gregor

The poll is un-answerable. The varying NT depictions of Jesus are many, and given the revisions before and after canonization, how can we hope to provide an answer? Possible additional options:

- only man, adopted by God at crucification (Mark)
- miracle working superman, short of God (Luke)
- gnostic near-god intervenor to supersede the evi, earth creating god (early gospel version)
- greek philosophical quasi god (John)
- deity appearing on a non-earthly plane (Paul)

SORRY - I missed the split to another thread

Soul Invictus

Ooh...cool that we start off on the same track. Let's investigate our differences.

I'm not sure the point of saying that humans/mortals are "mere". I've heard the usage of this term in the Christian sphere from pro-God Jesus advocates. That's something for another thread though.

As to your quote, Paul is describing Jesus, yes?


I'm not sure how you got that Paul was saying that. His wording seems very clear and unambiguous to me - ....the man Christ Jesus. I'm not seeing anything parallel to wording that says....the being that appears to be a man Christ Jesus.

StarCross

Hello again Soul,

I understand what you are saying. If you look at 1 Tim 2:5 again:

Notice that Paul does not say "a man" but rather "the man" to describe Jesus. This indicates that Jesus is a unique and special kind of being. After all, the verse does make a distinction between "men" as earthly mortals and what Christ was ('the man' as opposed to simply 'a man'). Keep in mind that Paul is describing Christ in heaven, not flesh and blood. Paul wrote this verse long after Christ's ascension. This would then allow us to reconcile Paul's description here with his description of Jesus in Philippians 2:8:

Do you see what I am saying?

Thanks
StarCross.

Soul Invictus

Hi again Starcross,

Since you rely on Philippians 2:8 to support your theory, I'll deal with the primary scripture, 1 Tim 2:5

It makes perfect sense that Paul say the man instead of a man Christ Jesus. The article "the" specifies that the object, which is Jesus, is a man. If he used the article "a", it would grammatically imply that there is more than one man that is Christ Jesus. In case you don't follow what I'm saying, here's an example.

Sentence A

The one responsible for declaring war on Iraq is the President of the United States George Bush.

Sentence B

The one responsible for declaring war on Iraq is a President of the United States George Bush.

The second sentence sounds as if there could be more than one president of the US (that is actively serving) at any given time. Obviously there can only be one active president of the United States at one time, so it would make sense to use Sentence A.

Make sense?

StarCross

Maybe I am not understanding you entirely but you appear to be arguing one thing but demonstrating the opposite with your examples. You are also skipping over a very important aspect that I stressed previously that Paul is speaking of the RISEN Christ in heaven. "The man" Christ Jesus cannot be referring to flesh and blood because Christ Jesus is not flesh and blood. Jesus Christ of the Gospels was formed of flesh and blood but was not a man. Christ Jesus (the RISEN Christ) is no longer flesh and blood:

How can the apostle Paul be referring to a flesh and blood human being in 1 Tim 2:5 if he is describing Christ Jesus as something other than flesh and blood here?

Thanks
StarCross.

Soul Invictus

I don't think you're understanding me. I don't understand how you concluded that my examples illustrate the opposite my argument. In both the "Jesus" sentences and the "President" sentences, the articles "a" and "the" qualify their respective objects.

I don't know what this has to do with a Jesus being a man.

Tell me the difference between and

Are these two different people?

Also, it sounds like you're trying to provide an example in which "flesh and blood" doesn't indicate being human and I don't know your basis for arguing this. I still haven't seen any indication as to why I should not believe that Paul means anything different than what he says.