While we are not seeking to make brethren offenders for words, we need to understand the paramount importance of each little jot and tittle in God's word as they are all important and relevant for our study. There are many texts in the Bible that are commonly misquoted, and this text is one such case. Even though the misquotation is perhaps "minor" and not intentional, the thought expressed in the misquotation is still damaging when fully considered. So, let us investigate this verse to see what it is saying and what it is not. Many times, this verse is quoted, "For there is one God, and one mediator between God and man, the man Christ Jesus." The difference is the difference between the word "man" and the word "men." Let us, for a moment, think about what the verse would mean if Jesus was the mediator between God and man. What is the difference between that and men? Is it relevant?  I believe that we will find that the difference is profound and quite relevant for us to consider. The word "man" can carry with it two thoughts. The first thought is that it speaks of singularity. When one person is referenced, the mention of "a man" is one of the most suitable references to the circumstance. On the other hand, the word man can have reference to a complete group. When the Psalmist asks, "What is man, that thou art mindful of him?" (Psalm 8:4) the question is applicable to every member of mankind.  

So, the use of the word man (by the misquotation of the verse) could carry either of these connotations. Looking at the first thought, we would infer that Jesus Christ is the mediator for one man. In other words, there would only be one person able to offer up prayers and supplications to go through Jesus Christ. So, in this scenario, one man's prayers would really be more important than another's. Such a situation is void of spiritual, Scriptural reasoning. Jesus Himself told the disciples that whatever they asked of the Father in His name would be granted. (John 16:26-27) Since the Lord Jesus gave that promise to the apostles (not one apostle), the idea that only one man can pray through Jesus as his mediator is total folly. The idea that supplications and confessions of sins must go through another to get to Jesus and into the heavenly throneroom is nonsensical. The verse plainly states that Jesus is the One and only Mediator, and the "one man" theory will not stand up to Scriptural examination. The other thought on the word "man" would indicate that every man that draws a natural breath has access to the Father by the Son. Such a thought would indicate that Christ died for all men that draw a natural breath. Again, this idea is void of Scriptural foundation, for if Jesus Christ died for all men that draw a natural breath, we must come to one of two conclusions. 1. Should He be who He says He is (Son of God), then all will be saved. The very God of heaven will not lose anything that He has purposed to save, so all must be there. 2. Should He lose one that He saved, none will be saved, for He cannot be the Son of God. One is either a universalist or no-versalist by the logical progression of the thought. Since Christ, the Son of God, brings to life the objects of His love as it hath pleased Him, we must conclude from Scripture that if all will not be there, not all were paid for and died for. So, if Christ would not die for someone, why would He pray and mediate for that person? (John 17:9) Now that we have given the logical progression of both avenues that improperly use the word "man" instead of "men," let us examine what we can find from the use of the word "men." The word "men" is the plural of "man." Looking at the verse, we see a singularity in God and the Mediator. There is only one God, and there is only one Mediator. Yet, there is a plurality of persons on the other side of the equation. There were many offenders, but only one offended. Also, we learn from this that our status in Christ is equal. There is no hierarchy of love as Christ serves as High Priest and Intercessor for all the heirs of grace. I can think of no better place in all of Scripture to add some kind of distinction to the children of God, if there was one to make, than in this verse. This verse puts all the men together with Christ between them and the Father. This verse should remove any sense of preeminence that a man may feel to have among his brethren. The only position of honour belongs to Christ as the sole Mediator of His people. There is no other person to sit with God as Ruler. The fact that we are blessed to be able to approach unto God (the offended) with boldness (Hebrews 4:16) is due to the One that stands in the breach for us. He was made a shame and reproach when He hung in the breach in our stead some 2000 years ago, and right now, He ever liveth to make intercession for His people at the right hand of the majesty on high. Indeed, this verse brings into focus some basic, bedrock principles. By misquoting the thought, we lose sight of the beauty of some of those principles, and whether intentional or not, we do damage to the principle being espoused. Therefore, let us not make brethren offenders for words, but may we examine ourselves to carefully see whether we are rightly stating the truths of God's word. My own experience is full of times where I must kick myself for not quoting or getting something right. It is a woeful thing to lead astray (even innocently) a little lamb by a simple mis-statement. May we beseech our Mediator to sweeten our studies and retain the precise thought and verbiage being employed.

In Hope,

 Bro Philip