1. Who is “men” – – for whom do we pray, in verse 1?
2. What does “first of all” refer to?  First of what?

1 Tim 2:3

3 For this is good and acceptable in the sight of God our Savior;

1. What does “this” refer to in verse 3a?
2. Who is our Savior in this verse?

1 Tim 2:4

4 Who will have all men to be saved, and to come unto the knowledge of the truth.

1. In verse 4 who are the “men” God wishes to be saved? Or, does this verse say anything about God’s wishes for women?
2. What is “to be saved” in verse 4b?
3. Can one be saved in this verse without a full knowledge of truth?

1 Tim 2:5

5 For there is one God, and one mediator between God and men, the man Christ Jesus;

1. Discuss “one God” in light of the Christian formula; God the Father, God the Son, and the Holy Ghost.
2. What is the significance of the phrase “one mediator of God and of men”?
3. Discuss briefly the nature of Christ as it relates to the phrase “a man Christ Jesus”.

1 Tim 2:6

6 who gave himself a ransom for all, to be testified in due time.

1. What is the significance of calling Jesus a ransom?
2. Summarize the teaching of verses 5 and 6.

1 Tim 2:7, 8

7 Whereunto I am ordained a preacher, and an apostle, (I speak the truth in Christ, and lie not;) a teacher of the Gentiles in faith and verity.
8 I will therefore that men pray every where, lifting up holy hands, without wrath and doubting.

1. What is Paul to herald, according to verse 7?
2. In the context of 2:7 what is to be prayed for in fulfilling Paul’s expressed wish in 2:8?

1 Tim 2:9, 10

9 In like manner also, that women adorn themselves in modest apparel, with shamefacedness and sobriety; not with braided hair, or gold, or pearls, or costly array;
10 But (which becometh women professing godliness) with good works.

1. What are women to do “similarly” to men? (verse 9a)?
2. According to verse 9 how are women to appear when they are workers for God?
3. According to verse 10 how are women to appear when they are workers for God?

1 Tim 2:11, 12

11 Let the woman learn in silence with all subjection.
12 but I suffer not a woman to teach, nor to usurp authority over the man, but to be in silence.

1. State verse 11 in your own words; to be sure to define “silence,” “subjection,” and “woman,” and “learn.”
2. What is a woman not permitted to do in verse 12?
3. What does the phrase “exercise authority” contribute to one’s definition of “silence” in verse 12 – – if anything?

1 Tim 2:13-15

13 For Adam was first formed, then Eve.
14 And Adam was not deceived, but the woman being deceived was in the transgression.
15 Notwithstanding she shall be saved in childbearing, if they continue in faith and charity and holiness with sobriety.

1. Why does verse 13 start with “For”?
2. What is the message as the content of verses 13 and 14 and the counsels of verse 11 and 12?
3. What is it that saves a woman in verse 15?  Is it childbearing?  Who is “they?”  Explain your answer.
4. A woman once said to me, “What Eve did has nothing to do with me.”  Is that statement true or false in the light of verses 19-15 in your opinion?

Assignment Answers

1 Tim 2:1, 2

1. The word “men” is the English translation of the greek anthropos, meaning “human being” or “man.”  The greek word anar is the word which designates a man when one wishes to show “contrast to a woman, “ “contrast to a boy,” or “to emphasize the dominant characteristics of a man” (Arndt & Gingrich, pp. 65, 66, 67).

   The “men” for whom we are to pray are the fellow human being who surround us and/or with whom and by whom our lives are affected.

2. “First of all” refers to the ladder of activities to be dealt with in this chapter and in this Bible book.

1 Tim 2:3

1. Praying for our fellow human beings to the end we may lead a quiet life of service to God (verse 2c).
2. God the Father (see 1:1)

1 Tim 2:4

1. “Men” is anthropos: our fellow human beings.
2. “To be saved” is from the greek word sozo, meaning “to preserve or rescue from dangers, “ to “save from death, “ or to “bring out safely” (Arndt & Gingrich, p. 805).

   As was noted in our study on the meaning and nature of miracle which appears under 1:1 above, sickness and sin are very closely related in Scripture; even the earth’s problems are to be addressed when God comes to save us.

   To be saved is to be healed; the blind will see, the deaf will hear, the lame will leap as a hart, and in the dry places waters shall break out.  The saved will go to Zion.  Isa 35:3-10.

   But the wicked will not go to the new earth (Isa 35:8).  In this context Paul’s statement, God wishes all to be saved, means that God wishes all to make use of the opportunity to be changed provided by verses 5 & 6.

3. “To be saved” and “to come to a full knowledge of truth” are separate wishes, because they are connected by the conjunction and (kai).  Therefore one can be saved, in this verse, without a full knowledge of truth.

1 Tim 2:5

1.  “One God” is a famous formula from Deut 6:4.  This formula is of interest in light of the Christian formula equating the God of the Bible with the Father, and the Son, and the Holy Spirit.

   A careful study of Scripture shows the three members of the heavenly trio share their titles and qualities.  (Texts such as John 1, Col 1, Phil 2, Heb 1, & Isa 9:.)

   In Isaiah 9:6 we also find a very interesting phrase that is almost universally mistranslated.

   The KJV translates the first part of this text, “for unto us a child is born, unto us a son is given; and the government shall be upon his shoulder; . . . “  all translations I’m aware of follow this pattern.  The fact is the Hebrew for “shall be” is a past tense, and can be translated “has been.”  In Isa 9:6 the prophesied child to be born is the One upon whose shoulders the government has been.

