• Welcome to Christian Forums
  1. Welcome to Christian Forums, a forum to discuss Christianity in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to be able to join in fellowship with Christians all over the world.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon and God Bless!

  2. The forums in the Christian Congregations category are now open only to Christian members. Please review our current Faith Groups list for information on which faith groups are considered to be Christian faiths. Christian members please remember to read the Statement of Purpose threads for each forum within Christian Congregations before posting in the forum.
  3. Please note there is a new rule regarding the posting of videos. It reads, "Post a summary of the videos you post . An exception can be made for music videos.". Unless you are simply sharing music, please post a summary, or the gist, of the video you wish to share.
  4. There have been some changes in the Life Stages section involving the following forums: Roaring 20s, Terrific Thirties, Fabulous Forties, and Golden Eagles. They are changed to Gen Z, Millennials, Gen X, and Golden Eagles will have a slight change.
  5. CF Staff, Angels and Ambassadors; ask that you join us in praying for the world in this difficult time, asking our Holy Father to stop the spread of the virus, and for healing of all affected.
  6. We are no longer allowing posts or threads that deny the existence of Covid-19. Members have lost loved ones to this virus and are grieving. As a Christian site, we do not need to add to the pain of the loss by allowing posts that deny the existence of the virus that killed their loved one. Future post denying the Covid-19 existence, calling it a hoax, will be addressed via the warning system.
  7. There has been an addition to the announcement regarding unacceptable nick names. The phrase "Let's go Brandon" actually stands for a profanity and will be seen as a violation of the profanity rule in the future.

Women Priests.

Discussion in 'Controversial Christian Theology' started by sparow, Jan 10, 2021.

  1. Gregorikos

    Gregorikos Ordinary Mystic

    914
    +720
    United States
    Pentecostal
    Married
    Actually that's not why. The reason why is that there are differing opinions about how to interpret that passage. Here are five options from the Believer's Bible Commentary:

    He must be the husband of one wife. This requirement has been understood in several ways. Some suggest that it means that a bishop must be married. The argument is that a single man would not have the proper breadth of experience to deal with family problems as they arise. If this expression means that a bishop must be married, then it must also be argued in verse 4 than an elder must have children as well, following the same line of reasoning.
    Others think that the husband of one wife means that if a bishop’s first wife died, then he does not marry again. This is a very strict interpretation that might cast reflection on the holiness of the marriage relationship.
    A third interpretation is that the words mean that a bishop must not be divorced. This view has considerable merit, although it scarcely seems to be a complete explanation.
    Another view is that a bishop must not have been guilty of any unfaithfulness or irregularity in his marriage. His moral life must be above question. This is certainly true, whatever else the passage might mean.
    A final explanation is that this means that a bishop may not be a polygamist. 1 Timothy 3:2 (BBC)

    Given that theologians are still debating what Paul meant by the words he used, many translators just translate it literally and let people debate what it means. Because to translate it dynamically is to take a side in the debate.

    But notice that none of the options above says Paul's point was to specify that Bishops had to be men.


    That's true, you did say that. But I didn't think you meant to say that. So why don't you explain to me what you mean when you say: "I see it the other way around- that being faithful to his wife is an idiom for husband of one wife!"

    Because that makes no sense to me.


    :rolleyes:
     
    Last edited: Jan 20, 2021
  2. nolidad

    nolidad Well-Known Member Supporter

    +1,255
    United States
    Baptist
    Married
    US-Others
    Sorry I haven't responded. I must have missed this in teh flood of responses I have gotten as of late.

    Yes there is much uncertainty as to the exact meaning of Pauls command. But one thing is certain among nearly all but the egalitarian interpreters. The Bishop is a man and have one wife.

    The meaning of one wife is what is discussed but not that the bishop must be a man. This whole line o argument on your part is a red herring.

    But the teacher I study under, I agree with. How one does interpret it, they must do so consistently. The language of the original is amorphous enough to allow it to mean
    Married only one time.
    Not having a n affair on his wife.
    Not having two wives.

    Given that Paul was writing to Timothy in Asia minor gives the option of having more than one wife. It also could be married just once Both of these are faithful to the words Paul wrote.

    Beingfaithful to their wife is an implied given that is in harmony with the rest of teh SCriptures. While weak because Paul speaks often of fidelity in marriage, it is still an acceptable dynamic translation. but they all refer to a man in relation to his wife!

