Are there any Baptists that believe a Divorced Pastor Can Still Pastor a Church??

now faith

Veteran
Supporter
Jul 31, 2011
7,772
1,568
florida
✟257,472.00
Faith
Word of Faith
Marital Status
Married
How do you get around Jesus' own words?

"Wherefore they are no more twain, but one flesh. What therefore God hath joined together, let not man put asunder." -Mt. 19:6 (KJV)

Besides, looking at the context of Paul's first letter to the church at Corinth, I don't see that passage referring specifically to bishops, elders, or deacons.

I also offer this Link. It is commentary by Charles Hodge on 1 Cor. 7. I have read it, and don't see it applying specifically to bishops, elders, or deacons, rather just a general letter addressing several problems that were present in the church at Corinth.

One of them was sons taking taking their mothers for wives.

"It is reported commonly that there is fornication among you, and such fornication as is not so much as named among the Gentiles, that one should have his father's wife." -1 Cor. 5:1 (KJV)

Sexual immorality was a big issue in the church at Corinth.

Hodge comments:

"The second evil in the church of Corinth, to which Paul directs his attention, is allowing a man guilty of incest to remain in its communion. He says it was generally reported that fornication was tolerated among them, and even such fornication as was not heard of among the heathen, v. 1. He reproves them for being inflated, instead of being humbled and penitent, and excommunicating the offender, v. 2. As they had neglected their duty, he determined, in the name of Christ, and as spiritually present in their assembly, to deliver the man guilty of incest to Satan, vs. 3-5. He exhorts to purity, in language borrowed from the Mosaic law respecting the Passover. As during the feast of the Passover all leaven was to be removed from the habitations of the Hebrews, so the Christian’s life should be a perpetual paschal feast, all malice and hypocrisy being banished from the hearts and from the assemblies of believers, vs. 6-8. He corrects or guards against a misapprehension of his command not to associate with the immoral. He shows that the command had reference to church communion, and not to social intercourse, and therefore was limited in its application to members of the church. Those out of the church, it was neither his nor their prerogative to judge. They must be left to the judgment of God, vs. 9-13. 1. It is reported commonly (that there is) fornication among you, and such fornication as is not so much as named among the Gentiles, that one should have his father’s wife.

Having dismissed the subject of the divisions in the church of Corinth, he takes up the case of the incestuous member of that church. It is reported commonly (o[lwv ajkou>etai ). This may mean what our translation expresses, viz., it was a matter of notoriety that fornication existed among them. %Olwv may have the force of omnino , ‘nothing is heard of among you except, etc.’ Or it may mean, ‘In general, fornication is heard of among you.’ That is, it was a common thing that fornication was heard of; implying that the offense, in different forms, more or less prevailed. This is the less surprising, considering how little sins of that class were condemned among the heathen and how notorious Corinth was for its licentiousness. To change the moral sentiments of a community is a difficult and gradual work. The New Testament furnishes sad evidence, that Jewish and Gentile converts brought into the church many of the errors of their former belief and practice. The word fornication (inappropriate contentei>a ) is used in a comprehensive sense, including all violations of the seventh commandment. Here a particular case is distinguished as peculiarly atrocious. The offense was that a man had married his step-mother. His father’s wife is a Scriptural periphrase for step-mother, Leviticus 18:8."

Source

So look at the scriptures as a whole, not just picking a piece out here, and say this applies to bishops, elders, and deacons too.

There were a lot of problems Paul addressed in the church at Corinth my friend.

God Bless

Till all are one.

I have heard this about the Corinthians may times,it is a point that sites a corrupt Church.
One of the main issues behind this was gossip,not unlike events we all know have happened among today's Churches.

1 Corinthians: 15. 33. Be not deceived: evil communications corrupt good manners. 34. Awake to righteousness, and sin not; for some have not the knowledge of God: I speak this to your shame.

At Ephesus Paul run up against a monetary system that profited from Idolatry.

At the Church of the Galatians Gnostic Jews were undermining Paul's teaching to the point he asks (are you under a witches spell?)paraphrase.