   In the Spirit of Prophecy we find a very interesting formula setting forth the concept of one God and three persons.  That formula stresses the concept of one substance, three persons.  This formula also stresses the oneness of the godhead while setting forth the heavenly trio so clearly presented in the New Testament, and appearing, though perhaps not so clearly, in the Old Testament, as equals.
    
   Note the following as examples of statements in the Spirit of Prophecy regarding one God.  (Much of this material is taken from Questions on Doctrine.)

   Christ, the Word, the only begotten of God, was one with the eternal Father, – – one in nature, in character, in purpose, – – the only being that could enter into all the counsels and purposes of God.

   “His name shall be called Wonderful, counselor, The mighty God, The everlasting Father, the Prince of peace” (Isa 9:6).  His “goings forth have been from of old, from everlasting”  (Micah 5:2). (Patriarchs and Prophets, p. 34).

   The Jews had never before heard such words from human lips, and a convicting influence attended them; for it seemed that divinity flashed through humanity as Jesus said, “I and my Father are one.”  The words of Christ were full of deep meaning as he put forth the claim that he and the Father were of one substance, possessing the same attributes (The Signs of the Times, Nov. 27, 1893, p. 54).

   Yet the Son of God was the acknowledged Sovereign of heaven, one in power and authority with the Father  (The Great Controversy, p. 495).

   To save the transgressor of God’s law, Christ, the one equal with the Father, came to live heaven before men, that they might learn to know what it is to have heaven in the heart.  He illustrated what man must be to be worthy of the precious boon of the life that measures with the life of God (Fundamentals of Christian Education, p. 179).

   The world was made by him, “and without him was not anything made that was made.”  If Christ made all things, he existed before all things.  The words spoken in regard to this are so decisive that no one need be left in doubt.  Christ was God essentially, and in the highest sense.  He was with God from all eternity, God over all, blessed forevermore. . . .
                   There are light and glory in the truth that Christ was one with the Father before the foundation of the world was laid.  This is the light shining in the dark place, making it resplendent with divine, original glory.  This truth, infinitely mysterious in itself, explains other mysterious and otherwise unexplainable truths, while it is enshrined in light, unapproachable and incomprehensible (The Review and Herald, April 5, 1906, p. 8).

   The world’s redeemer was equal with God.  His authority was as the authority of God.  He declared that he had no existence separate from the Father.  The authority by which he spoke, and wrought miracles, was expressly his own, yet he assures us that he and the Father are one (The Review and Herald, Jan. 7, 1890, p. 1)

   Before the entrance of sin among the angels; Christ the Word, the only-begotten of God, was one with the eternal Father, – – one in nature, in character, and in purpose, – – the only being in all the universe that could enter into all the counsels and purposes of God.  By Christ, the Father wrought in the creation of all heavenly beings (The Great Controversy, p. 493).

   The Lord Jesus Christ, the divine Son of God existed from eternity, a distinct person, yet one with the Father.  He was the surpassing glory of heaven.  He was the commander of the heavenly intelligence, and the adoring homage of the angels was received by him as his right.  This was no robbery of God (The Review and Herald, April 5, 1906, p. 8).

   In speaking of His pre-existence, Christ carries the mind back through dateless ages.  He assures us that there never was a time when He was not in close fellowship with the eternal God.  He to whose voice the Hews were then listening had been with God as one brought up with Him (The Signs of the Times, Aug. 29, 1900).

   From all eternity Christ was united with the Father, and when He took upon Himself human nature, He was still one with God (The Signs of the Time, Aug. 2, 1905, p. 10).

   From the days of eternity the Lord Jesus Christ was one with the Father; He was “the image of God,” the image of His greatness and majesty, “the outshining of His glory” (The Desire of Ages, p. 19).

   He was one with the Father before the angels were created (The Spirit of Prophecy, vol. 1, p. 17).

   Christ was God essentially, and in the highest sense.  He was with God from all eternity, God over all, blessed forevermore (The Review and Herald, April 5, 1906, p. 8).

The name of God, given to Moses to express the idea of the eternal presence, had been claimed as His own by this Galilean Rabbi.  He had announced Himself to be the self-existent One, He who had been promised to Israel, “whose goings forth have been from of old, from the days of eternity.”  Micah 5:2, margin.  (The desire of Ages, pp. 469, 470).

1. In the phrase one mediator of God and of men, the greek word for one carries significances such as, one, only one, and single (Arndt & Gingrich, p. 230).

   In using such a word the writer of 1 Timothy declares that there is only one mediator of God and man.

   Note again the Spirit of Prophecy.

   But while God’s Word speaks of the humanity of Christ when upon this earth, it also speaks decidedly regarding his pre-existence.  The Word existed as a divine being, even as the eternal Son of God, in union and oneness with his Father.  From everlasting he was the Mediator of the covenant, the one in whom all nations of the earth, both Jews and Gentiles, if they accepted him, where to be blessed.  “The Word was with God, and the Word was God.”  Before men or angels were created, the Word was with God and was God (The Review and Herald, April 5, 1906)

   The only way in which the fallen race could be restored was through the gift of his Son, equal with himself, possessing the attributes of God.  Though so highly exalted, Christ consented to assume human nature, that he might work in behalf of man and reconcile to God his disloyal subjects. When man rebelled, Christ pleaded his merits in his behalf, and became man’s substitute and surety.  He undertook to combat the powers of darkness in man’s behalf, and he prevailed, conquering the enemy of our souls, and presenting to man the cup of salvation (the Review and Herald, Nov. 8, 1892, p. 690).