    But it is a man in view. that is why dynamic equivalent translations can be accurate in their thoght, if not in the exact language.

    And that is why I discourage people from using dynamic translations, for they are translating based on the best guess of the interpreters. Could be 100% accurate in conveying the thought or 0% right.

    Well it was given that it was a man! Aner never means woman and gyne never means man! The question is exactly what was one wife in its intent? Not that it was gender neutral. You should know that.

    Therein lies the problem. I am misquoted because of your feelings instead of my words!

    And I wouldn't think it made any sense to you because you are arguing from a p[redisposed viewpoint on this!

    Idioms as they develop go from a more formal to a more colloquial way of expressing something. Same as metaphors and similes.

    id·i·om
    /ˈidēəm/
    Learn to pronounce

    noun
    1. 1.
      a group of words established by usage as having a meaning not deducible from those of the individual words
    Both phrases " A Bishop must be teh husband of one wife" which is the literal translation, and:

    "A bishop must be faithful to his wife" which is the dynamic equivalent both have meanings deducible from their individual words-: A MAN, must be faithful.

    To translate this passage as the two worst interpretations do'
    "A bishop must e faithful to their spouse" is a hideous abuse of linguistics! Thankfully only two English Bibles stoop to this level of horrendous grammar.
     
  3. Gregorikos

    Gregorikos Ordinary Mystic

    914
    +720
    United States
    Pentecostal
    Married
    My "feelings" were giving you the benefit of the doubt because I thought you knew what an idiom was.

    You still didn't answer the question. You actually said something like this twice, so it cannot be a mistake. I say that "husband of one wife is an idiom for "faithful to his wife." You are saying it goes the other way:

    In Actuality, though I cannot prove it either, it is more logical and probable that "being faithful to his wife" is the idiom for husband of one wife" and not vice versa as you say.

    So tell us what you mean by that.
     
  4. nolidad

    nolidad Well-Known Member Supporter

    +1,255
    United States
    Baptist
    Married
    US-Others

    For the second time, an idiom generally is a far more colloquial form of saying what the original said!

    Husband of one wife is a formal way of saying and has been the standard translation until recent times .

    Faithful to his wife uses terms not found in the original statement and thus is more likely the idiom. But as I said that is my opinion. But as you have failed to show the historic development of husband of one wife being a linguistic idiom you will accept it because scholars 2 millenia removed from teh language think they could be.

    But idiom or not both ways of saying that passage says a bishop is a man. And that is the core of this argument. all the rest of the fluff you wish to argue is just a side show distraction from that biblical fact!
     
  5. Gregorikos

    Gregorikos Ordinary Mystic

    914
    +720
    United States
    Pentecostal
    Married
    Incorrect. You are demonstrating that you don't understand what an idiom is, and making it clear why you don't understand what you're talking about.

    Again you prove you don't know what an idiom is, and you don't know what you're talking about. The one with the literal words is the idiom, according to the definition both you and I have posted. (But it doesn't seem to get through to you.)

    Well I did show that when I showed BAGD-

    (numerous sepulchral inscriptions celebrate the virtue of a surviving spouse by noting that he or she was married only once, thereby suggesting the virtue of extraordinary fidelity, e.g. CIL VI, 3604; 723; 12405; 14404; cp. Horace, Odes 3, 14, 4; Propertius 4, 11, 36; Valerius Maximus 4, 3, 3; and s. esp. CIL VI, 1527, 31670, 37053=ILS 8393 [text and Eng. tr.: EWistrand, The So-Called Laudatio Thuriae, ’76]; s. GWilliams, JRS 48, ’58 16–29.

    A Greek-English Lexicon of the New Testament and Other Early Christian Literature, 3rd Edition, Walter Bauer, revised & edited by F.W. Danker (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 2000), 292.

    Those sepulchre inscriptions and the references in the Biblical text are about all we have to go on. As the ESV Study Bible points out, the expression is rare. But we have enough.