Romans and the rest of his Churches Paul had contention and the Gnostic Jews were ever present.
Just for conversation I have heard the fornication at Corinth to demean almost everything.
A popular Preacher said this was why tongues were demonic.
A quick look at Romans 1 and 2 will show Paul dealing with big issues there.
I personally believe this sort of actions inspired Romans 7,as well Paul's thorn.
He was buffeted or beat against.

The question how do I get around Jesus's own words ,I believe is a simple difference between us in our belief of free will.
Jesus inforces his teaching by saying what God has joined together let no man put asunder.
Many marriages are not in God's will,they are spawned by our flesh.
God has not joined us to a witch or harlot,but those of us who walk in the flesh at a point in time are carnaly minded not truly seeking God's will.
I believe the Children of such unions would be born elsewhere predestined.
It is God who gives life,and the calling of lives to come.
A Christian married to a witch?
All things work together for good for those who love God.

1 Corinthians: 15. 50. Now this I say, brethren, that flesh and blood cannot inherit the kingdom of God; neither doth corruption inherit incorruption. 51. Behold, I shew you a mystery; We shall not all sleep, but we shall all be changed, 52. In a moment, in the twinkling of an eye, at the last trump: for the trumpet shall sound, and the dead shall be raised incorruptible, and we shall be changed. 53. For this corruptible must put on incorruption, and this mortal must put on immortality. 54. So when this corruptible shall have put on incorruption, and this mortal shall have put on immortality, then shall be brought to pass the saying that is written, Death is swallowed up in victory.

1 Corinthians: 7. 13. And the woman which hath an husband that believeth not, and if he be pleased to dwell with her, let her not leave him. 14. For the unbelieving husband is sanctified by the wife, and the unbelieving wife is sanctified by the husband: else were your children unclean; but now are they holy. 15. But if the unbelieving depart, let him depart. A brother or a sister is not under bondage in such cases: but God hath called us to peace.

There is one other thought in Jesus teaching on divorce,but I am not fully committed to this.
The thought was this was a proprietary teaching on the law of Moses directed at the Hebrew men.
You find them asking about a women who's husband's died and who's wife would she be in heaven in another chapter.
Jesus responds no ye not ye will be as Angels?

God Bless you Deacon,and as you might guess I have been divorced but no none knows about the beatings I took the money that was taken and the amount of hatred I was shown.
I cannot believe God calling us to peace would ordain this or punish me for not dieing.
 
  • Agree
Reactions: Hank77
Upvote 0

now faith

Veteran
Supporter
Jul 31, 2011
7,772
1,568
florida
✟257,472.00
Faith
Word of Faith
Marital Status
Married
Deacon,we all share a mutual respect here I know you do not teach to offend as you know I converse to learn.
Quote Deacon: There is only one man mentioned in the entire bible who had morethan one wife, but he was never a priest. Solomon. 700 wives and 300 concubines.
There is David ,Jacob Ahab and Jezebel’s daughter, Athaliah, with Jehoshaphat’s son, Jehoram , King Saul.
The narrative is based around the key figures in the text.
We do not read about the others ,but it seems wealth and notoriety would allow for multiple wives.
After Sarah died Abraham had another wife as well who gave him six children
Her name was Keturah,unless she was one in the same called Hagar his maid servent ,and her name changed when they married.
But Sarah had passed anyway.
 
Upvote 0

DeaconDean

γέγονα χαλκὸς, κύμβαλον ἀλαλάζον
Jul 19, 2005
22,183
2,677
61
Gastonia N.C. (Piedmont of N.C.)
✟100,334.00
Faith
Baptist
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Republican
The question how do I get around Jesus's own words ,I believe is a simple difference between us in our belief of free will.

You may be right, but I don't see where "free will" plays into this.

Jesus inforces his teaching by saying what God has joined together let no man put asunder.
Many marriages are not in God's will,they are spawned by our flesh.

You may be right again, but, how is one to know if their partner is the one God chose for us?

There is one other thought in Jesus teaching on divorce,but I am not fully committed to this.

The thought was this was a proprietary teaching on the law of Moses directed at the Hebrew men.

