In a previous post I made the case in favor of the importance of the middle phrase of 1 Timothy 2:5 (KJV) --
For there is one God, and one mediator between God and men, the man Christ Jesus
Now, I will examine the importance of two key individual words in the middle phrase for the proper interpretation of this verse. The words to focus upon are "and" and "one":
and can mean 'as well as', 'in addition to', 'along with' or 'also';
one can mean 'single' or 'individual'. BTW, both of the Greek words for "and" (
kai) and "one" (
eis) are actually found in the underlying ancient text.
Perhaps a visual aid of the word construction without "and" and "one" included will expedite our discovery --
For there is one God, { } mediator between God and men, the man Christ Jesus
The above construction should indicate to the reader that the middle phrase is describing the preceding phrase; specifically, that the "one God" is a "mediator". If Paul meant that the "mediator" was referring back to "one God" then this would be the proper way to express it. We can see that the words "and" and "one" in the middle phrase are completely unnecessary to arrive at this conclusion. This structure
would allow the last phrase to compliment the first --
For there is one God (the man Christ Jesus), mediator between God and men
Even if just the "and" were included in the construction it could carry the sense of 'as well as' and still not alter this interpretation; the first comma is unneeded in this example --
For there is one God-man (Christ Jesus) {as well as} mediator between God and men
Note that this interpretation must treat the two occurrences of the exact same word ("God") inconsistently or else there is a logical problem of a Person of the Godhead being between Himself and men (being His own mediator). The irregular method of substitution must cause only the first "God" in the verse to alter identity. If we accept that "God" is also mediator, then how can we immediately disregard this characteristic for very next "God" we find in the text? But this is absurd --
For there is one God-man (Christ Jesus) as well as mediator between {God-mediator} and men
Of course, these are not the ways the verse is written, and when "one" is present with "and" (in the 'as well as' sense) it becomes very awkward to ascribe "mediator" to "God"; if the truth is supposed to be a single 'God-mediator' (or even 'God-man/mediator') then there is no need to repeat "one" before "mediator". A redundant "one" would not serve any purpose. In light of the audience to whom Paul is writing, it is difficult to understand the necessity for enumeration of the 'God-mediator' or 'God-man' at all, since Timothy and his brethren that are being admonished into prayer for others certainly did NOT believe in multiple gods or messiahs.
Yet when "and" is understood in the sense of 'along with' it then functions harmoniously with words "one" to form the literary parallelism of "there is one God, AND [there is] one mediator" (the verb can be implied for the second phrase). Or --
For there is one God, {along with} one mediator between God and men, the man Christ Jesus
As I have written in an earlier post, Paul is giving two separate and distinct reasons in v.5 that support his instruction in the preceding verses of chapter 2. In part, because of "and" and "one", I don't believe that Paul was making a singular claim (of the Deity of Christ) that doesn't corroborate or relate to his preceding discourse. Structured another way it may seem clearer --
For there is one God, and one mediator (the man Christ Jesus) between God and men