    Here is the ESVSB:

    The meaning of husband of one wife (Gk. mias gynaikos andra) is widely debated. The Greek phrase is not common, and there are few other instances for comparison. The phrase literally states, “of one woman [wife] man [husband].” (1) Many commentators understand the phrase to mean “having the character of a one-woman man,” that is, “faithful to his wife.” In support of this view is the fact that a similar phrase is used in 1 Tim. 5:9 as a qualification for widows (Gk. henos andros gynē; “one-man woman,” i.e., “wife of one husband”), and in that verse it seems to refer to the trait of faithfulness, for a prohibition of remarriage after the death of a spouse would be in contradiction to Paul's advice to young widows in 5:14. Interpreters who hold this first view conclude that the wording of 3:2 is too specific to be simply a requirement of marriage and not specific enough to be simply a reference to divorce or remarriage after divorce. In the context of this passage, the phrase therefore prohibits any kind of marital unfaithfulness. 1 Timothy 3:2 (ESV SB Notes)


    I disagree. As an idiom for marital faithfulness, that's all the information it is trying to convey. The fact that is uses a the male version of the idiom is to be expected, because male was the default gender in the language.
     
  6. nolidad

    nolidad Well-Known Member Supporter

    +1,255
    United States
    Baptist
    Married
    US-Others
    Well I just went by the definition I posted.

    And you can spend your time arguing my expertise on idioms, but both teh original and teh dynamic translation both say bishops are men and not women.


    And you are wrong! There was all three genders in koine greek. Now you are being deceptive in presenting info! And He did not use anthropos or tis in the masculine gender but He used a masculine only noun ANER! Stop being coy.


    Once again you haven't shown this is an idiom for genderless faithfulness. You just give opinions of people 2 millenia removed from Paul writing this and they present no evidence how the idiom developed! Until you do that, teh original is still what we should live by! There were no female bishops when Paul wrote this so how could it be an idiom.

    Aner and gyne are gender specific words meaning a male and female. Once again if simple faithfulness in marriage is what was Pauls intent without regoard to ones gender- you cannot deny gay bishops who are faithful to their spouses!



    And I have no problem with this understanding. For this understanding you , YOU cited shows that a bishop must a MAN faithful to his wife! Not a woman faithful to her husband! This is the whole crux of our argument.


    Once again your coyness is noted and discarded. This is not an idiom for marital faithfulness, but a qualification for the office of bishop. And Paul used the words for male and female and not people. Paul was smart enough in the greek to know that if it was to be gender neutral he would have used "anthropos" or even better "tis" which could then be accepted as a "bishop" must be faithful to their spouose". But the FACT that paul used words that cannot be redefined in a gender neutral way is all that an honest exegete should need.
     
  7. Gregorikos

    Gregorikos Ordinary Mystic

    914
    +720
    United States
    Pentecostal
    Married
    No you didn't. You said the exact opposite of the definition you posted.

    Here is the definition you posted:

    id·i·om
    /ˈidēəm/
    Learn to pronounce

    noun

    1. 1.
      a group of words established by usage as having a meaning not deducible from those of the individual words
    Then you said:

    Faithful to his wife uses terms not found in the original statement and thus is more likely the idiom.

    The idiom is the literal statement. In our case it is "husband of one wife", and corresponds to your definition which you posted above. And you apparently didn't understand it, for you later said the non-literal expression "faithful to his wife" is more likely the idiom.

    So your statement runs completely counter to the definition you posted. And you didn't even realize it. Because you don't know what you're talking about.

    No they don't. I've posted several dynamic translations of the verse.

    Here's one:

    Now a bishop must be above reproach, married only once, temperate, sensible, respectable, hospitable, an apt teacher, 1 Timothy 3:2 (NRSV)

    Here's another:

    So the church’s supervisor must be without fault. They should be faithful to their spouse, sober, modest, and honest. They should show hospitality and be skilled at teaching. 1 Timothy 3:2 (CEB)

    You should probably look "coy" up in the dictionary. It's weird that you would say that.

    Yes. He used mias gunaikos andra. That's an idiom for marital faithfulness.

    You have rejected the Bauer Arndt Gingrich Danker Lexicon, Thomas Schriener, Douglas Moo, Andreas Köstenberger, the ESV Study Bible, The NRSV, CEB, NIV, and NLT, all of which testify to the fact that "husband of one wife" is an idiom for marital faithfulness. That's on you.
     
  8. nolidad

    nolidad Well-Known Member Supporter

    +1,255
    United States
    Baptist
    Married
    US-Others
    Well show how your calling "husband of one wife" is indechirable from "faithful to their spouse.