You find them asking about a women who's husband's died and who's wife would she be in heaven in another chapter.

Jesus responds no ye not ye will be as Angels?

From what I have been able to gleen, that was another question where they were trying to "trip" Jesus up, and that it may have been from a purely "sexual" nature".

God Bless you Deacon,and as you might guess I have been divorced but no none knows about the beatings I took the money that was taken and the amount of hatred I was shown.

I cannot believe God calling us to peace would ordain this or punish me for not dieing.

We are not God, Jesus, the Holy Spirit, or the angels. So it should not come as a surprise that we are attacked like we are.

Wouldn't be a great world if we could treat each other and live "Love one another as I have loved you"?

God Bless

Till all are one.
 
  • Like
Reactions: now faith
Upvote 0

DeaconDean

γέγονα χαλκὸς, κύμβαλον ἀλαλάζον
Jul 19, 2005
22,183
2,677
61
Gastonia N.C. (Piedmont of N.C.)
✟100,334.00
Faith
Baptist
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Republican
Deacon,we all share a mutual respect here I know you do not teach to offend as you know I converse to learn.

Quote Deacon: There is only one man mentioned in the entire bible who had morethan one wife, but he was never a priest. Solomon. 700 wives and 300 concubines.

There is David ,Jacob Ahab and Jezebel’s daughter, Athaliah, with Jehoshaphat’s son, Jehoram , King Saul.

The narrative is based around the key figures in the text.

Your right.

We do not read about the others ,but it seems wealth and notoriety would allow for multiple wives.
After Sarah died Abraham had another wife as well who gave him six children
Her name was Keturah,unless she was one in the same called Hagar his maid servent ,and her name changed when they married.
But Sarah had passed anyway.

But that in no way negates what I said earlier.

Kings, and others, may have had more than one wife. But, the OT priesthood as well as the qualifications for bishops, elders, and deacons, call for them to be...

You know what.

God Bless

Till all are one.
 
  • Like
Reactions: now faith
Upvote 0

DeaconDean

γέγονα χαλκὸς, κύμβαλον ἀλαλάζον
Jul 19, 2005
22,183
2,677
61
Gastonia N.C. (Piedmont of N.C.)
✟100,334.00
Faith
Baptist
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Republican
No argument. (with the exception of levirite marriage in the OT)

So a single man - never married - should NOT be in congregational leadership - right?

That is not what Paul says.

If it is your calling to be single, then you should stay single. Even Pastors.

"Let every man abide in the same calling wherein he was called...Art thou bound unto a wife? seek not to be loosed. Art thou loosed from a wife? seek not a wife...He that is unmarried careth for the things that belong to the Lord, how he may please the Lord: But he that is married careth for the things that are of the world, how he may please his wife." -1 Cor. 7:24, 27, 32-33 (KJV)

But if your married, and want to a Pastor, then according to what is taught in the NT scriptures, he should be what?

God Bless

Till all are one.
 
Upvote 0

Dave-W

Welcoming grandchild #7, Arturus Waggoner!
Supporter
Jun 18, 2014
30,521
16,866
Maryland - just north of D.C.
Visit site
✟771,800.00
Country
United States
Faith
Messianic
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Others
That is not what Paul says.

If it is your calling to be single, then you should stay single. Even Pastors.
Not so. If you are called to be single, then fine. Just do not think to get into any kind of congregational leadership. "Husband of one wife."

Not 2, not 3, not zero. One; no more and no less.
 
Upvote 0

OzSpen

Regular Member
Oct 15, 2005
11,541
707
Brisbane, Qld., Australia
Visit site
✟125,343.00
Country
Australia
Faith
Baptist
Marital Status
Private
There is only one man mentioned in the entire bible who had more than one wife, but he was never a priest. Solomon. 700 wives and 300 concubines.

Dean,

That is not true. There were a number of men in the OT who practised polygamy.

Jacob had 2 wives and 2 concubines (Gen 29-30).

Abraham had children to his concubines as well as his wife (Gen 16:1; 25:1-6).

King David had many wives. See the article, How many wives did King David have?