   The great sacrifice had been offered and had been accepted, and the Holy Spirit which descended on the day of Pentecost carried the minds of the disciples from the earthly sanctuary to the heavenly, where Jesus had entered by His own blood, to shed upon His disciples the benefits of His atonement (Early Writings, p. 260).

   By His spotless life, his obedience, His death on the cross of Calvary, Christ interceded for the lost race.  And now, not as a mere petitioner does the Captain of our salvation intercede for us, but as a Conqueror claiming His victory.  His offering is complete, and as our Intercessor He executes His self-appointed work, holding before God the censer containing His own spotless merits and the prayers, confessions, and thanksgiving of His people.  Perfumed with the fragrance of His righteousness, these ascend to God as a sweet savor.  The offering is wholly acceptable, and pardon covers all transgression (Christ’s Object Lessons, p. 156).

   When Christ died upon the cross of Calvary, a new and living way was opened to both Jew and Gentile.  The Savior was henceforth to officiate as priest and advocate in the heaven of heavens.  Henceforth the blood of beasts offered for sins was valueless, for the Lamb of God had died for the sins of the world (Und. Manuscript 127).

   Christ glorified not Himself in being made High Priest.  God gave Him His appointment to the priesthood.  He was to be an example to all the human family.  He qualified Himself to be, not only the representative of the race, but their Advocate, so that every soul if he will may say, I have a Friend at court.  He is a High Priest that can be touched with the feelings of our infirmities (Manuscript 101, 1897).

   Jesus is officiating in the presence of God offering up His shed blood, as it had been a lamb slain. Jesus presents the oblation offered for every offense and every shortcoming of the sinner.

   Christ, our Mediator, and the Holy Spirit are constantly interceding in man’s behalf, but the Spirit pleads not for us as does Christ who presents His blood, shed from the foundation of the world; the Spirit works upon our hearts, drawing out prayers and penitence, praise and thanksgiving.  Manuscript 50, 1900 (SDA Bible Commentary, vol. 5, on Rom 8:26, 34).

   When Christ ascended to heaven, He ascended as our advocate.  We always have a friend at court. And from on high Christ sends His representative to every nation, kindred, tongue, and people.  The Holy Spirit gives the divine anointing to all who receive Christ, (The Christian Educator, August, 1897, p. 22).

   He has paid the ransom money for the whole world.  All may be saved through Him.  He will present those who believe on Him to God as loyal subjects of His kingdom.  He will be their Mediator as well as their Redeemer (Manuscript 41, 1896).

   Our great High Priest is pleading before the mercy-seat in behalf of his ransomed people. . . . Satan stands at our right hand to accuse us, and our advocate stands at God’s right hand to plead for us.  He has never lost a case that has been committed to Him.  We may trust in our advocate; for He pleads His own merits in our behalf (The Review and Herald, Aug. 15, 1893).

   He gathers into his censer the prayers, the praise, and the confessions of His people, and with these He puts His own spotless righteousness.  Then, perfumed with the merits of Christ’s propitiation, the incense comes from before God wholly and entirely acceptable.  Then gracious answers are returned. . . . The fragrance of this righteousness ascends like a cloud around the mercy seat – – Manuscript 50, 1900 (SDA Bible Commentary, vol. 6, on Rom 8:26, 34).

   The arm that raised the human family from the ruin which Satan has brought upon the race through his temptations, is the arm which has preserved the inhabitants of other worlds from sin.  Every world throughout immensity engages the care and support of the Father and the Son; and this care is constantly exercised for fallen humanity.  Christ is mediating in behalf of man, and the order of unseen worlds also is preserved by His mediatorial work.  Are not these themes of sufficient magnitude and importance to engage our thoughts, and call forth our gratitude and adoration to God?  (the Review and Herald, Jan. 11, 1991; Messages to Young People, p. 254).

The Captain of our salvation is interceding for His people, not as a petitioner to move the Father to compassion, but as a conqueror, who claims the trophies of His victory (Gospel workers, p. 154).

1. When one starts to think of the humanity of Jesus one always thinks of Philippians chapter 2 which presents us with the formula for the nature of Christ; full God, fully man.

   Again we turn to the Spirit of Prophecy materials for a survey of teaching on this exciting topic.  (To make the human nature of Christ clear one has to note His divinity too – – as his pre-existent form, and as to the question of the co-existence of two natures in Jesus.  Was Jesus fully human?  Did He have a nature just like ours?  Did He have the ability to work miracles on His own – – was He that Divine?  Could He have come down from the cross – – or was He only a man at that point?  When Jesus was in the tomb, was He dead?  Did divinity die?  Did He have a soul?  With such questions in mind we will do our brief survey of the statement to be found in Mrs. White’s works.)
   Before presenting out survey it should be noted that the Greek word translated “man” in 1Tim 2:5 is anthropos, not anar (Supra: 2:1, 2).

   Jesus became a man that he might mediate between man and God.  He clothed His divinity with humanity, He associated with the human race, that with His long human arm He might encircle humanity, and with His divine arm grasp the throne of Divinity.  And this, that He might restore to man the original mind which he lost in Eden through Satan’s alluring temptation; that man might realize that it is for his present and eternal good to obey the requirements of God. Disobedience is not in accordance with the nature which God gave to man in Eden (Letter 121, 1897).

   As in the typical service the high priest laid aside his pontifical robes, and officiated in the white linen dress of an ordinary priest; so Christ laid aside His royal robes, and garbed Himself with humanity, and offered sacrifice, Himself the priest, Himself the victim) Ellen G. White, The Acts of the Apostles, p. 33).