    But move on if I made a mistake and I probably did- it still doesn't mean the Bible allows women to hold the officwe of Bishop by any stretch of the imagination.
     
  9. nolidad

    nolidad Well-Known Member Supporter

    +1,255
    United States
    Baptist
    Married
    US-Others
    Read your own words and see how foolish your conclusion is. All of them say men! show where it allows women.
     
  10. nolidad

    nolidad Well-Known Member Supporter

    +1,255
    United States
    Baptist
    Married
    US-Others
    Idiom

    An idiom (Latin: idiomī, "special property", from Ancient Greek: ἰδίωμα, translit. idíōma, "special feature, special phrasing, a peculiarity", f. Ancient Greek: ἴδιος, translit. ídios, "one's own") is a phrase or an expression that has a figurative, or sometimes literal, meaning. Categorized as formulaic language, an idiom's figurative meaning is different from the literal meaning. There are thousands of idioms, occurring frequently in all languages. It is estimated that there are at least twenty-five thousand idiomatic expressions in the English language.

    I stand by faithful to his wife- for that is a figurative way of saying husband of one wife! which would be a figurative or idiom of husband of one wife!

    If the idiom is the husband of one wife- then what is it the idiom of? Where isyour evidence (not opinions of people 2,000 years removed) but the actual evidence that Paul was using an idiom here. there has to be a development of this becoming an idiom for "faithful to their spouse." Where is that development?

    But be that as it may- start a new thread if you wish to show the world I do not havwe a bachelors degree in English grammar!

    but on this thread when you make a claim- you need evidence and not opinion to support your claims.
     
  11. Xarto

    Xarto New Member

    41
    +14
    Ireland
    Catholic
    Married
    The Catholic, Orthodox and Oriental Orthodox church were founded by Our Lord, that he only chose men as his bishops/ priests/ presbyters is Tradition with a capital T (unlike celibacy in the CC, which is tradition with a small "t", which could change) and is something that cannot be changed. You will find that the Orthodox are even less flexible on this and afaik isn't even a topic in their churches.
     
  12. Gregorikos

    Gregorikos Ordinary Mystic

    914
    +720
    United States
    Pentecostal
    Married
    Again, men is the default for the culture and the language.

    Again, as Cassia said:

    When the masculine gender is the default in a language, this means that the masculine gender is used to describe any person or group of people containing at least one man. The feminine gender would only be used when referring to a female person or a group of people who are all female.

    "A double-minded man is unstable in all his ways," the Greek word for "man," which is transliterated as "aner." The ancient Greek did have a gender-neutral word which meant "person" -- "anthropos"-- and this word is often used in the New Testament. "let not that person ("anthropos") think he shall receive anything from the Lord."

    Does that mean only men are double-minded or only those who receive the flesh but not the spirit
    ?

    The word there is aner.

    So answer this question: Does James 1:7-8 apply to men only?
     
  13. Gregorikos

    Gregorikos Ordinary Mystic

    914
    +720
    United States
    Pentecostal
    Married
    That's what I've been saying all along, but you've been arguing against the point you now embrace. This further shows your confusion.

    [quote-nolidad]
    If the idiom is the husband of one wife- then what is it the idiom of? [/quote]

    As we have both said dozens of times in this thread, it is an idiom meaning "faithful to one's wife."

    There is no historical development because it's an obsecure phrase. But within the Biblical text itself are sufficient clues to show it is an idiom referring to a bishop's character being above reproach in the area of marital faithfulness. In other words, the overseer must be known to be a person who is faithful and committed to their present spouse and who does not commit adultery (thus including both marital fidelity and sexual fidelity).

    a. Paul allows for remarriage in 1 Corinthians 7 and encourages remarriage in 1 Timothy 5 for younger widows. In the context of 1 Timothy 5, it is that doubtful that Paul would have denied putting an older widow on the support list who had earlier remarried at Paul’s encouragement and then been widowed a second time. Since 1 Timothy 5:9 says that a widow must be “a woman of one man,” we probably need to interpret that expression as consistent with the possibility of a second marriage under biblically allowed circumstances. This suggests that viewing the almost identical phrases in 1 Timothy 3:2 and 5:9 in a restrictive sense (i.e. required to be married once and only once or required to be male) is not warranted.

