Jump to content

Recommended Posts


  • Group:  Royal Member
  • Followers:  4
  • Topic Count:  55
  • Topics Per Day:  0.01
  • Content Count:  4,568
  • Content Per Day:  0.65
  • Reputation:   771
  • Days Won:  0
  • Joined:  01/18/2006
  • Status:  Offline

Posted

Hi all,

I have a question concerning this passage below

1 Timothy 3:1-7--"This is a true saying, If a man desire the office of a bishop, he desireth a good work. A bishop then must be blameless, the husband of one wife vigilant sober of good behaviour given to hospitality apt to teach. Not given to wine no striker not greedy of filthy lucre but patient not a brawler not covetous. One that ruleth well his own house having his children in subjection with all gravity. (For if a man know not how to rule his own house how shall he take care of the church of God?) Not a novice lest being lifted up with pride he fall into the condemnation of the devil. Moreover he must have a good report of them which are without lest he fall into reproach and the snare of the devil."

I was curious as to what your opinions are according to the above passage of scripture. I know that whenever this passage of scripture is being debated and discussed that the emphasis seems to always be the man who wants to be a bishop. As all the emphasis seems to be that the man desiring this office "should be the husband of "One" wife In other words he should still be in his very first marrage from the start of it. This part I understand of the text.

But my reflection here is what of the wife in this situation? What if it is the man's first marriage and the wife he has is his first wife that he's ever been married to? But the wife he married has been married and divorced before on her second marriage Is she thus qualified to be a bishop's wife in this case?

I know the qualification are for a man desiring the office of a bishop having one wife but what of the wife being married and divorced before being qualified to be a bishop's wife. Just am very curious about the other side of it is all. Thanks for your responses in advance.

OC

  • Replies 22
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic


  • Group:  Royal Member
  • Followers:  0
  • Topic Count:  32
  • Topics Per Day:  0.00
  • Content Count:  5,258
  • Content Per Day:  0.72
  • Reputation:   42
  • Days Won:  3
  • Joined:  06/16/2005
  • Status:  Offline
  • Birthday:  07/22/1960

Posted

I think the other part of that requirement OC was that they didn't want a man who was married to several wives, a polygamist, which was also happening at that time.

I don't know about the wife and her previous marriages. My take would be that it would not matter as the qualifications pertain to the male in this case, but I don't know.


  • Group:  Royal Member
  • Followers:  3
  • Topic Count:  366
  • Topics Per Day:  0.05
  • Content Count:  10,933
  • Content Per Day:  1.49
  • Reputation:   212
  • Days Won:  1
  • Joined:  04/21/2005
  • Status:  Offline

Posted

The literal tranlsation is that the Bishop should be a "one woman man". Given that all of the other requirements in this passage are character traiths, it seems that this particular requirement is not limiting the role of the "bishop" to those who have only been marrid once. it is limiting the office to the man whose life and character are characterized by his being devoted to one woman.


  • Group:  Royal Member
  • Followers:  4
  • Topic Count:  55
  • Topics Per Day:  0.01
  • Content Count:  4,568
  • Content Per Day:  0.65
  • Reputation:   771
  • Days Won:  0
  • Joined:  01/18/2006
  • Status:  Offline

Posted

Thanks for your input Smalcald and EricH,

It is a interesting but it looks the same way to me that the bishop is not limited to just a wife who has never been married before but instead his devotion should be to "One" wife. So the bishop could be married to a women who has been married and divorce before as long as he has only been married once.

Then that leads me into how people view marriage and divorce in a case like this. Would people look down on the pastor's wife and not accept her in her role because of that.

Would the church not accept her as the pastor's wife because of it and do you think that would make a good example to the flock in this case.

Would be interested in others opinions as I think it is interesting thoughts behind all of this.

OC


  • Group:  Diamond Member
  • Followers:  0
  • Topic Count:  4
  • Topics Per Day:  0.00
  • Content Count:  829
  • Content Per Day:  0.12
  • Reputation:   7
  • Days Won:  0
  • Joined:  12/25/2006
  • Status:  Offline
  • Birthday:  07/26/1943

Posted
The literal tranlsation is that the Bishop should be a "one woman man". Given that all of the other requirements in this passage are character traiths, it seems that this particular requirement is not limiting the role of the "bishop" to those who have only been marrid once. it is limiting the office to the man whose life and character are characterized by his being devoted to one woman.

Exactly! :emot-puke-old:

1. Verse one is addressing


  • Group:  Diamond Member
  • Followers:  0
  • Topic Count:  4
  • Topics Per Day:  0.00
  • Content Count:  829
  • Content Per Day:  0.12
  • Reputation:   7
  • Days Won:  0
  • Joined:  12/25/2006
  • Status:  Offline
  • Birthday:  07/26/1943

Posted
Thanks for your input Smalcald and EricH,

It is a interesting but it looks the same way to me that the bishop is not limited to just a wife who has never been married before but instead his devotion should be to "One" wife. So the bishop could be married to a women who has been married and divorce before as long as he has only been married once.

