Greg Logan wrote:With respect, I think our discussion has come to a close.
Thank you for your participation Greg. I was waiting for you to expand upon
your vague objection to my previous post before I answered it, but since you chose to not explain yourself, I'll go ahead and provide more justification for that now in order to edify other interested readers.
One reason why the Greek text of 1 Timothy 2:5 doesn't support the weight you try to place upon it is because you emphasize that it
must be present tense, while the Greek text simply is not explicitly so. The verb is implicit, and as such it must be interpreted by the translator. Take for example the other verse you brought up, 1 Corinthians 15:21, which states:
- "For since by a man came death, by a man also came the resurrection of the dead." (NAS)
The NAS translators supplied both implicit verbs above and chose the past-tense form for both. This is an interpretation. Another version has the passage this way:
- "For since death came through a man, the resurrection of the dead comes also through a man." (NIV)
The NIV translators chose to supply a past-tense verb in the first instance and a present-tense verb in the second. This too is a valid translation of the passage, but again it should be well understood that this is an interpretation by the translators; they
inferred this meaning from contextual considerations.
Now what if I tried to use the NAS version of 1 Corinthians 15:21 as my major proof text to
insist that the resurrection has already taken place? (It's PAST tense!!!) Would the text be able to support my claim? NO!! And that's because the past-tense aspect that I would be using as my proof is merely an
interpretation by those translators.
So let's look again at 1 Timothy 2:5, which says:
- "For there is one God, and there is one mediator between God and men, the man Christ Jesus." (ESV)
The translators here decided to supply two present-tense verbs, but they could have, with equal authority, rendered the passage as the NIV did 1 Corinthians 15:21, using verbs with different tenses:
- "For there is one God, and there was one mediator between God and men, the man Christ Jesus."
This would be an equally valid translation/interpretation of the underlying Greek text, and it would NOT support the burden you are attempting to make the verse carry because it explicitly places the entire episode of Jesus' mediatorship (as a man) in the past, when he made his sacrifice (as the next verse spells out).
This was the point I was making by noting the simple fact that the present tense in that passage is merely an interpretation of the Greek. But as I went on to explain, I don't at all believe that it's even necessary to use a past-tense verb in the passage to show your conclusion is faulty. I'm perfectly happy with the way the ESV translates it. The effects of Jesus' work as mediator, wherein he provided the ransom sacrifice (in the past), extends to the present and is
no different than a first-century Jew saying that "the man Moses
is our mediator". That claim would certainly NOT be intended as proof that Moses still existed somewhere as a human being! But you chose to not respond to any of that (common-sense) reasoning.
Thank you again for discussing these issues with me, Greg.