Yeah I thought it was pretty funny I was tempted to reply saying I could make a kitty cult^
This post was meant to be a joke like I believe Blain was making a joke in his reference to identifying as a cat![]()
Yeah I thought it was pretty funny I was tempted to reply saying I could make a kitty cult^
This post was meant to be a joke like I believe Blain was making a joke in his reference to identifying as a cat![]()
Lol that would have been hilariousYeah I thought it was pretty funny I was tempted to reply saying I could make a kitty cult![]()
@Magenta
True.....
In college I remember having discussions with the campus pastor about the pastoral requirements, for instance in the pastoral epistles.
One view was that the husband of one wife only applies to polygamy, multiple wives.
Another view of the passage was one wife at a time; meaning you could legitimately marry and divorce 5 times, as long as you were married at the time of the office.
Another was that you had to be married and at least have a child on the way, as in wife must be pregnant .
That was a discussion that I had with a previous pastor who hired an assistant and ordained him.
Then there's the view that a single guy can pastor as long as he's not a novice.
There's probably more, but those are what I surprisingly remember.
I was serious about the thread and my initial post. Tonight I'm not taking anything too awful seriously because I need sleep to function well tomorrow.
Besides, I've been down the debate road a time or two on this one with a former pastor.
Those evil wicked male GentilesFor whatever its worth.... the Greek text literally translates "a one-woman man". Polygamy wasn't common in Ephesus at the time, but divorce/remarriage/adultery/fornication were all very common. Polygamists would definitely be disqualified, but I'm guessing the instruction was speaking more towards:
-Adulterers
-Men who were keeping relations within marriage but divorcing and remarrying for non-biblical reasons
-Single guys who were "playing the field"
-Just any guy in general (married or single) who was known for seeking out the romantic attention of multiple females, even if he refrained from sexual contact.
I could be wrong of course, but "one woman man" does seem to me to refer more to heart attitude than marital status..... Paul himself was single, and he oversaw much.
Those evil wicked male Gentiles![]()
For whatever its worth.... the Greek text literally translates "a one-woman man". Polygamy wasn't common in Ephesus at the time, but divorce/remarriage/adultery/fornication were all very common. Polygamists would definitely be disqualified, but I'm guessing the instruction was speaking more towards:
-Adulterers
-Men who were keeping relations within marriage but divorcing and remarrying for non-biblical reasons
-Single guys who were "playing the field"
-Just any guy in general (married or single) who was known for seeking out the romantic attention of multiple females, even if he refrained from sexual contact.
I could be wrong of course, but "one woman man" does seem to me to refer more to heart attitude than marital status..... Paul himself was single, and he oversaw much.
Excellent Post and spot on with your assessmentLol I doubt the women were any better!
Keep in mind that a lot of new converts were being added rapidly.... Paul knew Timothy would be fighting against ingrained mindsets and cultural norms that would wreck the church if not guarded against![]()
My error.... The Bible is always right, but not people's interpretation of it.When we see plainly in scripture about women preaching & also to be quiet, one MUST conclude that BOTH are correct, but one of them is improperly interpreted.
The Bible is always right, but not it's interpretation.
So how do you interpret when Paul tells us this is how he feels it should be done because he isn't saying God said but rather how he thinks?My error.... The Bible is always right, but not people's interpretation of it.
I needed to clean that up.![]()
Excellent Post and spot on with your assessment![]()
You can't identify as a cat without being catty.If I identify as a cat can I still be a pastor?![]()
You are Most Welcome!Thank you Sir!It drives me nuts when people become obsessed with the letter of the law and ignore the spirit of it. Us church people do like our rules!
You bring up an important issue: as Christians, I think the majority of us are “law-abiding citizens”. We function more easily within clearly established boundaries than in areas where the edges aren’t as clear. We also tend towards judgement of those who interpret boundaries differently.Thank you Sir!It drives me nuts when people become obsessed with the letter of the law and ignore the spirit of it. Us church people do like our rules!
I would say he's giving an educated opinion of these things he says because of church traditions/customs.So how do you interpret when Paul tells us this is how he feels it should be done because he isn't saying God said but rather how he thinks?
Considering how common fornication and adultery are today, I think that principle should apply to anyone in marriage. I go with the traditional translation, but see your point.
You are Most Welcome!
Personally speaking here, I have no issue with the idea of having Rules. When we think about how Jesus condensed the Law down to 2 principles of Loving God with all of our abilities and to Treat our Neighbors like we would ourselves I never had an issue of looking at those as Rules I should be doing and applying to my life.
To me, if the Bible is a Guide and Guideline to how we should be and become. Looking at what I read as Rules is a benefit to enhance my overall life.
It's like when I see someone holding a sign asking for help. If I get this overwhelming feeling and ideas about giving food or money I see that as God telling me to be obedient and follow His command to give to that person in need. And if I want to further the explanation of what is happening I can say God gave me a Rule to obey and I choose to obey it.
You bring up an important issue: as Christians, I think the majority of us are “law-abiding citizens”. We function more easily within clearly established boundaries than in areas where the edges aren’t as clear. We also tend towards judgement of those who interpret boundaries differently.