Lamech had more than one wife (Gen 4:23).

There were OT instructions for men with more than one wife (Deut 21:15-17).

Oz
 
Upvote 0

OzSpen

Regular Member
Oct 15, 2005
11,541
707
Brisbane, Qld., Australia
Visit site
✟125,343.00
Country
Australia
Faith
Baptist
Marital Status
Private
Not so. If you are called to be single, then fine. Just do not think to get into any kind of congregational leadership. "Husband of one wife."

Not 2, not 3, not zero. One; no more and no less.

Dave,

Have you investigated the various meanings of 'husband of one wife'. It is not to interpret as simple as it seems on the surface.

The 1978 edition of the NIV for 1 Tim 3:12 is translated, ‘A deacon must be the husband of but one wife and must manage his children and household well’. The latest edition of the NIV renders this verse as, ‘A deacon must be faithful to his wife and must manage his children and his household well’. Why the change?

It is because the Greek word translated ‘wife’ is gune and it can mean either wife or woman. Arndt & Gingrich’s Greek lexicon gives the meaning as ‘woman … of any adult female’ or ‘wife’ (Arndt & Gingrich 1957:167). A&G support 1 Tim 2:11ff as referring to a ‘woman … of any adult female’. So the meaning is that ‘a deacon must also “be faithful” to his own wife [1 Tim 3:2] and must manage his children and his household well [1 Tim 3:4]’ (Fee 1988:89).

This letter of 1 Timothy was written to Timothy who was in an Ephesian culture (see 1 Tim 1:3) where there were false teachers. Ephesus was a provincial capital in Asia Minor where the Temple of Artemis (Diana) was located. This cult of Artemis was a syncretism of various religions but was a cult of ‘Oriental fertility rite, with sensuous and orgiastic practices’. We don’t know the fuller details of how this cult influenced the false teachers in Ephesus but Paul was concerned to root out the error that was infiltrating this new church (Fee 1988:40).

Therefore, it is not surprising that in 1 Tim 3 Paul is addressing the need to deal with faithfulness of a man to his woman/wife in a sexually promiscuous culture. We must not impose our understanding of ‘husband of one wife’ on this text (are bachelors prohibited from being church leaders?) when ‘man of one woman’ or ‘faithful to his wife’ could be better translations.

It is sometimes difficult for us to get to the core of what was happening in the culture of the first century and not to impose our understanding of marital fidelity onto the text, based on our 21st century perspective. (taken from my article, Should churches have female deacons?)

Oz

Works consulted
Arndt, W F & Gingrich, F W 1957. A Greek-English lexicon of the New Testament and other early Christian literature. Chicago: The University of Chicago Press (limited edition licensed to Zondervan Publishing House).

Fee, G 1988. 1 and 2 Timothy, Titus (New International Biblical Commentary). W W Gasque (NT ed). Peabody, Massachusetts: Hendrickson Publishers.
 
Upvote 0

OzSpen

Regular Member
Oct 15, 2005
11,541
707
Brisbane, Qld., Australia
Visit site
✟125,343.00
Country
Australia
Faith
Baptist
Marital Status
Private
Here again, the passages speak of the qualifications (NT bishops, elders, and deacons), not the duties. Only the OT addressed the duties.

And both the Old and the New teach, the husband of one wife.

God Bless

Till all are one.

Dean,

See my explanation at #48 that challenges your restrictive understanding of 'the husband of one wife'.

I urge you to examine the nuances of the Greek language in this phrase.

Archaeology, tombstones & women presbyters
slide4.jpg


(image courtesy Catacombs of Priscilla, Rome)

It was pointed out that in the first four centuries of the NT era, archaeology has found grave sites that confirmed there were women presbyters. ‘One tombstone reads, (don’t remember the names in order) ___ the daughter of Lois the presbyter’. He stated that in many areas around the Mediterranean Sea, there have been discovered paintings of women in leadership positions and inscriptions in churches and on tombstones. These women are named and their positions are that of bishops and deacons. His view was that ‘archaeology demands that we reconcile what we have from Paul with the evidence’.

