Default Feature Image for Post

Interpretation versus Explanation

Here’s that verse:

“Faithful is the saying and worthy of all acceptation. For to this end we labor and strive, because we have our hope set on the living God, Who is the Savior of all men, specially of them that believe. These things command and teach”
(1 Tim. 4:9-11, R.V.)

I read a “pastor” making an “interpretation” against the “literal” meaning of 1 Timothy 4:10 as follows:

“He is the Savior of all men, but not all men accept Him. So some will not be saved. King David was King of all Israel, but not all Israel accepted him. Some rebelled.”

Here is a simple “Explanation” (read both sides):

He Will Save all but not all at the same time.

It will be testified (proven true in its own times as a testimony):

“who did give himself a ransom for all — the testimony in its own times” (1 Timothy 2:6)

One cannot use an “analogy” (such as David being a King) to “interpret” God’s Factual statement such as 1 Timothy 4:10 (David is not God; it’s a common logical fallacy or pitfall).

A simple reason is that something which applies to man is “relative” (e.g. a man’s will can fail) but when applied to God it’s “absolute” (e.g. His Will can only be delayed but “not” thwarted for all time).

In fact, the statement “David was king of all Israel” is “not” the same as “All Israelites accepted David as their king”; these are different statements where only the former is found in Scripture and is “true” regardless if “there were some in Israel who disagreed with David being king”.

So, take a verse for what it says with no interpretation needed but only an explanation suffices.

Interpretation is saying something “against the meaning” of what’s plainly written (by using some cunning analogies etc which when examined, are entirely illogical).

Explanation, on the other hand, refers to further clarifying what’s written in a verse “without changing its meaning”.

Don’t worry, He will not fail to Save the World and no man can interpret otherwise.

It’ll all be clear one day on the other side but if you believe it now even without seeing, a great reward in itself indeed.


Here is a more logical explanation by the “same” grammar & “same” word usage which settles the meaning of this beautiful verse once and for all:

Specially (“Malista” in Greek)

“God is the Saviour of all men, especially those who believe.” (1Timothy 4:10)

The “summary” verses such the one quoted above proves that “God Saves All Men”. (note that “all men” (Full set of men) and “believers” (a subset of men) are distinctly distinguished in this one verse).

Note that it does not read: “God is the Saviour of believers from all men.” (for example)

By exact use of the word “specially” (Malista in Greek) and the exact grammar syntax consider:

“For there are many rebellious people, full of meaningless talk and deception, especially those of the circumcision group.” (Titus 1:10)

If the first verse (as wrongly) described by our ECT brethren claim it means “only believers are saved” (in 1 Timothy 4:10), then in the second verse (in Titus 1:10 shown here), we must have too by the same “logic” that there are “only” such (rebellious, deceivers) from the “circumcision group” (if following the “bringing into” logic).

The absurdity is obvious (literally).

For another discussion on this “same” verse, you may also like to read:

Similar Posts