Bishops/Elder/Pastors required to be married?

[Carry_Your_Name]

You must be bored...

No sir, I might be bored at other subjects such as trinity, but never on this one. You are totally unaware of your own arrogance and discriminatory attitude, your twisted view has effectively rendered all faithful servants of God who took a vow of celibacy unqualified frauds, and you're reinforcing the idolatry of marriage which is already prevalent in the church, both in the past and present age.

In case you've forgotten, we the church are collectively the bride betrothed to Lord Jesus, our great commission is to make disciples, not babies! That is our eternal destiny in the kingdom of God, any earthly marriage and family life is but a temporary reflection, like a trailer of the whole movie, or to use a more biblical analogy, crumbs fallen off the master's table!

 

[Carry_Your_Name]

That information was never publicized.

Never publicized or never had existed?

 

[Hopeful 2]

This is exactly a word game and a translation issue, which I’ve already predicted. The original Greek work in Rom. 16:1-2 was diakanos, from which came the word “deacon”, and Paul entrusted her to carry his message from God. Sister Phoebe may not be an elder, but she was most assuredly a deacon, a leader of the Cenchrean church which Paul acknowledged, he asked the Roman church to assist her. Your argument comes not from the Scripture, but your own confirmation bias, it only shows your contempt against women and single people. If this translation is the result of modern feminism, then call God a feminist, for He made Mary Magdalene to be the first eye witness of his only begotten son’s resurrection, an apostle of apostles.

I don't beleive the dilution of Paul's requirements for either bishop/pastor or deacon for a second.
Why write something then provide an example to counter it ?
Your findings suggest Paul was double-minded...or someone is making him look untrustworthy.

 

[Hopeful 2]

Nonetheless, the Scripture is clear, by the time Paul wrote 1 Tim. to Timothy, he was told to remain in Ephesus as an overseer of the local church to watch out false doctrines. In 2 Tim. 4:6-8 Paul bid his farewell, the torch was passed to Timothy, so regardless of where Timothy traveled with Paul before, his journey stopped there. This was corroborated by Jesus’s own remark to the Ephesian church, the Lord personally testified Timothy’s work:

“I know your works, your labor, your patience, and that you cannot bear those who are evil. And you have tested those who say they are apostles and are not, and have found them liars;” (Rev. 2:2)

The word "over-seer" is not present in the scriptures concerning Tim's duties.

 

[Hopeful 2]

Never publicized or never had existed?

Never written about.
So to say Timotheus was married and had kids had to come from somebody's imagination.

 

[Carry_Your_Name]

I don't beleive the dilution of Paul's requirements for either bishop/pastor or deacon for a second.
Why write something then provide an example to counter it ?
Your findings suggest Paul was double-minded...or someone is making him look untrustworthy.

Who made him look double-minded? Paul gave his sound advice on marriage in 1 Cor. 7, it is crystal clear that unmarried people are preferred, marriage was a distraction and it was merely permitted, not required or encouraged. Why would the same Paul required church leaders to be husband and father?

I say to the unmarried and to the widows: It is good for them if they remain even as I am; (1 Cor. 7:8)
I suppose therefore that this is good because of the present distress—that it is good for a man to remain as he is (1 Cor. 7:26)
But I want you to be without care. He who is unmarried cares for the things of the Lord—how he may please the Lord. (1 Cor. 7:32)
He who gives her in marriage does well, but he who does not give her in marriage does better. (1 Cor. 7:38)
Are you bound to a wife? Do not seek to be loosed. Are you loosed from a wife? Do not seek a wife. But even if you do marry, you have not sinned; and if a virgin marries, she has not sinned. Nevertheless such will have trouble in the flesh, but I would spare you. (1 Cor. 7:27-28)

 

[Carry_Your_Name]

Never written about.
So to say Timotheus was married and had kids had to come from somebody's imagination.

Exactly, and that is a slap in the face to your "husband and father requirement" misinterpretation, for neither Paul, the writer of 1 Tim nor Timothy, the recepient of 1 Tim was married with kids. This requirement is nothing but your imagination.

 

[Carry_Your_Name]

The word "over-seer" is not present in the scriptures concerning Tim's duties.

But Timothy's duties effectively made him an overseer. He was put in charge of the Ephesian church to ensure no false doctrines were taught.

 

[Hopeful 2]

Who made him look double-minded?

The folks who say single men, (or women), can be a bishop or deacon, in spite of the requirements written in 1 Tim and Titus, make Paul double-minded.

Paul gave his sound advice on marriage in 1 Cor. 7, it is crystal clear that unmarried people are preferred,

Preferred for what ?
Not for being a bishop or deacon.

marriage was a distraction and it was merely permitted, not required or encouraged. Why would the same Paul required church leaders to be husband and father?

Different contexts between men in general and qualification to lead a church.

I say to the unmarried and to the widows: It is good for them if they remain even as I am; (1 Cor. 7:8)

Paul's preferences didn't constitute a law.