1 Tim 3:12 states that deacons should each be the 'husband of one wife' (ESV).

However, in the NT a female was a deacon.

Talking of what Paul wrote, I do not know why we are arguing over whether deacons must only be males. A woman can be a deacon in the church when there is a clear example of a female deacon in the early church in Romans 16:1 (NIV), ‘I commend to you our sister Phoebe, a deacon of the church in Cenchreae.’ What was Phoebe’s ministry (Rom 16:1)? Paul states, ‘She has been helpful to many, and especially to me ‘ (Rom 16:2 NLT).

Therefore, the 'husband of one wife' should be interpreted as 'faithful to one's spouse' (in harmony with the NIV rendering, 'a deacon must be faithful to his wife'. Since the NT affirms both male and female deacons, the meaning of 'husband of one wife' is male and female deacons should be 'faithful to their spouses' (with assistance from my article, Should churches have female deacons?)

Otherwise, we have a clanging contradiction of deacons being only men married to one woman vs. a woman (Phoebe) as a deacon.

Oz
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0

Dave-W

Welcoming grandchild #7, Arturus Waggoner!
Supporter
Jun 18, 2014
30,521
16,866
Maryland - just north of D.C.
Visit site
✟771,800.00
Country
United States
Faith
Messianic
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Others
It is because the Greek word translated ‘wife’ is gune and it can mean either wife or woman.
Yes I understand that. At the time the concept of an adult woman who had never been married did not exist.
Therefore, it is not surprising that in 1 Tim 3 Paul is addressing the need to deal with faithfulness of a man to his woman/wife in a sexually promiscuous culture.
Again I get that. But you cannot discount the phrase " ... and must manage his children and his household well."

Should a single man be fathering children? NO.
 
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums

OzSpen

Regular Member
Oct 15, 2005
11,541
707
Brisbane, Qld., Australia
Visit site
✟125,343.00
Country
Australia
Faith
Baptist
Marital Status
Private
Yes I understand that. At the time the concept of an adult woman who had never been married did not exist.

Again I get that. But you cannot discount the phrase " ... and must manage his children and his household well."

Should a single man be fathering children? NO.

Dave,

You still seem to be missing the point I raised with regard to deacons: 'Let deacons each be the husband of one wife, managing their children and their own households well' (1 Tim 3:12 ESV).

The NIV translates this verse as, 'A deacon must be faithful to his wife and must manage his children and his household well'. Why is 'faithful to his wife' a better translation of the Greek and the biblical context than the traditional restriction to males being 'the husband of one wife'?

That's because of the Greek and the biblical support for female deacons: 'I commend to you our sister Phoebe, a deacon of the church in Cenchreae' (Rom 16:1 NIV).

So, by application, a male deacon needs to be faithful to his wife and manage his children and household well. Surely the same applies to a female deacon who is married! She must be faithful to her husband and manage her children and household well.

Or are you going to make it the husband's responsibility to manage the children?

Oz
 
Upvote 0

Dave-W

Welcoming grandchild #7, Arturus Waggoner!
Supporter
Jun 18, 2014
30,521
16,866
Maryland - just north of D.C.
Visit site
✟771,800.00
Country
United States
Faith
Messianic
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Others
Or are you going to make it the husband's responsibility to manage the children?
Absolutely. The "buck stops" with him. He is the one held accountable before God for his childrens' behavior and attitude. He is also held accountable for his wife's behavior and attitude. In Gen 18, God held Abraham responsible for Sarah's laughter (even before he was aware of it).

9 Then they said to him, “Where is Sarah your wife?” And he said, “There, in the tent.” 10 He said, “I will surely return to you at this time next year; and behold, Sarah your wife will have a son.” And Sarah was listening at the tent door, which was behind him. 11 Now Abraham and Sarah were old, advanced in age; Sarah was past childbearing. 12 Sarah laughed to herself, saying, “After I have become old, shall I have pleasure, my lord being old also?” 13 And the Lord said to Abraham, “Why did Sarah laugh, saying, ‘Shall I indeed bear a child, when I am so old?’ 14 Is anything too difficult for the Lord? At the appointed time I will return to you, at this time next year, and Sarah will have a son.”​

The Lord does not even address her until she comes out and denies the charge. (next verse)
The NIV translates this verse
Sorry but I do not like the NIV. It has always seemed too "watery" to me.
 
