31:31-37 and find out what is YHvH's New Covenant.
That is a new one with the Nation of Israel - I'm a gentile
My friend you have been misled.
Not in the least.
A clear reading of Holy Scripture will show It does not End the Law and create lawlessness however. Do you wish to be grafted into Israel or not? So you believe in lawlessness ?
shalom b'SHEM Yah'shua HaMashiach
The blood of the Lamb covers all sin.
See Romans 11
fulfilling the law does not create lawlessness, nor does living under the law create righteousness. See ALL of Romans and Galatians.
The Catholic Church has always believed that Jesus Christ is the one mediator between God and man. It is the death and resurrection of Jesus alone by which people are saved.Look closely at what 1 Timothy 2:5 really says: Jesus is the only mediator between God and man. Because Jesus was the God-Man, only he can be the Mediator, the one who is between. Between men and the Father, there is the Son. This doesn’t undercut our belief that the saints in heaven intercede for us because these saints, too, are (wo)men; they are members of mankind. Thus, we ((wo)men) ask them ((wo)men, too) to pray to the one Mediator (Jesus) in order to find favor with the Father.
In 449 Pope Leo the Great wrote his Tome against Eutyches, who taught that Jesus Christ had only one nature, not two. (This was the heresy of monophysitism.) In the Tome, which the Council of Chalcedon accepted as the authentic Catholic teaching on Christ, he quotes 1 Timothy 2:5 as the authentic Catholic doctrine: "Hence, as was suitable for the alleviation of our distress, one and the same mediator between God and men, himself man, Christ Jesus, was both mortal and immortal under different.aspects."
The fifth session of the Council of Trent (1546) laid out the belief in Jesus the one true mediator as the norm of Catholic faith: "[Original sin cannot be] taken away through the powers of human nature or through a remedy other than the merit of the one mediator, our Lord Jesus Christ, who reconciled us to God in his blood, having become our justice, and sanctification, and redemption."
The schema of the Dogmatic Constitution on the Principal Mysteries of the Faith, drafted for the First Vatican Council (1869-1870), includes the unique mediation of Jesus Christ as one of these principal mysteries: "Truly, therefore, Christ Jesus is mediator between God and man, one man dying for all; he made satisfaction to the divine justice for us, and he erased the handwriting that was against us. Despoiling principalities and powers, he brought us from our longstanding slavery into the freedom of sons."
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.