I suppose therefore that this is good because of the present distress—that it is good for a man to remain as he is (1 Cor. 7:26)

And there is your context...the present distress.
Men touching women outside of marriage.

But I want you to be without care. He who is unmarried cares for the things of the Lord—how he may please the Lord. (1 Cor. 7:32)
He who gives her in marriage does well, but he who does not give her in marriage does better. (1 Cor. 7:38)
Are you bound to a wife? Do not seek to be loosed. Are you loosed from a wife? Do not seek a wife. But even if you do marry, you have not sinned; and if a virgin marries, she has not sinned. Nevertheless such will have trouble in the flesh, but I would spare you. (1 Cor. 7:27-28)

Looks like you have all the info you need, in the context of men and women living honorably.
But it doesn't apply to those seeking to lead a congregation.
A single man can't show he has what it takes to lead a family, so has no indicators of his fitness to lead a church.

 

[Hopeful 2]

Exactly, and that is a slap in the face to your "husband and father requirement" misinterpretation, for neither Paul, the writer of 1 Tim nor Timothy, the recepient of 1 Tim was married with kids. This requirement is nothing but your imagination.

Neither were bishops or deacons.
Both were itinerant preachers.

 

[Hopeful 2]

But Timothy's duties effectively made him an overseer. He was put in charge of the Ephesian church to ensure no false doctrines were taught.

Not really.
He had one assignment.
It didn't include taking over from whoever had already been leading the church in Ephesus.

 

[Carry_Your_Name]

The folks who say single men, (or women), can be a bishop or deacon, in spite of the requirements written in 1 Tim and Titus, make Paul double-minded.

The folks who deny the facts that Timothy was appointed as an overseer without a shred of evidence regarding his marital status make Paul double minded.

Preferred for what ?
Not for being a bishop or deacon.

Preferred for serving the Lord. Are bishop and deacon not servants of the Lord?

Different contexts between men in general and qualification to led a church.

So the Corinthian church had no leader?

Paul's preferences didn't constitute a law.

And what makes those qualifications "law"? 1 Tim. 3:1 reads "trustworthy statement" or "faithful saying", what makes it law?

And there is your context...the present distress.
Men touching women outside of marriage.

Then don't! Paul commended celibacy in 1 Cor. 7:1 - it is GOOD for a man not to touch a woman!

Looks like you have all the info you need, in the context of men and women living honorably.
But it doesn't apply to those seeking to lead a congregation.
A single man can't show he has what it takes to lead a family, so has no indicators of his fitness to lead a church.

Again, are you suggesting that the Corinthian church had no leader? What applies to the Ephesian church doesn't affect the Corinthian church? Then why does this list of qualification in 1 Tim. 3 matter? Paul had other rules for other churches, 1 Tim. 3 was a niche, tailored for to the Ephesian church only, right? For example, sister Phoebe was a deacon in the church of Cenchrea, so clearly it doesn't apply to that church since she was clearly not a "husband of a wife". Is that what you're saying?

 

[Carry_Your_Name]

Neither were bishops or deacons.
Both were itinerant preachers.

No, Timothy was told to REMAIN in Ephesus.

Not really.
He had one assignment.
It didn't include taking over from whoever had already been leading the church in Ephesus.

Yes it did. Whoever had already been in charge was obviously preaching false doctrines, spreading "myths and endless genealogies, which give rise to useless speculation". Timothy was appointed by Paul to put an end to that and teach the real word of God.

 

[Hopeful 2]

The folks who deny the facts that Timothy was appointed as an overseer without a shred of evidence regarding his marital status make Paul double minded.

Two wrong assumptions don't make a correct conclusion

Preferred for serving the Lord. Are bishop and deacon not servants of the Lord?

They sure are, but they have the added glory of leading a congregation.
For which certain requirements are listed...including running a household/family.

So the Corinthian church had no leader?

I am sure it did.
Why do you ask ?

And what makes those qualifications "law"? 1 Tim. 3:1 reads "trustworthy statement" or "faithful saying", what makes it law?

The term "law" was hyperbole where I used it.
I certainly consider anything written in NT scripture as requiring adherence.

Then don't! Paul commended celibacy in 1 Cor. 7:1 - it is GOOD for a man not to touch a woman!

It was not a command.
You are over-stating what he says in 1 Cor 7:6..."But I speak this by permission, and not of commandment."

Again, are you suggesting that the Corinthian church had no leader?

Not at all.

What applies to the Ephesian church doesn't affect the Corinthian church?

It sure does.

Then why does this list of qualification in 1 Tim. 3 matter?

Because Paul had the gift of the Holy Ghost, and used it when teaching.
It is unwise to ignore him.

Paul had other rules for other churches,

I doubt that.

1 Tim. 3 was a niche, tailored for to the Ephesian church only, right?

Nope.

For example, sister Phoebe was a deacon in the church of Cenchrea, so clearly it doesn't apply to that church since she was clearly not a "husband of a wife". Is that what you're saying?

She was not a deacon.
And being a wife is never listed as a requirement for leadership.
Being a husband is though !

