The qualification for both Pastors (bishop) and deacons in I Timothy 3:2,12 is that they are to be "the husband of one wife". I understand the Greek to mean a "one woman man" or a "one wife sort of husband" that is, married only once. I have a man that wants to be a Deacon and says "I only have one wife" He is divorced. Let's talk.
-
Welcome to Baptist Board, a friendly forum to discuss the Baptist Faith in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to all the features that our community has to offer.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon and God Bless!
Husband of one wife
- Thread starter revdms
- Start date
Dear Brother Jamie,
I didn't consider that. Thanks for pointing out it wasn't specified in the post.
I believe a divorced man remaining unmarried is qualified.
I think sometimes it may be cause of trouble or offense for some (others) and may hurt his ministry.
But he would not be Biblically disqualified.
Bro. Dallas
I didn't consider that. Thanks for pointing out it wasn't specified in the post.
I believe a divorced man remaining unmarried is qualified.
I think sometimes it may be cause of trouble or offense for some (others) and may hurt his ministry.
But he would not be Biblically disqualified.
Bro. Dallas
Thanks for your response! I have only joined this BB a short while ago, I start attending Liberty Univerisity in Jan 06 in their Distance Learning Program.
It's these types of questions/answers that will help me better understand things when I start my studies and start studying the Bible from a wannbe-in-the-future-minister perspective.
Thanks again!
Jamie
It's these types of questions/answers that will help me better understand things when I start my studies and start studying the Bible from a wannbe-in-the-future-minister perspective.
Thanks again!
Jamie
Dear Brother Dale,
This is the announcement forum/welcome forum.
I am going to ask a moderator of this forum to move it to the general Baptist discussion forum.
When you return to the board check there if you can't find it.
Also, I agree, these cases must be viewed on an individual basis.
May God Bless,
Bro. Dallas
Rev. Lowery
New Member
Matthew 19:9
Barnabas H.
<b>Oldtimer</b>
Welcome revdms to the Baptist board!
Hence I am moving this thread to the Baptist Theology & Bible Study forum, because I believe this discussion, by nature, belongs there.
canadyjd
Well-Known Member
revdms
"one woman man" is refering to faithfulness to the one woman, not just staying married to her.
Other things to consider. Was the man divorced and remarried prior to salvation? If you hold that this qualification must be applied to the person even prior to salvation, then all the qualifications must be applied to a man prior to salvation; therefore, no one is qualified for service.
peace to you
"one woman man" is refering to faithfulness to the one woman, not just staying married to her.
Other things to consider. Was the man divorced and remarried prior to salvation? If you hold that this qualification must be applied to the person even prior to salvation, then all the qualifications must be applied to a man prior to salvation; therefore, no one is qualified for service.
peace to you
If a divorced man is not allowed to be a deacon / elder, why is a man who was never married allowed to pastor and be a deacon? They clearly are not the "husband of one wife". I believe in context, that the meaning is for a man to be in a monogamous marital relationship.
Each church is permitted to decide for itself whether a divorced man is disqualified from the office. The caveat is that, if one references the "husband of one wife" verse, then the only way to be consistent is to forbid men who have never married from serving (since they have no wife). Also, if a man is divorced, but not remarried, then, again, to be consistent, that person should be permitted to be a deacon, so long as he does not remarry while his ex-wife is alive.
I personally disagree with the interpretation of "husband of one wife" in this manner, but the church is permitted to make the rules as it chooses, regardless of my personal opinion.
That's a bit nebulous (you could technically forbid men with negative credit history to be deacons). If one applies this concept to the issue of divorce, if the divorce was for a scriptural reason (adultery or abandonment by the other party), then there's no issue of blame.
The literal translation is "one woman man".
First, place that in the context of the qualifications. Are the other qualifications applicable to a persons whole life? If a person has ever been impatient or struggled with impatience does that disqualify them no matter what their character is now? How about any of the other qualifications? What if failures in those areas have lasting consequences... as they almost always do? Why is this one qualification picked out as one that must be applied to a man's whole life as opposed to all the others?
Second, how many "one woman" men do you actually know? If a man had sex with a woman prior to marriage is he qualified? How about touching, kissing, holding hands, etc? What if he considered another woman for marriage? What if he were engaged to another woman?
Wouldn't any kind of romantic consideration of another woman at any time disqualify a man if we are going to take this text literally? Wouldn't any behavior prior to marriage that would be considered unfaithful or adulterous after marriage make someone less than a "one woman man"?
I have asked before but never been given a reason for reading "divorce" into this passage to the exclusion of all other possible deviations or variations from the "one woman man" standard.
I don't know of any other interpretation that is contextually and practically consistent than the one that holds this as a demonstrated character trait of the man under consideration... and not a lifelong disqualifier that dismisses growth and sanctification.
First, place that in the context of the qualifications. Are the other qualifications applicable to a persons whole life? If a person has ever been impatient or struggled with impatience does that disqualify them no matter what their character is now? How about any of the other qualifications? What if failures in those areas have lasting consequences... as they almost always do? Why is this one qualification picked out as one that must be applied to a man's whole life as opposed to all the others?
Second, how many "one woman" men do you actually know? If a man had sex with a woman prior to marriage is he qualified? How about touching, kissing, holding hands, etc? What if he considered another woman for marriage? What if he were engaged to another woman?