Then that leads me into how people view marriage and divorce in a case like this. Would people look down on the pastor's wife and not accept her in her role because of that.

Would the church not accept her as the pastor's wife because of it and do you think that would make a good example to the flock in this case.

Would be interested in others opinions as I think it is interesting thoughts behind all of this.

OC

As long as they are both devoted Christians, good examples of Christ's character, and have a good reputation then that should be all there is to say. But human nature is such that we often will find excuses to condemn, judge, and criticize that are not relative at all.


  • Group:  Royal Member
  • Followers:  3
  • Topic Count:  366
  • Topics Per Day:  0.05
  • Content Count:  10,933
  • Content Per Day:  1.49
  • Reputation:   212
  • Days Won:  1
  • Joined:  04/21/2005
  • Status:  Offline

Posted

Saints,

The original post was asked in the spirit of trying to understand what husband of one wife meant. Please do not turn this into yet another thread dealing with the women's issue


  • Group:  Royal Member
  • Followers:  2
  • Topic Count:  297
  • Topics Per Day:  0.04
  • Content Count:  5,586
  • Content Per Day:  0.66
  • Reputation:   193
  • Days Won:  1
  • Joined:  04/09/2002
  • Status:  Offline

Posted
Thanks for your input Smalcald and EricH,

It is a interesting but it looks the same way to me that the bishop is not limited to just a wife who has never been married before but instead his devotion should be to "One" wife. So the bishop could be married to a women who has been married and divorce before as long as he has only been married once.

Then that leads me into how people view marriage and divorce in a case like this. Would people look down on the pastor's wife and not accept her in her role because of that.

Would the church not accept her as the pastor's wife because of it and do you think that would make a good example to the flock in this case.

Would be interested in others opinions as I think it is interesting thoughts behind all of this.

OC

The question isn't about her being accepted, it becomes about a bishop and adultery. If we want to adhere to the Scriptures, then we need to understand what qualifies a man as an adulterer, (keep in mind I am posting from Scripture), you do with it what you want and don't try to pursuade me, as if (I) wrote the passages, I didn't. I DO understand this will be hard to receive:

Matthew 19:9 I tell you that anyone who divorces his wife, except for marital unfaithfulness, and marries another woman commits adultery."

Matthew 5:32 But I tell you that anyone who divorces his wife, except for marital unfaithfulness, causes her to become an adulteress, and anyone who marries the divorced woman commits adultery.

We have to get to the Scriptural understanding of "divorce and adultery" and what the BIBLE REALLY SAYS, rather than what we've been told by men.

Look Here: http://www.worthyboards.com/index.php?show...=66011&st=0

In His Love,

Suzanne


  • Group:  Royal Member
  • Followers:  4
  • Topic Count:  55
  • Topics Per Day:  0.01
  • Content Count:  4,568
  • Content Per Day:  0.65
  • Reputation:   771
  • Days Won:  0
  • Joined:  01/18/2006
  • Status:  Offline

Posted

'tsth' post

The question isn't about her being accepted, it becomes about a bishop and adultery. If we want to adhere to the Scriptures, then we need to understand what qualifies a man as an adulterer, (keep in mind I am posting from Scripture), you do with it what you want and don't try to pursuade me, as if (I) wrote the passages, I didn't. I DO understand this will be hard to receive:

Matthew 19:9 I tell you that anyone who divorces his wife, except for marital unfaithfulness, and marries another woman commits adultery."

Matthew 5:32 But I tell you that anyone who divorces his wife, except for marital unfaithfulness, causes her to become an adulteress, and anyone who marries the divorced woman commits adultery.

We have to get to the Scriptural understanding of "divorce and adultery" and what the BIBLE REALLY SAYS, rather than what we've been told by men.

Hello tsth,

I must say that you have brought up some very interesting scriptures and thoughts into the discussion that I believe are valid.

So a man can have only one wife and still be unqualified as a bishop. The woman in which the man married could have committed adultery on her previous husband causes this man who is desiring the office of a bishop to be in adultery if he marries her according to the scriptures you gave above Matthew 5:32

I have been looking at this from both sides of the fence and I really do think what you have to say is recieved by me as I want others opinions about this. I have always heard the issue of the bishop being debated on the man's side of things and being the role model and example but I was curious about the wife as a role model and leader and if it was good for her to have been married and divorced before. So you make a good point and I thank you for your response hope you'll have more to say.

blessings

OC


  • Group:  Royal Member
  • Followers:  0
  • Topic Count:  32
  • Topics Per Day:  0.00
  • Content Count:  5,258
  • Content Per Day:  0.72
  • Reputation:   42
  • Days Won:  3
  • Joined:  06/16/2005
  • Status:  Offline
  • Birthday:  07/22/1960

Posted
Saints,

The original post was asked in the spirit of trying to understand what husband of one wife meant. Please do not turn this into yet another thread dealing with the women's issue

:emot-puke-old:

I agree let us stick to this passage and the question of OC.