   The humanity of the Son of God is everything to us.  It is the golden chain that binds our souls to Christ, and through Christ to God.  This is to be our study.  Christ was a real man; He gave proof of His humility in becoming a man.  Yet He was God in the flesh.  When we approach this subject, we would do well to heed the words spoken by Christ to Moses at the burning bush, “put off they shoes from off they feet, for the place where on thou standest is holy ground.”  We should come to this study with the humility of a learner, with a contrite heart.  And the study of the incarnation of Christ is a fruitful field, which will repay the searcher who digs deep for hidden truth (The Youth’s Instructor, Oct. 13, 1898).

   Was the human nature of the Son of Mary changed into the divine nature of the Son of God?  No; the two natures were mysteriously blended in one person — the man Christ Jesus.  In Him dwelt all the fullness of the Godhead bodily. . . .
                   This is the great mystery, a mystery that will not be fully, completely understood in all it’s greatness until the translation of the redeemed shall take place.  Then the power and greatness and efficacy of the gift of God to man will be understood.  But the enemy is determined that this gift shall be so mystified that it will become as nothingness (the SDA Bible Commentary, vol. 5, p. 1113).

   We cannot explain the great mystery of the plan of redemption.  Jesus took upon Himself humanity, that He might reach humanity; but we cannot explain how divinity was clothed with humanity.  An angel would not have known how to sympathize with fallen man, but Christ came to the world and suffered all our temptations, and carried all our griefs (The Review and Herald, Oct. 1, 1889).

   Laying aside His royal robe and kingly crown, Christ clothed His divinity with humanity, that human beings might be raised from their degradation and placed on vantage-ground.  Christ could not have come to this earth with the glory that He had in the heavenly courts.  Sinful human beings could not have borne the sight.  He veiled His divinity with the garb of humanity, but He did not part with his divinity.  A divine-human Savior, He came to stand at the head of the fallen race, to share in their experience from childhood to manhood.  That human beings might be partakers of the divine nature, He came to this earth, and lived a life of perfect obedience (Ibid., June 15, 1905).

   In Christ, divinity and humanity were combined.  Divinity was not degraded to humanity; divinity held its place, but humanity by being united to divinity, withstood the fiercest test of temptation in the wilderness.  The prince of this world came to Christ after His long fast, when He was an hungered, and suggested to Him to command the stones to become bread.  But the plan of God, devised for the salvation of man, provided that Christ should know hunger, and poverty, and every phase of man’s experience (Ibid., Feb. 18, 1890).

   The more we think about Christ’s becoming a babe here on earth, the more wonderful it appears.  How can it be that the helpless babe in Bethlehem’s manger is still the divine Son of God? Though we cannot understand it, we can believe that He who made the worlds, for our sakes became a helpless babe. Though higher than any of the angels, though as great as the Father on the throne of heaven He became one with us.  In Him God and man became one, and it is in this fact that we find the hope of our fallen race.  Looking upon Christ in the flesh, we look upon God in humanity, and see in Him the brightness of divine glory, the express image of God the Father (The Youth’s Instructor, Nov. 21, 1895).

   No one, looking upon the childlike countenance, shining with animation, could say that Christ was just like other children.  He was God in human flesh.  When urged by His companions to do wrong, divinity flashed through humanity, and He refused decidedly.  In a moment He distinguished between right and wrong, and placed sin in the light of God’s commands, holding up the law as a mirror which reflected light upon wrong (Ibid., Sept. 8, 1898).

   As a member of the human family He was mortal, but as a God he was the fountain of life to the world.  He could, in His divine person, ever have withstood the advances of death, and refused to come under its dominion; but He voluntarily laid down His life, that in so doing He might give life and bring immortality to light. . . . What humility was this!  It amazed angels.  The tongue can never describe it; the imagination cannot take it in.  The eternal Word consented to be made flesh!  God became man!  (The Review and Herald, July 5, 1887).

   The apostle would call our attention from ourselves to the author of our salvation.  He presents before us His two natures, divine and human. . . . He voluntarily assumed human nature.  It was His own act, and by His own consent.  He clothed His divinity with humanity.  He was all the while as God, but He did not appear as God.  He veiled the demonstrations of Deity which had commanded the homage, and called forth the admiration of the universe of God.  He was God while upon earth, but He divested Himself of the form of God, and in its stead took the form and fashion of a man.  He walked the earth as a man.  For our sakes He became poor, that we though His poverty might be made rich.  He laid aside His glory and His majesty.  He was God, but the glories of the form of God He for a while relinquished. . . . He bore the sins of the world, and endured the penalty which rolled like a mountain upon His divine soul.  He yielded up His life a sacrifice, that man should not eternally die.  He died, not through being compelled to die, but by his own free will (Ibid.).

   Was the human nature of the Son of Mary changed into the divine nature of the Son of God?  No; the two natures were mysteriously blended in one person – – the man Christ Jesus.  In Him dwelt all the fullness of the Godhead bodily.  When Christ was crucified, it was His human nature that died.  Deity did not sink and die; that would have been impossible (The SDA Bible commentary, vol. 5, pp. 1113).

   In contemplating the incarnation of Christ in humanity, we stand baffled before an unfathomable mystery, that the human mind cannot comprehend.  The more we reflect upon it, the more amazing does it appear.  How wide is the contrast between the divinity of Christ and the helpless infant in Bethlehem’s manger!  How can we span the distance between the mighty God and a helpless child? And yet the Creator of worlds, He in whom was the fullness of the Godhead bodily, was manifest in the helpless babe in the manger.  Far higher than any of the angels, equal with the Father in dignity and glory, and yet wearing the garb of humanity!  Divinity and humanity were mysteriously combined, and man and God became one.  It is this union that we find the hope of our fallen race.  Looking upon Christ in humanity, we look upon God, and see in Him the brightness of His glory, the express image of His person (The Signs of the Times, July 30, 1896).

