I meant that an outsider must be introduced into the situation to help settle the issue.
Last edited:
The Bible does not teach to pray to Jesus
- Thread starter Runningman
- Start date
synergy
Active Member
Two different covenants, two different mediators. As you know, the critical covenant is the New Covenant wherein salvation is found. That's where Jesus is considered the one and only Mediator because he is the only one who shares both natures of God and man and is therefore the only one who can mediate between God and man.
The message has been obscure, or at least the logic. Few modern interpreters see Jesus as mediator in these two verses. The point I had last made shows he cannot be a mediator in a promise from God to him. See 3:16 on that point and then 3:19 on Christ arriving according to the promise to him. Also, the issue that has caused the greatest problem is the last phrase "but God is one." The interpretations vary greatly. It is not something readily figured out. I think the letter's recipients could follow it since they were taught by Paul.
Also, it is likely that Paul was cautious in mention of the divinity of God due to persecution against him and the Galatian gentiles -- a concern resulting from aggression for presumed blasphemous ideas of the divinity of Christ.
synergy
Active Member
The unitarian knee jerk reaction is always that God is one person. That is never found in scripture, only in their minds. Whoever believes John 1:1 (the Word was God) can never agree to that unitarian heretical position. Because of that verse and many more verses, it only makes sense that God is one essence/nature, not one person.
Paul is holding steady with the "Lord is One" shema but Paul is not one to shy away from confrontational truths.
Right. They modify the Shema to satisfy their doctrine, even when it makes verses like these unreadable.
Galatians is likely his first letter. So he could exercise caution at that time for the sake of the gentiles.
As to any verification or endorsement of my explanation of Gal 3:16,19-20, I would need to get the interpretation distributed broadly and see how people respond. A narrow group reading it could miss the point or be too strong on an alternative explanation.
Runningman
Active Member
Party 1 = God
Mediator = Jesus
Party 2 = humans
That's Scripture. 1 Tim. 2:5 is a prooftext against the deity of Jesus. This isn't rocket science. For normal people it's very rational.
you fail even those who cannot do rocket science. Humans are not the topic in Gal 3:19-20 unless you have some odd interpretation. Galatians not writing about 1 Tim 2:5. How does "but God is one" fit in your very unique interpretation?
Runningman
Active Member
Seems you have already forgotten we are discussing your OP: Mike's errant belief about the Godhead
Your theory is that you are suggesting there is no mediator needed between God and Jesus, contrary to Scripture like 1 Timothy 2:5, and Moses being a mediator, because you want Jesus to be God. I think you are just being evasive and coy at this point.
And regarding the oneness of God, this is not about ontological oneness. This oneness is the same kind of oneness others share with God. Being one with God is something Jesus and Christians enjoy.
you do not make sense in your opposition. you are too confused. jesus is one party. God is the other party. Jesus cannot mediate between himself and God. That would be like saying you have a dispute with the dealer about a car you bought. It needs mediation so you become the mediator. That would be pure nonsense. Jesus cannot mediate between himself and God in this situation of GAl 3:19-20. Maybe you can respond how that is possible.
Then your idea of oneness Christians have has nothing to do with the issue of the law being discussed in Gal 3. You have isolated v20 and made it nonsensical. But that is not really a surprise with your interpretations.
Runningman
Active Member
Jesus isn't mediating between himself and God, but rather between mankind and God in the same way Moses was a mediator between God and the Israelites concerning the Law. That's what a mediator does. You are attempting to blur the lines between Jesus and God. The language of the Bible will not allow you to do this. Galatians 3:19,20 is a strong passage to show how God and Jesus aren't the same person.
Other related ideas would be Jesus as a high priest for his people to God. The high priest is never himself God anywhere in the Bible.
you are not talking about Gal 3:19-20 when you speak of Jesus as a mediator since the challenge of v 20 is against mediating a single party. I do not know how you are suggesting the idea of a mediating of many; that is not in focus here.
Also, I do not know of any Trinitarian who says Jesus and God are the same person. You have a strawman that you are arguing against.
Since Jesus is human and of the Godhead, he acts in both ways. If you have an improved Trinity concept, that could help on this issue.
Runningman
Active Member
Ah, you're just going to dig your heels in on Galatians 3 now. Either I can stay here and beat that dead horse for another week or we can move on, again, which is what already happened before you brought it up again. When you're ready to stop stonewalling me, let me know.
Wait, you think Trinitarians do not believe Jesus is God? So you agree that Jesus isn't God then.