Upvote 0

OzSpen

Regular Member
Oct 15, 2005
11,541
707
Brisbane, Qld., Australia
Visit site
✟125,343.00
Country
Australia
Faith
Baptist
Marital Status
Private
Absolutely. The "buck stops" with him. He is the one held accountable before God for his childrens' behavior and attitude. He is also held accountable for his wife's behavior and attitude. In Gen 18, God held Abraham responsible for Sarah's laughter (even before he was aware of it).

9 Then they said to him, “Where is Sarah your wife?” And he said, “There, in the tent.” 10 He said, “I will surely return to you at this time next year; and behold, Sarah your wife will have a son.” And Sarah was listening at the tent door, which was behind him. 11 Now Abraham and Sarah were old, advanced in age; Sarah was past childbearing. 12 Sarah laughed to herself, saying, “After I have become old, shall I have pleasure, my lord being old also?” 13 And the Lord said to Abraham, “Why did Sarah laugh, saying, ‘Shall I indeed bear a child, when I am so old?’ 14 Is anything too difficult for the Lord? At the appointed time I will return to you, at this time next year, and Sarah will have a son.”​

The Lord does not even address her until she comes out and denies the charge. (next verse)

Sorry but I do not like the NIV. It has always seemed too "watery" to me.

So the buck stops with the bloke? Try telling that to the stay-at-home Mum with 3 children and he is working for 8 hours a day.

Appealing to the Old Covenant of Abraham and Sarah to support men controlling the children's behaviour and attitude is hardly applicable for New Covenant believers.

This is what the NT includes:
  • 'So I counsel younger widows to marry, to have children, to manage their homes and to give the enemy no opportunity for slander' (1 Tim 5:14 NIV).
  • 'Children, obey your parents in everything, for this pleases the Lord' (Col 3:20 NIV). Note that it doesn't say, 'Children obey your fathers in everything....'
  • 'Children, obey your parents in the Lord, for this is right' (Eph 6:1 NIV). Note that it doesn't single out mother or father. Mothers are just as responsible as fathers for supervising children's obedience.
  • 'Fathers, do not provoke your children, lest they become discouraged' (Col 3:21 NIV).
So you don't 'like the NIV. It has always seemed too "watery" to me'. That's your personal, subjective opinion. Are you a Bible translator who understands dynamic equivalence translation methodology?

If you are not, then you won't understand the meaning-for-meaning dynamic equivalent methodology used by the NIV translators. I happen to have taught NT Greek and know the dynamics of Bible translation. I conclude, based on my knowledge of Greek and translation styles, that the NIV NT is an excellent translation, although I quibble over the occasional translation detail.

I have many more translation difficulties with the KJV, the translation of 'hell' throughout being just one example.

Oz
 
Upvote 0

now faith

Veteran
Supporter
Jul 31, 2011
7,772
1,568
florida
✟257,472.00
Faith
Word of Faith
Marital Status
Married
Could it possibility be Paul's statement on women was proprietary, to the Churches of that day?
We know Paul used Women to help minister.
And we also know of the gossip at Corinth and the pagan worship of Diana at Ephesus.
I cannot find any place on not having multiple wife's in the New Testament
 
Upvote 0

DeaconDean

γέγονα χαλκὸς, κύμβαλον ἀλαλάζον
Jul 19, 2005
22,183
2,677
61
Gastonia N.C. (Piedmont of N.C.)
✟100,334.00
Faith
Baptist
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Republican
Not so. If you are called to be single, then fine. Just do not think to get into any kind of congregational leadership. "Husband of one wife."

Not 2, not 3, not zero. One; no more and no less.

Oh brother. :SIGH:

Again, must I point out the obvious?

Lets fall back on scripture.

