I assume that your definition of best theologians and mine would differ greatly. My second assumption would be that any assumptions you make would be greatly flawed given your lack of a sound foundation in the word of God.
Rather than speculate I'm just going to stick with what Gods word teaches on the subject.
For the cause of Christ
Roger
You suspicions about my lack of foundation in scriptures might be your true feelings but this does not advance a correct interpretation of the verse at hand nor answer the question
about why you think allowing "if" he has children is ok, but "if" he is married is not.
If the answer is
no, then explain why hermeneutically it is sound logic to insist on "the husband of one wife" means he
HAS to be married to be the husband of one wife, but then "having his children in subjection" does not mean he
HAS to have children even though having children (plural) in subjection would require that he have children?
You cannot in all intellectual honesty allow for an interpretation of "IF" he has kids, and not allow for an interpretation of "IF" he is married.
If you believe that you may allow for "if" he has kids, but not "if" he is married then I am not sure why you do not recognize that as intellectually dishonest method of handling the Word of God. And you would be required to present your reasoning for this seemingly double standard in interpretation in the same passage here. I mean you would be required to present your reasoning if you were trying to teach someone why this is the correct interpretation or if you were expecting them to agree.
Talking about the benefits of being a good husband is not answering the question as that would apply to the benefits of being a good father also and so if that is your reason for insisting that he MUST be married then you would use it as your reason for insisting that he MUST have children.
You have effectually cornered yourself into a necessity of insisting 1) that if based on this text he must be married, then 2) based on this text he must have children and using this same hermeneutic he must have children plural since that is what the text implies.
You then must answer the question, "What if his wife dies?" "What if his children grow up and depart" "What if one of them as an adult stops following the Lord or becomes an unbeliever"
How far do you take Titus 1:6 if anyone is above reproach, the husband of one wife, and his children are believers and not open to the charge of debauchery or insubordination
Does this mean while living at home or at anytime in their adult lives? Do you fire a pastor if it is found out that one of his adult children is living in sin or claims to not be a believer?
The answers to these questions is your attempt to identify authorial intent. How you go about it demonstrates your "foundation" in scripture as the entire body of scripture on a subject will come into play when answers such questions.
If you insist that
he MUST have children in order to be consistent with
he MUST be married, then you have to answer these further questions about the pastor who does not have children after having been married for some years and it is discovered that he or she is not able to have children. Does the church board then demand that they adopt or resign?
You may think it is a ridiculous question but if your church is insisting that he have children then how are you going to answer the question about infertility when it occurs. Do you wait until couples have children already before you allow them to pastor? I am assuming there is a group out there somewhere that does this very thing because of their interpretation of these verses. But what do you think Paul (and the Holy Spirit) intended by this command about subjected children? "IF" he has children or that he "MUST" have children?
Answer the questions showing your ability to interpret scripture with the rules of hermeneutics please, and not with your opinions about me or my foundation in scriptures or my devotion to obey the Word of God, as that does nothing to present the correct interpretation. Your feelings about me are irrelevant to discovering authorial intent.