   In the fullness of time He was to be revealed in human form.  He was to take His position at the head of humanity by taking the nature but not the sinfulness of man.  In heaven was heard the voice, “The Redeemer shall come to Zion, and unto them that turn from transgression in Jacob, saith the Lord” (The Signs of the Times, May 29, 1901).

   When Christ bowed his head and died, He bore the pillars of Satan’s kingdom with Him to the earth.  He vanquished Satan in the same nature over which in Eden Satan obtained the victory.  The enemy was overcome by Christ in His human nature.  The power of the Savior’s Godhead was hidden.  He overcame in human nature, relying upon God for power (The Youth’s Instructor, April 24, 1901).
    
   In taking upon Himself man’s nature in its fallen condition, Christ did not in the least participate in its sin.  He was subject to the infirmities and weaknesses by which man is encompassed, “that it might be fulfilled which was spoken by Esaias the prophet, saying, Himself took our infirmities, and bare our sicknesses.”  He was touched with the feeling of our infirmities, and was in all points tempted like as we are.  And yet He “knew no sin.”  He was the Lamb “Without blemish and without spot.”  Could Satan in the least particular have tempted Christ to sin, he would have bruised the Savior’s head.  As it was, he could only touch His heel.  Had the head of Christ been touched, the hope of the human race would have perished.  Divine wrath would have come upon Christ as it came upon Adam. . . . We should have no misgivings in regard to the perfect sinlessness of the human nature of Christ (The SDA Bible Commentary, vol. 5, p. 1131).

   Be careful, exceedingly careful as to how you dwell upon the human nature of Christ.  Do not set him before the people as a man with the propensities of sin.  He is the second Adam.  The first Adam was created a pure, sinless being, without a taint of sin upon him; he was in the image of God.  He could fall, and he did fall through transgressing.  Because of sin his posterity was born with inherent propensities of disobedience.  But Jesus Christ was the only begotten Son of God.  He took upon Himself human nature, and was tempted in all points as human nature is tempted.  He could have sinned; He could have fallen, but not for one moment was there in Him an evil propensity.  He was assailed with temptations in the wilderness, as Adam was assailed with temptations in Eden (Ibid., p. 1128).

   As the worker studies the life of Christ, and the character of His mission is dwelt upon, each fresh search will reveal something more deeply interesting than has yet been unfolded.  The subject is inexhaustible.  The study of the incarnation of Christ.  His atoning sacrifice and mediatorial work, will employ the mind of the diligent student as long as time shall last (Gospel Workers, p. 251).

1 Tim 2:6

1. Antilutron, is the key word about Christ in verse 6.  According to Arndt and Gingrich it simply means ransom. Webster says a ransom is a consideration paid or demanded for the redeption of a captured person. It is used to free someone or something from captivity or punishment by paying a price.

   One who has been ransomed has been rescued.  The basic idea is one of substitution.  Money is given to a kidnapper, as a substitute for the kidnapper’s harming or killing the one having been captured, i.e.

   In our text Christ Jesus, not money, is the ransom that is given.  The interesting questions are questions like, to whom was the ransom paid – – and by whom was the ransom from God?  How was the demand presented?  Whole books have been written on this topic; we will only briefly highlight it.

   The following passage sets forth the tone of Scripture regarding the word “ransom.”  This material is taken from Baker’s Dictionary of Theology.

   RANSOM.  Three basic Hebrew words underlie the idea of ransom; (1) koper indicates payment made in substitution for another’s life.  Ps. 49:7 (a difficult text) appears to suggest that no one can circumvent death through payment of a “ransom,” cf. (Isa. 43:3).  (2)  In contrast with the private nature of the transaction implied in the noun Koper, the verb ga’al is primarily associated with family relationships, rooted in the obligations of the kinsman of go’el outlined in Lev 25:25 ff.

   Thus Isa 51:10 suggests that God has played the role of a concerned kinsman in ransoming Israel from the sea (cf. Jer 31:11).  (3) the word pada, used in Isa 35:10 and Hos 13:14 of God’s gracious salvific activity in general, expresses specifically the redemption of something claimed by God, as in Ex 13:15, of the first-born.
                   Through the LXX which renders these concepts in most instances with the verb lytroun or the noun lytron, the substitutionary note apparent in the OT appears in the NT notably in Mark 10:45 (=Mat 20:28):  “The Son of man came . . to give his life a ransom for many.”  No particular OT practice seems emphasized here, but rather the general concept of liberation achieved by the payment of the price, with perhaps accent on Hellenistic associations connected with liberation of slaves….

   Regarding These Concepts Mrs. White comments that

   In it [God’s Word] we may learn what our redemption has cost Him who from the beginning was equal with the Father (counsels to Parents and Teachers, p. 13).

   When we think philosophically about issues of ransom as we find them applied to the plan of salvation, thoughts like the following present themselves to us; the basic issue being decided is that of the future of the government of God.  Satan thinks he has managed to destroy part of God’s domain, and he plans to take it all away – – unless God gives him what he demands – – co-rulership with authority to make new principles of governmental operation.