    b. The expression that Paul uses in the case of desertion of a spouse in 1 Corinthians 7:15 (“is not under bondage”; cf. 7:27) is so similar to expressions and ideas in Romans 7:2-3 (“is bound by law” “she is released” “free from the law”) and the similar expression in 1 Corinthians 7:39 (“a wife is bound as long as her husband lives”) that allowance for remarriage should be understood in such a case. Would Paul have excluded potential overseers from participating in what seems to be the freedom to remarry implied by these verses?

    c. The requirements for overseers in 1 Timothy 3 all point toward the present positive “character” of these people rather than their past lives. It seems that their past lives in all other cases are only relevant insofar as they show the candidates presently to be people of good character (cf. the “above reproach,” the “managing household,” and the “good reputation with those outside” requirements). Since the “above reproach” requirement is first, many interpreters think that it should encompass all the other items in the list. Thus, the phrase under consideration should probably be considered a character-issue (a quality related to being “above reproach”), particularly in light of the fact that all the other items in the list fit comfortably under this rubric.

    That is strong evidence that it is an idiom. Moreover-

    The phrase one-woman man is an idiom inscribed on numerous ancient gravestones celebrating the virtue of a husband (or wife, see below) who had not remarried. By noting that he (or she) was married only once, it suggests the virtue of extraordinary fidelity. See A Greek-English Lexicon of the New Testament and Other Early Christian Literature, 3rd Edition, Walter Bauer, revised & edited by F.W. Danker (University of Chicago Press, 2000), 292.

    According to Lucien Deiss (notes to the French Bible, the TOB, Edition Intégrale, p. 646, note a), "this Greek phrase was used in Asia Minor, on both Jewish and pagan gravestone inscriptions, to designate a woman or a man, who was faithful to his or her spouse in a way characterized by “a particularly fervent conjugal love.”

    In addition several Bible translations translate it as an idiom, and several study Bibles and commentators note it as such-


    The requirement of being. literally, a ‘‘one-wife-type-of-husband" resembles that of the Roman univira (a “one-husband-type-of-wife”). This term conveying marital fidelity initially applied to wives during their lifetime and later became an epithet husbands gave to their wives after they died, as is attested by numerous extant tombstone inscriptions. The understanding that this requirement was aimed at excluding polygamists is implausible because polygamy wasn’t a widespread practice in the Greco-Roman world of the time. More likely Paul here excludes men with one or several concubines. This common practice conflicted with biblical morals since sexual union with a concubine constituted adultery and amounted to polygamy. Most likely, therefore, “husband of one wife” represents an idiom for marital faithfulness (e.g.. NIV: “faithful to his wife”).

    This is further suggested by the parallel wording in 5:9, where a widow must have been “the wife of one husband” in order to be eligible for church support and where the equivalent phrase ἑνὸς ἀνδρὸς γυνή is used (cf. | Cor 7:2-5). In that case the issue is not polyandry (simultaneous marriage to multiple husbands) because Paul addresses women bereft of their husbands. Andreas J. Köstenberger, the editor of the Journal of the Evangelical Theological Society, in his Commentary on 1-2 Timothy and Titus

    Many commentators understand the phrase to mean “having the character of a one-woman man,” that is, “faithful to his wife.” In support of this view is the fact that a similar phrase is used in 1 Tim. 5:9 as a qualification for widows (Gk. henos andros gynē; “one-man woman,” i.e., “wife of one husband”), and in that verse it seems to refer to the trait of faithfulness, for a prohibition of remarriage after the death of a spouse would be in contradiction to Paul's advice to young widows in 5:14. Interpreters who hold this first view conclude that the wording of 3:2 is too specific to be simply a requirement of marriage and not specific enough to be simply a reference to divorce or remarriage after divorce. In the context of this passage, the phrase therefore prohibits any kind of marital unfaithfulness. 1 Timothy 3:2 (ESV Study Bible Notes)

    A bishop must not have been guilty of any unfaithfulness or irregularity in his marriage. His moral life must be above question. This is certainly true, whatever else the passage might mean. 1 Timothy 3:2 (Believers Bible Commentary)
     
  14. nolidad

    nolidad Well-Known Member Supporter

    +1,255
    United States
    Baptist
    Married
    US-Others

    Actually men is not the default position! That is just a deceptive ploy! The default word if gender is not at issue would be the words "tis' or "anthropos" not gender specific words like aner and gyne. Sorry but you r glass here holds no water!