You seem to have changed over time. Now you have stopped saying Jesus is God, but are now obscuring his real status as one who is of an imaged "three member Godhead."
synergy
Active Member
We are not modalists is what we are trying to get through to you. Hello. Can you understand that we are not modalists? So stop trying to twist our words to suit your heresies.
Since you show a lack of understanding of Gal 3:19-20, you can hardly deny the reliance on Galatian knowledge of the deity of Christ here. All you have been able to do is force the idea of Jesus being mediator in a 2 Tim 2:5 superficially into Gal 3:19-20. But you could not explain Gal 3:19-20 itself in any detail. Like any passage that points to the divinity of Christ, you give a weak proposal that hardly is convincing. Your approach then is to sweep the evidence under the rug and move on to "safer" territory.
If you do not know that mention of God being a person involves confusion of meaning when talking about the Trinity, you should not even be discussing this topic. Or, perhaps, that is why you get confused and do not understand the essence of God. Or, you are manipulating the discussion instead of holding to an honest approach. Is that the only tool you have?
Again, you use my wording to clarify the discussion as if I have "changed over time." I can state again Christ is God. No one has sufficiently argued otherwise.
Last edited:
Runningman
Active Member
Nothing about the deity of Christ in Galatians 3:19,20. Your error has been that you are imposing this premise without first having proved it.
1 Timothy 2:5 is about the mediatorship of Jesus. Paul doesn't contradict himself or make God and Jesus out to be a single party together. The point is that if that's the case then God would be His own mediator between Jesus and humanity, of which Jesus is included. Your premise is all based on a "riddle" as you say.
Most of your replies are just ad hominem anymore. I think you have lost your point long ago but just lack the humility and temperament to do so gracefully. There's something for you to work on.
that was not ad hominem but is a list of choices. You have not explained a difficult couple of verses while disagreeing with the solution I have given.
You just keep going in circles denying scripture. The point about the riddle is that the reader has to recognize the three local times of mentioning the aspect of "one" in 3:16, 19-20. That point is to help understand it. But it remains a mystery for you since you miss the difficulty of the verses. Nor do you share a sufficient understanding of any conventional sense nor of recognizing the difficulty of it.
The people of Judah were expecting the Messiah/King not just some generic anointed something or another. Jesus came to reveal he is that king. That is the king of Daniel 7:13ff. You have a non-Jesus-focused religion since you deny everything most important about Jesus.
I'm not giving up on telling the truth. sorry if that hurts you.
Last edited:
Runningman
Active Member
Talking about me, the person writing these comments, instead of my refutes of Trinitarianism is an ad hominem and it makes you and your ilk look bad.
Which ones? I have already refuted your mediator argument of Galatians 3:19,20. Was their something else?
No the point about the riddle is that neither Moses nor Jesus are ontologically one with God. You can't just keep ignoring these facts about Galatians 3 and repeating the same mistakes in circles, but you're welcome to. It really exposes the weakness of trinitarian to the public so thank you.
Don't give up please. Let's keep my thread on page one, front and center, I need the truth to get out. No matter where the conversation turns is ok for me. As long as people know the Bible doesn't teach to pray to Jesus then I am happy. Thank you for helping.
I have talked about Gal 3 but you talk about 2 Tim 2 as if Paul wrote those for the same purpose. The proof of what I have explained is that the two verses (or three with Gal 3:16) finally makes sense of the difficult verses. You have not made any sense of them from what I have seen. Nor do you match any commentator that I have checked.
That has nothing to do with the interpretation of Gal 3:19-20. What do you think is the function of Gal 3:16-20?
The truth has gone out, but you do not listen.
Runningman
Active Member
I doubt you'll listen to anything aside from an agreement which won’t come from me. In the context of Galatians 3, there are certainly numerous parties. There are those under the law and Moses and there are those under faith and Jesus. Then there is God.
It follows suit that those under the law, Moses, and God are distinct parties. It follows suit that “those in Christ” are the seed of Abraham, including Jesus himself. So there are those under faith, Jesus, and God.
I think the more I examine this passage, your result actually gets worst. Paul said that the seed of Abraham refers to one, not many. Then he concludes the shape by saying that those in Christ are the seed of Abraham which would make church members God according to the construct of your argument.
I don’t see your disconnect here. I’m not budging on anything. Maybe it’s better you just state what you believe and stick to it and I’ll do the same.
Maybe some feedback for you.
You have not clarified what Rom 3:19-20 has said. It seems instead you jumped to Rom 3:27-28ish when you say "the seed of Abraham refers to one, not many." So it is impossible to find any aspect pertinent to an alternative view of Rom 3:19-20.