The passage and several others almost exactly like it found in the New Testament detailing the requirements for a Bishop, I think are really looking at both polygamy and the ability to maintain a marriage (in some sense serial marraiges are a form of polygamy if you think about it as you marry multiple women). As the other requirements deal with both ability and character it would seem rationale that this is also looking at that point.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
  • Our picks

    • You are coming up higher in this season – above the assignments of character assassination and verbal arrows sent to manage you, contain you, and derail your purpose. Where you have had your dreams and sleep robbed, as well as your peace and clarity robbed – leaving you feeling foggy, confused, and heavy – God is, right now, bringing freedom back -- now you will clearly see the smoke and mirrors that were set to distract you and you will disengage.

      Right now God is declaring a "no access zone" around you, and your enemies will no longer have any entry point into your life. Oil is being poured over you to restore the years that the locust ate and give you back your passion. This is where you will feel a fresh roar begin to erupt from your inner being, and a call to leave the trenches behind and begin your odyssey in your Christ calling moving you to bear fruit that remains as you minister to and disciple others into their Christ identity.

      This is where you leave the trenches and scale the mountain to fight from a different place, from victory, from peace, and from rest. Now watch as God leads you up higher above all the noise, above all the chaos, and shows you where you have been seated all along with Him in heavenly places where you are UNTOUCHABLE. This is where you leave the soul fight, and the mind battle, and learn to fight differently.

      You will know how to live like an eagle and lead others to the same place of safety and protection that God led you to, which broke you out of the silent prison you were in. Put your war boots on and get ready to fight back! Refuse to lay down -- get out of bed and rebuke what is coming at you. Remember where you are seated and live from that place.

      Acts 1:8 - “But you will receive power when the Holy Spirit has come upon you, and you will be my witnesses … to the end of the earth.”

       

      ALBERT FINCH MINISTRY
        • Thanks
        • This is Worthy
        • Thumbs Up
      • 3 replies
    • George Whitten, the visionary behind Worthy Ministries and Worthy News, explores the timing of the Simchat Torah War in Israel. Is this a water-breaking moment? Does the timing of the conflict on October 7 with Hamas signify something more significant on the horizon?

       



      This was a message delivered at Eitz Chaim Congregation in Dallas Texas on February 3, 2024.

      To sign up for our Worthy Brief -- https://worthybrief.com

      Be sure to keep up to date with world events from a Christian perspective by visiting Worthy News -- https://www.worthynews.com

      Visit our live blogging channel on Telegram -- https://t.me/worthywatch
      • 0 replies
    • Understanding the Enemy!

      I thought I write about the flip side of a topic, and how to recognize the attempts of the enemy to destroy lives and how you can walk in His victory!

      For the Apostle Paul taught us not to be ignorant of enemy's tactics and strategies.

      2 Corinthians 2:112  Lest Satan should get an advantage of us: for we are not ignorant of his devices. 

      So often, we can learn lessons by learning and playing "devil's" advocate.  When we read this passage,

      Mar 3:26  And if Satan rise up against himself, and be divided, he cannot stand, but hath an end. 
      Mar 3:27  No man can enter into a strong man's house, and spoil his goods, except he will first bind the strongman; and then he will spoil his house. 

      Here we learn a lesson that in order to plunder one's house you must first BIND up the strongman.  While we realize in this particular passage this is referring to God binding up the strongman (Satan) and this is how Satan's house is plundered.  But if you carefully analyze the enemy -- you realize that he uses the same tactics on us!  Your house cannot be plundered -- unless you are first bound.   And then Satan can plunder your house!

      ... read more
        • Oy Vey!
        • Praise God!
        • Thanks
        • Well Said!
        • Brilliant!
        • Loved it!
        • This is Worthy
        • Thumbs Up
      • 230 replies
    • Daniel: Pictures of the Resurrection, Part 3

      Shalom everyone,

      As we continue this study, I'll be focusing on Daniel and his picture of the resurrection and its connection with Yeshua (Jesus). 

      ... read more
        • Praise God!
        • Brilliant!
        • Loved it!
        • This is Worthy
        • Thumbs Up
      • 13 replies
    • Abraham and Issac: Pictures of the Resurrection, Part 2
      Shalom everyone,

      As we continue this series the next obvious sign of the resurrection in the Old Testament is the sign of Isaac and Abraham.

      Gen 22:1  After these things God tested Abraham and said to him, "Abraham!" And he said, "Here I am."
      Gen 22:2  He said, "Take your son, your only son Isaac, whom you love, and go to the land of Moriah, and offer him there as a burnt offering on one of the mountains of which I shall tell you."

      So God "tests" Abraham and as a perfect picture of the coming sacrifice of God's only begotten Son (Yeshua - Jesus) God instructs Issac to go and sacrifice his son, Issac.  Where does he say to offer him?  On Moriah -- the exact location of the Temple Mount.

      ...read more
        • Well Said!
        • This is Worthy
        • Thumbs Up
      • 20 replies

×
×
  • Create New...