"Seeing then that we have a great high priest, that is passed into the heavens, Jesus the Son of God, let us hold fast our profession." -Heb. 4:14 (KJV)

After about 30-33 AD, Jesus Christ became our "high priest" according to Hebrews. Now unless you want to believe the new arguments that Christ was married to Mary Magdalene and subsequently had children, here is our "Pastor/Bishop/Priest" who is "single".

It is arguable who wrote the book of Hebrews. I tend to believe that because of the language of the Greek, it was Paul.

Here is Jesus Christ, the Son of the Living God. Single, who became our high Priest. Now unless there is a contradiction that I'm not aware of, Paul, or any other scripture writer, cannot contradict themselves, or scripture.

SO what we are left with is the qualifications for bishops/elders.deacons, that there is nothing after AD 30-33 that prohibits singles. But!...If they are married, then they must be "the hsband of one wife, who rules their children and households well".

We can, (though I prefer not to) take the example left to us by the RCC who actually require their priests to be single.

We can also take Timothy and/or Titus as an example.

Lets call him/them an "elder" for arguments sake.

The same qualifications for "elders" as for bishops:

"and ordain elders in every city, as I had appointed thee: If any be blameless, the husband of one wife, having faithful children not accused of riot or unruly. For a bishop must be blameless" -Titus 1:5-7 (KJV)

I am not aware of history where Timothy or Titus were "the husband of one wife".

So your argument don't hold water. Unless your gonna argue that elders and deacons must also:

Not 2, not 3, not zero. One; no more and no less.

God Bless

Till all are one.
 
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums

Dave-W

Welcoming grandchild #7, Arturus Waggoner!
Supporter
Jun 18, 2014
30,521
16,866
Maryland - just north of D.C.
Visit site
✟771,800.00
Country
United States
Faith
Messianic
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Others
So the buck stops with the bloke? Try telling that to the stay-at-home Mum with 3 children and he is working for 8 hours a day.
You describe me about 30 years ago - except I was working 55-60 hours a week while my wife was home with 4 children.
And yes - the buck stopped with ME for all 5 of them.
Appealing to the Old Covenant of Abraham and Sarah to support men controlling the children's behaviour and attitude is hardly applicable for New Covenant believers.
God's principles never change, even if the mode of application may.

And the "old covenant" that Hebrews refers to is the Mosaic covenant which was still about 450 years in the future at that point.
So you don't 'like the NIV. It has always seemed too "watery" to me'. That's your personal, subjective opinion. Are you a Bible translator who understands dynamic equivalence translation methodology?

If you are not, then you won't understand the meaning-for-meaning dynamic equivalent methodology used by the NIV translators. I happen to have taught NT Greek and know the dynamics of Bible translation. I conclude, based on my knowledge of Greek and translation styles, that the NIV NT is an excellent translation, although I quibble over the occasional translation detail.
Yes "watery" is my own subjective opinion. So is my not liking it.

And no, I am not a translator of biblical writ. But I have known a few, including the late Lewis Goldberg who was on the translation teams of both the NIV and NKJV; along with Dan Juster and Glenn Blank who were on the translation team of the new Tree of Life version. Almost to a man, they shy away from "dynamic equivalence" in favor of the more strict word-for-word translation, making the understanding of the equivalence to be put into a commentary instead of writing into the actual scriptural text.

My personal preference is for the New American Standard Bible.
 
Upvote 0

Dave-W

Welcoming grandchild #7, Arturus Waggoner!
Supporter
Jun 18, 2014
30,521
16,866
Maryland - just north of D.C.
Visit site
✟771,800.00
Country
United States
Faith
Messianic
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Others
Here is Jesus Christ, the Son of the Living God. Single, who became our high Priest.
True. But He was not an elder, deacon or pastor of a local congregation.
We can also take Timothy and/or Titus as an example.
Lets call him/them an "elder" for arguments sake.
The same qualifications for "elders" as for bishops:
"and ordain elders in every city, as I had appointed thee: If any be blameless, the husband of one wife, having faithful children not accused of riot or unruly. For a bishop must be blameless" -Titus 1:5-7 (KJV)
I am not aware of history where Timothy or Titus were "the husband of one wife".
And had it not been that Peter's mother in law fell sick, we would have no record that he was married either. Historically, in 1st century Jewish culture, EVERYONE was married in their teens unless there was some question about their heritage. (possibility of being illegitimate)

So while we have no historical record of either Timothy or Titus being married, (but we do know they were in congregational leadership) so both by history and by Paul's instructions we can infer they were both married.