    Well as a group is not mentioned but these are singular Cassias explanation does not apply here!

    Well as verses 7&8 are singular and given that James used teh generic anthropos twice prior, I would conclude that yes. Given the culture and how prayer was conducted it would be men as James used anthropos as well in chptr. 1. but we know from teh rest of Scripture apart from this specific narrow verse that all people must ask in faith. But if this pssage is forced to stand alone- then it would mean just an individual man.
     
  15. nolidad

    nolidad Well-Known Member Supporter

    +1,255
    United States
    Baptist
    Married
    US-Others
    As we have both said dozens of times in this thread, it is an idiom meaning "faithful to one's wife."[/QUOTE]


    Then simply show that faithful to ones wife preceded husband of one wife in ancient literature. An idiom comes after the actual phrase. They are not born together. YOU have said it dozenzs of times but have not proven it. But even if it is an idiom for being faithful to ones wife- it precludes women from the ministry which is the point of this whole mess!

    If you want to start a thread how I erroneously conflated idiom with metaphorical phrases- be my guest!. but even if you can prove that faithful to ones wife grew to include an idiom of husband of one wife, it still keeps women ouot of the ministry biblically!


    And this is not in question here.


    And this is not in question here either. These and the others which I will not cite are all straw men ! For the issue under discussion is does the bible allow women to the bishopric and this passage certainly does not ! Especially if the words Paul penned are an idiom for what you say it actually means!


    So at best you are saying there is no evidence but it "could be" an idiom. I won't argue that It could mean simply faithful to his present wife.
    It could mean that he cannot have been remarried unlawfully according to SCripture.
    It also could mean not a bigamist or polygamist.

    All of these could also be what your might be idiom mean as well. And I don't have a problem with any and all of those applications. But it is a man and not a woman that has to meet this qualification!
     
  16. sparow

    sparow Well-Known Member Supporter

    +289
    Protestant
    Single
    I believe there is a place for women in the church, but it is not the man's place they should take.

    I have never assimilated or have been trained in religious jargon; for me tradition is merely a word in the English language, where tradition may be good or bad; I am aware that Tradition in the religions you mention takes on a profound dimension, which maybe a tradition in itself; celibacy means to not marry, it does not prohibit fornication or other sexual deviation; I am aware that the vow the priest makes is complex and may be much more than the word suggests, but the issue is who does the Priest swear his oath to; most likely to the Pope and his piers, but if to God, he will be held accountable keep any oath, if it is Lawful, even the useless and unnecessary oaths.
     
  17. Gregorikos

    Gregorikos Ordinary Mystic

    914
    +720
    United States
    Pentecostal
    Married
    You're completely wrong. As the Louw and Nida Lexicon points out:

    It is not uncommon in languages for a term which is often used to refer to an adult male to be employed also in a generic sense of person. This is especially true when such terms are used in the plural form. (Louw & Nida Lexicon)

    You know this to be true. For example, the quote attributed to Edmund Burke, "The only thing necessary for the triumph of evil is that good men do nothing," is in reference to both men and women. Male is the default gender in most languages, including Biblical Greek and older English.

    Tis is a masculine pronoun, and is translated "man" by some in this very passage!

    This is a true saying, If a man desire the office of a bishop, he desireth a good work. 1 Timothy 3:1 (KJV)

    Anthropos is a masculine noun, and was translated as "man" or "men" for centuries, even when it referred to both genders. There are hundreds of examples. Here are a couple:

    But he answered, “It is written,
    “‘Man shall not live by bread alone,
    but by every word that comes from the mouth of God.’” Matthew 4:3-4 (ESV)

    Wherefore he saith, When he ascended up on high, he led captivity captive, and gave gifts unto men. Ephesians 4:8 (KJV)

    You yourself pointed out that "anthropos" is 'generic' and used for both genders. Yet the KJV translates it "man" or "men" 552 times out of 559! Very clearly male is the default gender, and you are foolishly figthing against an obvious and well-known fact.

    So you admit that in James 1:7-8, aner is used of both males and females. Very well.

    Now what about: "blessed is the man against whom the Lord will not count his sin.” Romans 4:8 (ESV)

    That's aner again. Here's the question: Does Romans 4:8 apply to men only?
     
