Search results

I will play your game, Roman occupation of the known world (broad), Titus(Crete/grecoroman), Timothy(Ephesus/greco-roman-asian) i believe

I am not sure if I have made it clear that I am not arguing for or against polygamy, though I can make a good argument for a biblical basis. I am arguing that the criteria in titus and 1 Timothy requires an officer to be married to be an officer.

Are you arguing that an officer has the option of marrying and having the maximum of one wife? (My argument is that as the verse reads it says a minimum of one wife.)

Whataboutism argument, but yes if we read Paul literally, women cannot speak in the service, but those that hold to this view make an exception for women singing, which would contradict such a command. I see the section in 1 Corinthians as an example of a circumstance present to the people of...

I am in a way all of these. But most days more one than another, Calvin has greatly influenced my world view

It depends on what you mean by Free will. I would say no we do not, but my definition of free will is very Pelagian in that we can will ourselves to do anything like perfect memory recall, choose to be unaffected by emotions, choose to act without compulsion or restraint of any ability, etc...

It sounds very counter intuitive, but that is what it says.

What I am saying is that as the verse is worded, an overseer cannot be unmarried, so only monogamous men and polygamist men can hold the office, to be blunt. It doesn’t say “must not be a polygamist” it “a husband of one wife.” That is a command, we can go in the direction of polygamy, but the...

I am surprised no one has you the most common counter yet.

Even if Paul was talking to a different culture, he is talking from a culture that followed rabbinic traditions and Jewish law, but even still if the culture whether from or to the message held a norm, it doesn’t change the fact that this is what it says “an overseer must be…the husband of one...

You are going to have to be more precise in your speaking, I am saying this passage commands marriage, what do you mean by bringing up idolatry? Are you saying there was or may be more evidence to support or discredit my assertion, but it was destroyed because fanatical Christians in the past...

Is “them” divorce, polygamy, commands to marry, or something else?

????

That is clever but it is not what it says.

According to the wording they cannot be overseers.

The same culture and tradition that mandated marriage to be on a Sanhedrin.

Let me make this clear, 1. I am not saying this commands polygamy, I am saying that it commands marriage, whether there is a cap of one or several is another debate, but polygamy is permitted, not necessarily endorsed by the scripture, other than one instance. 2. I am saying that the phrasing in...

Certainly, thank you for asking. Therefore an overseer must be above reproach, the husband of one wife, sober-minded, self-controlled, respectable, hospitable, able to teach, (1 Timothy 3:2) How it is misread often is “an overseer must be above reproach, the husband of [but or only] one wife...

That is not really a question, but a statement, and I feel that the only way to be properly Insync with these criteria is to A. require that a man be married to be an officer, or B. Do not interpret this passage to be literal requirements, but a ballpark example of what an officer should be...

I have come to the conclusion that the phrase "a husband of one wife" is a mandate and a requirement for an officer of the church to be married.