 

[Carry_Your_Name]

Two wrong assumptions don't make a correct conclusion

Those are scriptural facts, not assumptions. Your "husband and father requirement" is the real assumption. You appeal to the arthority of the Scripture, so do I.

They sure are, but they have the added glory of leading a congregation.
For which certain requirements are listed...including running a household/family.

Then why are the recepients of the Corinthian letters preferred to be single? Are they not church leaders?

I am sure it did.

No, you're not.

Why do you ask ?

Hypocrisy. Inconsistence.

The term "law" was hyperbole where I used it.
I certainly consider anything written in NT scripture as requiring adherence.

Then why not 1 Cor. 7?

It was not a command.
You are over-stating what he says in 1 Cor 7:6..."But I speak this by permission, and not of commandment."

Exactly, marriage is merely permitted, not commanded.

Not at all.

Yes you are.

It sure does.

Not according to you.

Nope.

Yes according to you.

She was not a deacon.
And being a wife is never listed as a requirement for leadership.
Being a husband is though !

Yes she was a deacon, Rom. 16:1-2, Greek word diakanos. You're denying God's holy word.

 

[Hopeful 2]

No, Timothy was told to REMAIN in Ephesus.

Yep, until he was rejoined with Paul.

Yes it did. Whoever had already been in charge was obviously preaching false doctrines, spreading "myths and endless genealogies, which give rise to useless speculation".

I think you are jumping to conclusions.

Timothy was appointed by Paul to put an end to that and teach the real word of God.

And that is all.

 

[Hopeful 2]

Those are scriptural facts, not assumptions. Your "husband and father requirement" is the real assumption. You appeal to the arthority of the Scripture, so do I.

I feel that you should reread 1 Tim 3 and Titus 1.

Then why are the recepients of the Corinthian letters preferred to be single? Are they not church leaders?

Paul would prefer the single men to remain single, but he says that is not a command from the Lord.
He also says that bishops and deacons should be married to a wife.

No, you're not.

A church with no shepherd ?
I doubt it.

Hypocrisy. Inconsistence.

Not much to work with there...

Then why not 1 Cor. 7?

That too should be considered is man-woman relationships.
As we don't know exactly what the Corinthians wrote to Paul, it can't be established how Paul would answer it

Exactly, marriage is merely permitted, not commanded.

It is commanded, as a requirement to be a bishop or deacon.

Yes you are.
Not according to you.
Yes according to you.

Yes she was a deacon, Rom. 16:1-2, Greek word diakanos. You're denying God's holy word.

I am denying your misinterpretation of the word.
It makes 1 Tim 3 and Titus 1 moot points.

 

[Carry_Your_Name]

Yep, until he was rejoined with Paul.

No he didn't, Paul left, he remained.

For I am already being poured out as a drink offering, and the time of my departure has come. (2 Tim. 4:6)

I think you are jumping to conclusions.

I think you're overlooking plainly stated circumstances in 1 Tim. 1:4.

And that is all.

That made him an overseer who oversees the correct teaching of God's word.

 

[Carry_Your_Name]

I feel that you should reread 1 Tim 3 and Titus 1.

I think you should reread the entire 1 Cor. 7, Rom. 16:1-2, 1 Tim. 1:3-7 and Matt. 19:11-12.

Paul would prefer the single men to remain single, but he says that is not a command from the Lord.
He also says that bishops and deacons should be married to a wife.

Then why did he give this advice to bishops and deacons of the Corinthian church?

A church with no shepherd ?
I doubt it.

That church had a shepherd - Erastus the treasurer, whom Paul greeted in his letters to Timothy, also mentioned in the Romans letter. He was to stay in Corinth as Timothy remained in Ephesus, so they were on equal footing. Why did Paul prefer him to be single? Where's the marriage requirement for Erastus?

Erastus, the treasurer of the city, greets you ... (Rom. 16:23)
Erastus stayed in Corinth ... (2 Tim. 4:20)

That too should be considered is man-woman relationships.
As we don't know exactly what the Corinthians wrote to Paul, it can't be established how Paul would answer it

Actually we do know - rampant sexual immorality, which Paul rebuked in 1 Cor. 6:12-20. 1 Cor. 7 was Paul's response to that.

It is commanded, as a requirement to be a bishop or deacon.

Again, the text reads "faithful saying" or "trustworthy statement", depending on the version, nowhere does it say "command" or "requirement", and according to you, other churches such as Corinth have their only unique "distress", what applies to the church of Ephesus has no effect on them.

I am denying your misinterpretation of the word.
It makes 1 Tim 3 and Titus 1 moot points.

And I'm denying your misinterpretation of 1 Tim 3 and Titus 1, which makes them irrelevant.

 

[D-D-W]

I think you have the words Apollos, and apostle confused.

Oops - You are correct. It was Barnabas that was an apostle.
Apollos was an itinerant preacher, not a local pastor.
Again, since he was not leading a congregation, the "husband of one wife" does not apply.