    Last edited: Jan 29, 2021
  18. Gregorikos

    Gregorikos Ordinary Mystic

    914
    +720
    United States
    Pentecostal
    Married
    Already done that. Here it is again:

    The phrase one-woman man is an idiom inscribed on numerous ancient gravestones celebrating the virtue of a husband (or wife, see below) who had not remarried. By noting that he (or she) was married only once, it suggests the virtue of extraordinary fidelity. See A Greek-English Lexicon of the New Testament and Other Early Christian Literature, 3rd Edition, Walter Bauer, revised & edited by F.W. Danker (University of Chicago Press, 2000), 292.

    According to Lucien Deiss (notes to the French Bible, the TOB, Edition Intégrale, p. 646, note a), "this Greek phrase was used in Asia Minor, on both Jewish and pagan gravestone inscriptions, to designate a woman or a man, who was faithful to his or her spouse in a way characterized by “a particularly fervent conjugal love.”


    No it doesn't. Because as mentioned previously, male is the default gender. So even in the preposterous case that there had been more female presbyters than males, Paul would not have used the equivalent expression "woman of one man" (1 Timothy 5:9) to describe both genders. He would use the male version to apply to both.


    Those things that you say are not in question are all part of the logical case that leads scholars to the conclusion that "husband of one wife" and "wife of one husband" are idioms that refer to marital faithfulness. But you have to be able to take those facts, which you don't contest, and put 2 and 2 together. That seems to be the hard part for you.
     
    Last edited: Jan 30, 2021
  19. nolidad

    nolidad Well-Known Member Supporter

    +1,255
    United States
    Baptist
    Married
    US-Others
    Digging up some more obscure authors do not help. Aner is a male noun meaning a man. Anthropos is used of mankind.

    you will not find a biblical verse using aner in a gander neutral sense.

    Even if male is the default is irrelavent to the Timothy passage. For aner is not a pronoun but a noun and always is defined as a male or married man. Just like gyne is not a pronoun but a noun and is always defined as woman or married woman! So all your defense here is not germaneto the topic!

    When singular it is always males. when used of an unidentified group, the quaternary definition allows for men and women, but here context must determine whether all men or a comingled group!
    4:8 is singular- so it is a male! sorry But thems the rules!

    And if god inspired "tis" I would agree with you , but He didn't, He inspired aner and it is singular so it is male!




    Already done that. Here it is again:

    The phrase one-woman man is an idiom inscribed on numerous ancient gravestones celebrating the virtue of a husband (or wife, see below) who had not remarried. By noting that he (or she) was married only once, it suggests the virtue of extraordinary fidelity. See A Greek-English Lexicon of the New Testament and Other Early Christian Literature, 3rd Edition, Walter Bauer, revised & edited by F.W. Danker (University of Chicago Press, 2000), 292.

    According to Lucien Deiss (notes to the French Bible, the TOB, Edition Intégrale, p. 646, note a), "this Greek phrase was used in Asia Minor, on both Jewish and pagan gravestone inscriptions, to designate a woman or a man, who was faithful to his or her spouse in a way characterized by “a particularly fervent conjugal love.”
    [/QUOTE]

    So just show that being faithful to ones wife preceded "husband of one wife" so that "husband of one wife" became an idiom for meaning being faithful to ones wife. But even granting it is an idiom- it still precludes women from the ministry!YOu cannot have an idiom formed before the phrase it is an idiom of! But even granting it is an idiom which you still have not established. (All you do is give a reason why someone calls it an idiom in the 20th century but not the whys or hows). But even if an idiom- it still does not grant women the right to be in the ministry.
     
  20. nolidad

    nolidad Well-Known Member Supporter

    +1,255
    United States
    Baptist
    Married
    US-Others

    That is pure suppostiion on your part with no evidence to support it.

    Male may be a default gender for pronouns, not nouns! Aner is male and gyne is female they are not gender neutral nouns butr gender specific nouns.

    Paul knew enough of grammar that if he was allowing females into teh ministry he would have used the plural of anthropos and tis to the plural of aner! but tehn I can also swhow those other mysogynisitc verses God inspired Paul to write about women keeping silent in the church and to submit to their husbands and how deacons wives must be grave. all the evidence except the new "egalitarian"cholars are against you!
     
Loading...