   God acknowledges Satan’s victories and agrees to pay – – but He substitutes His  life for what Satan wants.  God thus proposes a payment that appears to give Satan what he really wants – – the death of Christ, in place of co-kingship.  God’s omniscience understands that such a concession, high as it is, will not give Satan the desired result – – the death of Christ, but will in face result in the complete philosophical defeat of Satan’s issues, and the complete destruction of Satan and his power and his followers.

   This transposition was realized by means of a ransom; a substitution.  What Satan wanted was given, but in such a way as to destroy the opponent rather than to reward him.

   In Summary Form:

   Satan wants; man, the earth, the co-regency.

   God gives:  a revelation of His and Satan’s characters (the incarnation, life and death of Christ — patience with evil.  Satan the destroyer).

   Who is supposed to pay? Man.

   Who really pays? God.

   The substitution from co-kingship to the life of Christ, the death of Christ, His mediatorship, and His being future Judge resolves the conflict by showing the penalty for sin can’t be set aside, even for God Himself; because to remit sin makes it eternal.  To pay the penalty keeps God subjects under control, and reveals how much God loves His created beings; it reveals the nature of His law and character; the law being a revelation of His character.

   Christ has pledged Himself to be our substitute and surety, and He neglects no one.  He who could not see human beings exposed to eternal ruin without pouring out His soul unto death in their behalf, will look with pity and compassion upon every soul who realizes that he cannot save himself.

   He will look upon no trembling suppliant without raising him up.  He who through His own atonement provided for man an infinite fund of moral power, will not fail to employ this power in our behalf.  We may take our sins and sorrows to His feet; for He loves us.  His every look and word invites our confidence.  He will shape and mold our characters according to His own will (Christ’s Object Lessons, p. 157).

   Christ has pledged Himself to be our substitute and surety, and He neglects no one.  There is an inexhaustible fund of perfect obedience accruing from His obedience.  In heaven His merits, His self-denial and self-sacrifice, are treasured as incense to be offered up with the prayers of His people.  As the sinner’s sincere, humble prayers ascend to the throne of God, Christ mingles with them the merits of His own life of perfect obedience.  Our prayers are made fragrant by this incense.  Christ has pledged Himself to intercede in our behalf, and the Father always hears the Son (Sons and Daughters of God, p. 22).

2. To provide a summary of the teachings of 1 Tim 2:5, 6 we will quote from Mrs. White:
   

   The completeness of His humanity, the perfection of His divinity, form for us a strong ground upon which we may be brought into reconciliation with God.  It was when we were yet sinners that Christ died for us.  We have redemption through His blood, even the forgiveness of sins.  His nail-pierced hands are outreached toward heaven and earth.  With one hand He lays hold of sinners upon earth, and with the other He grasps the throne of the Infinite, and thus He makes reconciliation for us.  Christ is today standing as our Advocate before the Father.  He is the one Mediator between God and man.  Bearing the marks of His crucifixion, He pleads the causes of our souls (Letter 35, 1894).

1 Tim 2:7,8

1. Paul is to herald verses 1-6.
2. Paul’s work set forth in verse 7, and the issues in verses 1 and 2.

1 Tim 2:9, 10

1. The women are also to pray for Paul’s work as set forth in verse 7, and the issues in verses 1 and 2.
2. They are to wear the right clothes, according to verse 9.
3. Women who work for God are to be clothed with good works, according to verse 10.

1 Tim 2:11, 12

1. The English “let learn” is from the greek manthaneto; third person single present imperative of manthano.

   According to A & G, manthano, has the basic meaning of “learn” – – to learn through instruction (p. 491).  The form of the word we have in 1 Tim 2:11 occurs only once in the NT, and has the straight forward meaning of learn, or, let learn, in the imperative.

   The English word “woman” is a regularly used translation for the greek word guna, meaning “woman, “ in the sense of an adult female.  The word may also be used to designate a wife or bride, or widow (Arndt & Gingrich, p. 167).

   The English word “silence” is from hasuchia, which has a number one dictionary meaning of quietness or rest, and may also mean silent or silence – – being quiet (Arndt & Gingrich, p. 350).

   In the phrase “in all subjection” the English word subjection is a translation of the greek hupotaga.  Arndt & Gingrich set it forth as meaning subjection, subordination, or obedience (p. 855).  This noun is derived from the verb meaning to submit.  Therefore our noun is properly translated submission or subjection.  In 1 Peter 3:1, 2 this concept also appears, but in that passage there is a context which helps us to define the meaning of our word hypotage.  Though the form of the word in 1 Peter 3:1 is hypotassomenai, they both go back to a common root – – hypo + tag or tak.

   Before trying to state the meaning of hupotage in 1 Tim 2:11 we will study briefly the contextual message of our word “submission” in 1 Peter 3:1, 2.

   The submission 1 Peter 3:1, 2 sets forth is required of a wife, whether or not the husband is a Bible-obeying husband.  Note: The greek phrase translates, “Likewise wives, submitting yourselves to the own husbands in order that even if any disobey the word, they will be gained” (fig.: for the Kingdom of God.  Cf.  Arndt & Gingrich, 430).

   The greek word translated “be submissive” in 3:1 & 5 and in 2:18 is a participle form coming from hypotasso.

   Tasso means to place or station a person or thing in a fixed spot – – to appoint or establish in an office (Arndt & Gingrich, 813).

   Hupo designates an agent and translates “by,” or it designates a place to answer a ‘where’ question (see A & G 851), and is translated “under” or “below.”

   This sounds like a great concept to every man!  The woman, his wife, is commanded by Scripture to be placed in a fixed position beneath the position which her husband holds!  Great doctrine!  Except that it does not sound like the rest of scripture’s teaching.  Perhaps we should finish examining this greek word.