Wouldn't any kind of romantic consideration of another woman at any time disqualify a man if we are going to take this text literally? Wouldn't any behavior prior to marriage that would be considered unfaithful or adulterous after marriage make someone less than a "one woman man"?
I have asked before but never been given a reason for reading "divorce" into this passage to the exclusion of all other possible deviations or variations from the "one woman man" standard.
I don't know of any other interpretation that is contextually and practically consistent than the one that holds this as a demonstrated character trait of the man under consideration... and not a lifelong disqualifier that dismisses growth and sanctification.
paidagogos
Active Member
Agreed. Some pastors ought not be pastors because of how they treat their wives.
No, your reasoning is wide of the mark. Why should salvation be the dividing line? You are confusing forgiveness with qualifications. Some things can be forgiven but the debarment remains. As a overly simplistic example, an incompetent doctor who causes wrongful death by his malpractice may be pardoned from serving a prison sentence but he can never practice medicine again because he is banned.Other things to consider. Was the man divorced and remarried prior to salvation? If you hold that this qualification must be applied to the person even prior to salvation, then all the qualifications must be applied to a man prior to salvation; therefore, no one is qualified for service.
peace to you
Divorce, bigamy, or polygamy is not the only thing that may disqualify a man from being a pastor. A poor testimony, drunkenness, unruly children, brawling, hot temper, impatience, greediness, covetousness, bad behavior, frivolousness, being a novice, etc. exclude a man from the pastorate. However, many of these things can be corrected and remedied so that a man can become fit for a pastorate subsequent to forgiveness.
On the other hand, polygamy and divorce cannot be undone. These can be forgiven but a divorced man can never become eligible to be a pastor. It is rather like the situation with a promiscuous woman—she can be forgiven of her sin but she can never be a virgin again. Sometimes when we sin, the consequences remain although forgiven.
paidagogos
Active Member
Yes, anytime one applies the man is disqualified until he repents and purges the sin from his life. The catch is that the other qualifications are in the present whereas divorce remains—once divorced, always divorced. A woman, who plays the whore, although she may be forgiven, will never qualify as a virgin again. Sorry, but she must bear her ignominy.
Some things have consequences that forgiveness doesn’t take away. The Christian college girl who gets pregnant in a one night fling can find mercy and forgiveness but she is pregnant nonetheless. She is not justified in seeking an abortion just to alleviate her embarrassment. God expects her to have the baby. She must bear her own burden.
Yes, some things disqualify you for life. That’s just the way it is. Drunkenness, impatience, temper, etc. can be forgiven and overcome. Bigamy, polygamy, and divorce can be forgiven but these can never be undone. It’s done and all the fine sentiments and specious questions in the world won’t change it.
I don’t know. Are you one?
This is hogwash! You are confusing marriage and sex. Equating marriage with sex is a Roman Catholic idea, not Biblical doctrine. Marriage is a covenant. You have to have to understand a lot of OT theology to appreciate this. God is a covenant-making and covenant-keeping God. The disqualification has nothing to do with sex except in the sense that adultery violates the covenant and the “one woman man” requirement. Any pre-covenantal relationships or transgressions do not apply since it cannot involve the covenant before it came into being. The disentitlement is about breaking a covenantal relationship that mirrors the relationship of Christ and His church. Now, that’s serious! You must learn to think and view things theologically and Biblically instead of humanistic rationalizations.
[DELETED] No if you understand marriage to be a covenantal relationship, not a sexual liaison. You don’t get married to legitimatize sex. These are specious questions trying to confuse and nullify a fairly clear Biblical teaching. This is utter babble. It belongs to the category of questions of God making a rock too big for God to move.
Do you accept the Biblical definition of marriage as a lifetime covenant of companionship? This is the Biblical ideal relationship mirroring the picture of the relationship between Christ and His church. Any breaking of that lifetime covenant (i.e. divorce) is a violation of the “one woman man” concept and destroys the image of the relationship between Christ and His church. The “one woman man” idea represents an unbreakable relationship of two who have become inseparably one. Anything different is to speak as if Christ or the church could entertain other lovers or loyalities. Therefore, such a divorced man cannot accurately represent the spiritual truth of Christ and His church as pastor. The divorced man can be forgiven but he cannot picture the Christ and church relationship since he is part of a broken covenant. Therefore, he is disqualified as pastor.
How so? So, “one woman man” means that he is devoted to his wife. Yes, it means this but it means much more than this. That devotion is part of a lifetime covenant, which cannot be broken with impunity.
{Inflammatory personal remarks removed at the discretion of the moderator}
[ November 23, 2005, 04:42 PM: Message edited by: TomVols ]
paidagogos
Active Member
Therein lies your flaw in logic. You presume that divorce is a sin. There are two clear examples given to us in scripture then divorce is not a sin. I myself divorced my prior wife due to her adultery. I have no sin to repent of. </font>[/QUOTE]What are those two clear Scriptural examples? BTW, your action has nothing whatsoever to do with the question of whether divorce is sin or not. I do presume that you are basing your statement on Matthew 19:9 or I Corinthians 7. By no means do these passages, in light of other Scripture, clearly indicate that divorce even for adultery is permissible. There are many unresolved issues here. They can be made into what you want them to say if you come with presuppositions. Answer these questions:
1. Is marriage a lifetime covenantal commitment? If not, exactly what is marriage?
2. Is it conditional or unconditional? If conditional, what are the conditions? How do you know?
3. Is covenant breaking a sin? Does God expect us to unconditionally keep our unconditional covenants?