🔎 What Does the Phrase καιροῖς ἰδίοις Mean in 1 Timothy 2.6? 🔍
By Bible Researcher Eli Kittim 📚🎓
There is a mysterious phrase in the Greek New Testament which seems to suggest that the evidence for Christ’s death has not yet been demonstrated. If one considers Christ’s historicity and death as a foregone conclusion, then this terse phrase certainly questions this assumption. Let’s go a little deeper and look at some of the details. The Greek text of First Timothy 2.5-6 (SBLGNT) declares:
εἷς γὰρ θεός, εἷς καὶ μεσίτης θεοῦ καὶ
ἀνθρώπων ἄνθρωπος Χριστὸς Ἰησοῦς, ὁ
δοὺς ἑαυτὸν ἀντίλυτρον ὑπὲρ πάντων, τὸ
μαρτύριον καιροῖς ἰδίοις ·
The last clause literally means: the martyrdom/testimony [given] in its own times.
We must first understand what the Greek term μᾰρτῠ́ρῐον (martúrion) means. It actually has several meanings:
1. testimony, evidence, proof
2. martyrdom
3. shrine of a martyr
Since 1 Timothy 2.5-6 is explicitly referring to Christ’s death as a ransom (ἀντίλυτρον), it is therefore appropriate to regard the term μαρτύριον (martúrion) in this particular context both as a testimony and as a martyrdom. Let’s look at the translation of 1 Timothy 2.5-6 (KJV):
“For there is one God, and one mediator
between God and men, the man Christ
Jesus; Who gave himself a ransom for all, to
be testified in due time.”
There is something deeply perplexing about the last clause. If the testimony took place in Christ’s own time, then why will the evidence or proof be put forth “in due time”?
According to the Merriam-Webster dictionary, the phrase “in due time” means “eventually at an appropriate time,” as in the sentence “I will answer all of your questions in due time.” Therefore, the KJV seems to suggest that the evidence establishing these facts will come at some future time period. The text is referring specifically to Christ’s death as “a ransom for all.” So, the KJV suggests that the evidence for Christ’s death will be demonstrated “in due time.” Bear in mind that this is the same English Bible translation which says elsewhere that Christ will die “ONCE IN THE END OF THE WORLD” (Hebrews 9.26b italics mine)! Let’s look at a cross-reference in 1 Timothy 6.14-15 (the same letter), which has the exact same phrase (καιροῖς ἰδίοις):
τηρῆσαί σε τὴν ἐντολὴν ἄσπιλον
ἀνεπίλημπτον μέχρι τῆς ἐπιφανείας τοῦ
κυρίου ἡμῶν Ἰησοῦ Χριστοῦ, ἣν καιροῖς
ἰδίοις δείξει ὁ μακάριος καὶ μόνος
δυνάστης, ὁ βασιλεὺς τῶν βασιλευόντων
καὶ κύριος τῶν κυριευόντων.
Translation (NASB):
“keep the commandment without fault or
reproach until the appearing of our Lord
Jesus Christ, which He will bring about at
the proper time—He who is the blessed and
only Sovereign, the King of kings and Lord
of lords.”
First Tim. 6.15 has the exact same phrase that we find in 1 Tim. 2.6, namely, καιροῖς ἰδίοις, and in this particular context it is a reference to “the appearing of our Lord Jesus,” which elsewhere is called “the revelation of Jesus Christ” (1 Cor. 1.7; 1 Pet. 1.7, 13; Rev. 1.1)! Here, the Greek phrase καιροῖς ἰδίοις means “at the proper time” or, more accurately, “in its own times” (YLT). And it refers to the future revelation of Jesus in his own time.
But if 1 Timothy was written at the end of the first century——and the evidence for Christ’s death had already, presumably, been demonstrated in the New Testament books——why would the author insist that the proof of Christ’s death comes “in its own times”? It doesn’t make any sense. If Jesus died ca. 30 AD, and the writer of 1 Timothy is writing at around 100 AD, 70 years later, then why would the testimony of Jesus’ death be given at the proper time, or in Christ’s own time? The author doesn’t say that the testimony was already given but rather suggests that it will be given in due time. In other words, why isn’t the testimony given right then and there? Or, why isn’t the testimony considered as something that was already given in the past about the occurrence of a previous event?
Readers often read 1 Timothy 2.6 and ignore the last clause, or they skip it as if it doesn’t really mean anything. But it does! In fact, it is the key to understanding the passage. First Timothy 2.5-6 (NASB) reads:
“For there is one God, and one mediator also
between God and mankind, the man Christ
Jesus, who gave Himself as a ransom for
all, the testimony given at the proper time.”
Notice how the last clause is translated in modern Bible versions. Most versions translate it correctly, without committing the clause to a past reference point, thereby suggesting that the evidence for Christ’s death is given in Christ’s own time (whenever that is…).
The New International Version gets it horribly wrong. The editors are clearly basing their translations on their theological bias. Nowhere does the Greek text say that the testimony “has now been witnessed.” Yet that’s what the NIV says at 1 Tim. 2.6:
“This has now been witnessed to at the
proper time.”
Unfortunately, that is unsubstantiated by the Greek text, which reads:
τὸ μαρτύριον καιροῖς ἰδίοις ·
However, most of the modern Bible translations actually get it right:
ESV - “which is the testimony given at the
proper time.”
KJV - “to be testified in due time.”
ASV - “the testimony to be borne in its own
times.”
DRB - “a testimony in due times.”
YLT - “the testimony in its own times.”
Conclusion
Hebrews 9.26b (KJV) says that Jesus will die “once in the end of the world.” First Peter 1.20 (NJB) says that Christ is “revealed at the final point of time.” Revelation 12.5 says that the Messiah is born in the end times. Acts 3.19-21 says that the Messiah cannot come “until the period of restoration of all things.” Galatians 4.4 says that Christ is born in “the fullness of the time,” which Eph. 1.9-10 defines as the consummation of the ages! Moreover, the auditory and visual impressions of the transfiguration narrative in 2 Peter 1.16-18 constitute an apocalyptic *prophecy,* which is revealed in verse 19:
“so we have the prophetic word made more
sure, to which you do well to pay attention
as to a lamp shining in a dark place.”
What is more, 1 Timothy 2.6 (written at ca. 100 AD) says that Christ’s death is meant “to be testified in due time.” The author is certainly NOT referring to 70 years prior to the time that he penned this letter (i.e. ca. 30 AD)! Therefore, it's perplexing why this mysterious phrase “to be testified in due time” is inserted in the text, and what is its temporal implication. That’s because it implies that the testimony of Christ’s death seems to be forthcoming rather than being already available!