   The word, hypotassomenai, which appears in 3:1 and 5 is a nomitive, plural, feminine, present, middle, participle!  (this same form in masculine appears in 2:18.)

   That word middle is bad news for us men.  If the form were active, it would translate like “I wash the car”; if it were passive it would translate like, “the car is being washed”; but being middle it has a meaning like, “The car is washing itself.”  The middle voice signifies the action is being done by one to oneself.  To bad for us men.  We are not to make our wives be submissive.

   The Bible passage here being examined teaches women they are to place themselves in a fixed position of submission to their husband.  The husband is not involved in their activity – – the voice is middle.  This is a work the wife is commanded by God to be doing on herself – – the significance of the middle voice.  The wife here has a work assigned to her by God which she can’t neglect without being in rebellion against God; rather than against her husband.

   This same concept appears in 2:13 in the imperative (command) mode in passive voice to ‘all’, for the reason that God may be seen as good (2:15).

   Note:  In Eph 6:1 and in Col 3:20 children are, in English, commanded to obey their parents; making the position of the wife to the husband the same as the obedience required of a child – – however immature – – to its parents!  Another great text for men!  Only the greek work translated “obey” in these verses is different than the word instructing wives to ‘obey’ their husbands.  The wife is not treated as a child in Scripture.

   “Children obey your parents, “ is translated from  hypakouete, meaning, “listen to.”  This word appears in the New Testament in this form five times and never is addressed to wives; it is rather addressed to slaves twice (Eph 6:5; Col 3:22), and to children twice (Eph 6:1; Col 3:20).  Wives in scripture are never classed with slaves or children;1  their work is not to listen, their work is to win people (their husbands) to Christ.  But I’m running ahead!  Sarah, however, is said to have listened carefully to Abraham (hupekousen), (1 Peter 3:6).

   That which the wife and the servant have in common is that they are, if obedient to their instruction, both following the will of God for them.

    The wife’s submission to the husband is for the purpose of winning the husband to Christ, even if some of the husbands are disobedient to the word, by the wife’s behavior – – not by her words.

   Note: the implied of what is stated in v. 1 is very interesting to this writer:  If the wife’s submission to the husband is of such a nature as to result in causing him to do evil and thereby be separated from the Lord, that submission is a violation of her commission – – to be in submission in order to win him to Christ.

   The assignment of such accountability is, in the eyes of his researcher, the result of great trust.  It is much more difficult to live the Christian life than to talk to it.  Such a role is never in Scripture assigned, to my knowledge, to children, slaves, or friends – – nor to husbands.  God had great trust in woman when He said to her, your job is to save your husband, not with a rod or words, but with gentle service.

   (For an excellent development of this concept read Adventist Home, pp. 349-351.  A portion of p. 349 we will quote here.)

   Let your husband see the Holy Spirit working in you.  Be careful and considerate, patient and forbearing.  Do not urge the truth upon him.  Do your duty as a wife should, and then see if his heart is not touched.  Your affections must not be weaned from your husband.  Please him in every way possible.  Let not your religious faith draw you apart.  Conscientiously obey God, and please your husband whenever you can. . . . ^A2

   ¹ In 1 Peter 2:18 house servants are told  to be “submitting yourselves” to their masters – – the same concept as in 3:1 linguistically.  But the reason is different.  The wife in 3:1 is to be submitting to win her husband to Christ, while the servant in 2:18 is to be submitting because God will respond by blessing the servant (cf. vv. iy-21a).

   ²In material addressed to “Every child of God,” not just to wives, we read that “The lesson they are to learn is the lesson of submission.  Self is not to be made prominent.  If due attention is given to the divine instruction, if self is surrendered to the divine will, the hand of the Potter will produce a shapely vessel. . . . “ 4SDABC 1154).  Here submission or not submission affects everyone’s salvation.

   This understanding makes the counsel given to a wife in 1 Pet 3:1, 2 applicable only to her relationship to her husband. This verse is not capable of being broadened into a description of the job assignment of women to men or even of married women to married men.

   Turning back now to 1 Tim 2:11 it is clear that Paul’s counsel is that a woman or wife is to be willing to learn.

2. In verse 12 a woman is not permitted to teach or to exercise authority over a man.  The English “to teach” is from didaskein – – the present infinitive of didasko: teach (Arndt & Gingrich, p. 101).  The phrase “to exercise authority of a man” is from Andros, genitive singular of anar: man, in contrast to women, and authentein, present infinitive of authenteo: to have authority or to domineer over someone (Arndt & Gingrich, p. 120).

   Here Paul says a woman is not to domineer over a man but to be in “silence” – – hasuchia, to be in quietness or rest (Supra, a).

   The thing one notices about these counsels by the apostle Paul is that though they are straight-forward and easy to understand, no reason for these counsels is immediately obvious, and none is given in verses 11, and 12.  Paul just says what he has to say; perhaps the explanation we would like to ask for is already prepared.  After we hear it we may want to take time to think again about verses 11 and 12 and their explicit and implied messages.  Let’s look at verses 13-15; the verses which, of course, immediately follow verses 11 and 12.

3. The silence is the voice of domineering authority, on the part of the woman.

1 Tim 2:13-15

1. The English “for” comes from gar.  This is one of the most common words in the New Testament and simply means “for,” almost all the time.  It’s primary function is to show cause or reason, but it also shows explanation, and sometimes conveys an inference (Arndt & Gingrich, p. 151).