So your argument don't hold water. Unless your gonna argue that elders and deacons must also:

"Not 2, not 3, not zero. One; no more and no less."
Absolutely they must be husband of ONE woman. No more, no less.
 
Upvote 0

DeaconDean

γέγονα χαλκὸς, κύμβαλον ἀλαλάζον
Jul 19, 2005
22,183
2,677
61
Gastonia N.C. (Piedmont of N.C.)
✟100,334.00
Faith
Baptist
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Republican
True. But He was not an elder, deacon or pastor of a local congregation.

And that bears out how?

Is He not the "good shepherd"?

Did He not teach that He takes care of his flock?

Are Pastors not called "undershepherds"?

And had it not been that Peter's mother in law fell sick, we would have no record that he was married either. Historically, in 1st century Jewish culture, EVERYONE was married in their teens unless there was some question about their heritage. (possibility of being illegitimate)

Again, this bears significance how?

So while we have no historical record of either Timothy or Titus being married, (but we do know they were in congregational leadership) so both by history and by Paul's instructions we can infer they were both married.

Now your going beyond what scriptures say.

Paul wrote to Titus saying:

"To Titus, mine own son after the common faith: Grace, mercy, and peace, from God the Father and the Lord Jesus Christ our Saviour. For this cause left I thee in Crete, that thou shouldest set in order the things that are wanting, and ordain elders in every city, as I had appointed thee:" -Titus 1:4-5 (KJV)

There is no record of Titus, since you mentioned Peter, being married. In fact, Titus was also converted along with Onesimus:

"Not in a natural, but in a spiritual sense; the apostle being the instrument of his conversion, as he was of the conversion of Onesimus, and of many of the Corinthians, and therefore is said to beget them, ( Philemon 1:10 ) ( 1 Corinthians 4:15 ) and so was their spiritual father, and they his children: Titus was, in this sense, his "own son", or a true son, a legitimate one; a true convert; one really born again; a sincere believer, an Israelite indeed: and this he was "after the common faith"; either the doctrine of faith, which is but one, and is common to all the saints; or the grace of faith, which though different in degrees, yet is alike precious faith in all; the same for nature, kind, object, operation, and effects: and this phrase is used to show in what sense Titus was son to the apostle; as he was a believer, and no otherwise."

Source

So evidently, since you cannot prove Peter, Timothy, or Titus were married, and since I cannot prove they were single, we must accept the scripture at "face-value".

Which leads us to believe both Timothy and Titus were single. But...if they were married, then they had to be...what?

Absolutely
they must be husband of ONE woman. No more, no less.

If they were married. But, if we follow your interpretation, then we all (bishops/elders/deacons) must be married, and this contradicts what Paul taught in Corinth. And according to your interpretation, it also means that nobody called into the ministry of the ecclesiastic can perform the job unless they are married. Which again, contradicts what Paul taught in Corinth.

Sorry, it just cannot be the way you say or it makes the scriptures contradict themselves, which they absolutely cannot do. And if they do, that renders then useless, and worthless.

God Bless

Till all are one.
 
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums

Dave-W

Welcoming grandchild #7, Arturus Waggoner!
Supporter
Jun 18, 2014
30,521
16,866
Maryland - just north of D.C.
Visit site
✟771,800.00
Country
United States
Faith
Messianic
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Others
So evidently, since you cannot prove Peter, Timothy, or Titus were married, and since I cannot prove they were single, we must accept the scripture at "face-value".

Which leads us to believe both Timothy and Titus were single.
Since Peter had a mother in law - (Matt 8.14, Mk 1.30) it proves he was married.

Since the historical record would tend to suggest otherwise, why assume Tim and Titus were single?
 
Upvote 0