   The reason Paul starts verse 13 with “for” (gar is property postpositive) is to make clear that the counsels of the verses preceding verse 13 are going to be explained – – after the “for”.  Gar at the beginning of verse 13 means verse 13, shows the cause or reason for what preceded it.

2. The message of verse 13 and 14 is that Adam is “first” because he was formed first (the significance of this is not clear to me right now), and that Adam was not deceived (and did not enter into transgression by way of deception), but the woman (same word as in verse 11) being deceived in transgression has become.

   When Paul hooks these statements to the verses preceding verse 13 by means of gar, or “for”, the message is that the restrictions set forth for a woman in verses 11 and 12 have their cause in the statements (history) appearing in verses 13 and 14.

   The implied message is that a woman’s role as set forth in this passage is not due to her being defective or second class, but it is because of the role of Eve in the events known to us as the fall of man.  (In another passage we will talk with Paul about the fall of man and the results accruing to males!)

   Mrs. White sets forth an interesting principle when she writes that if someone has done something that has really embarrassed the Lord, they should walk very humbly before the Lord from then on.  Eve really embarrassed the Lord, it seems to me, therefore Paul’s counsels are philosophically to be expected.  (Men will be dealt with tool – – but in another passage.)

   Eve was told of the sorrow and pain that must henceforth be her portion.  And the Lord said, “Thy desire shall be to thy husband, and he shall rule over thee.”  In the creation God had made her the equal of Adam.  Had they remained obedient to God – – in harmony with His great law of love – – they would even have been in harmony with each other; but sin had brought discord, and now their union could be maintained and harmony preserved only by submission on the part of the one or the other.  Eve had been the first in transgression; and she had fallen into temptation by separating from her companion, contrary to the divine direction.  It was by her solicitation that Adam sinned, and she was now placed in subjection to her husband.

   Note:  Because I believe that God’s thoughts to us are thoughts of peace and not of evil, and because I believe Paul wrote these counsels under the inspiration of God, the implicit message of this message is inescapable to me; There is something in the nature of feminineness, that under conditions such as fallen man lives,  makes these counsels to women appropriate – – not as punishment, but as an expression of loving – – hedging-up by God to an object of His love.  We all know Christ would die for just one man – – I’m not sure we always remember He would have died for just one woman.  There is nothing in Scripture that ties the cross of Christ to the previous sinning of only males.  Jesus died for all.  Women are made in the image of God, as are men, even though they are different in nature.  Women reflect some of the qualities of God (Isa 66:13; Matt 23:37, etc.), while men reflect other of God’s character qualities (Deut 1:31; 8:5, etc.).  Therefore it should be apparent to us that God’s counsels to women are based in redeeming love, as are His counsels to men.

3. The message of this verse appears to be clear and obvious; women shall be saved (taken to heaven) if they have children, if they remain in faith, and love, and sanctification and sobriety.

   The implication is clear those women who don’t have children are not going to be saved.

   The foregoing message and implication is so clear one can scarcely imagine suggesting the message set forth is inappropriate, but there is cause for concern.

   When Scripture teaches the possibility of salvation it presents that possibility as based in two things; the acts of God, the objective atonement, and the response of those for whom God acts, the subjective atonement.  The objective atonement is always presented in the New Testament as an accomplished fact, at the cross it is finished.

   The subjective atonement however is not finished while God calls people to repentance and someone somewhere answers.  It is true that people sometimes stop listening, or God stops calling, before people die, but if that does not happen the subjective atonement lasts until people die, or, until God stops calling to anybody – – an event generally known as the close of probation.

   The relevance of these comments to our text is to be found in the fact that none of the recorded invitations by God extended to people to take advantage of the offered salvation, and none of the threatening that are made regarding what will happen to those who reject salvation, are in scripture in any way tied to the sex of the people hearing or responding.  There is only one way of salvation presented; there is not two ways, depending on one’s sex- – except in our text!  Could it be our text needs to be read more carefully?  (The translation on which our opening comments were made is reliable.)  If we were to read the text more carefully what might we observe?

    One thing is immediately obvious – – in verse 15 in the second clause, which reads in part, “if they remain in faith, “ etc., the “they” has no linguistic antecedent.  It is generally assumed to refer to “she” – – the one who will be saved through childbearing if she also meets some other requirement listed in the end of our clause.

   It seems to me the answer is suddenly obvious – – “they” follows “childbearing, “ an abstract noun – – verb or gerund – – without number – – that is to say it does not show whether it is singular, or plural, feminine or masculine.  “They” therefore refers to the specifically listed activities implied results – – children!

   Now our text sounds like a Christian text – – mothers whose children “remain in faith and love and sanctification with sobriety” “will be saved.”

   That which saves the woman who bears a child is the faithfulness which produces faithful children, for this faithfulness, plus obedience to the counsels of verses preceding verse 13, show this woman is not unfaithful or deceived as was Eve; therefore she was not like Eve, “being deceived, in transgression has become.”

   Obedience or disobedience determines our eternal destiny.  The atmosphere surrounding the mother determines her destiny and the destiny of her children.

   The man who neglected the hurt man in the good Samaritan story could pray pious prayers and sound good but he could not deceive anyone when revelation was by works.  A mother’s work’s results show whether she is following Eve or God. In one way or another we all must demonstrate the truth of our professed faith in God.

4. In my opinion it can’t be true.  Now read the Spirit of Prophecy materials in 7SDABC 812-914 on 1 Tim 2 for special insights on these verses.

1 Timothy & Titus: intro | lesson 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 | 13