One Woman Man

[HAMel]

I found myself into a discussion last evening regarding the meaning and intent
of 1 Timothy 3:2. The Husband of One Wife. (I kept my mouth shut and listened)

Having been raised Independent, Fundamental Baptist, the rule was that once married that was it. End of subject. Only as a result of death could one remarry.

I did a search and found the following link that provides several views on the subject, at

http://www.spiritandtruth.org/teaching/documents/articles/15/15.pdf

To save a lot of space I'll just provide the summary paragraph which reads as follows,

This paper has examined various interpretations of the phrase “husband of one wife” found in 1 Timothy 3:2. After examining the merits and deficiencies of each approach, it was concluded that the best interpretation is to translate the phrase “a one woman man” and to view the phrase as
requiring fidelity in the character of a candidate for the office of elder. Thus, this phrase does not deal with the candidate’s legal married status but rather pertains to fidelity as part of the candidate’s character at the time he is considered for the office. Although it is acceptable for the church to
examine the candidate’s past sins in order to ascertain the content of his character, it is inappropriate for the church to use 1 Timothy 3:2 as a basis of holding a candidate’s past sins against him in isolation of his current character. The church can best maintain balance in this area by following
Paul’s intent behind 1 Timothy 3:2 rather than by adding to what Paul said even for the noble purpose of maintaining high standards for church leadership.

From what I've gleaned from the discussion last night and from this search this morning, am I to understand the most logical intent of "The Husband of One Wife" to be the opposite of what most churches preach and demand?

The husband of one wife = a one woman man.

...goodness.

 

[Luke2427]

I found myself into a discussion last evening regarding the meaning and intent
of 1 Timothy 3:2. The Husband of One Wife. (I kept my mouth shut and listened)

Having been raised Independent, Fundamental Baptist, the rule was that once married that was it. End of subject. Only as a result of death could one remarry.

I did a search and found the following link that provides several views on the subject, at

http://www.spiritandtruth.org/teaching/documents/articles/15/15.pdf

To save a lot of space I'll just provide the summary paragraph which reads as follows,

This paper has examined various interpretations of the phrase “husband of one wife” found in 1 Timothy 3:2. After examining the merits and deficiencies of each approach, it was concluded that the best interpretation is to translate the phrase “a one woman man” and to view the phrase as
requiring fidelity in the character of a candidate for the office of elder. Thus, this phrase does not deal with the candidate’s legal married status but rather pertains to fidelity as part of the candidate’s character at the time he is considered for the office. Although it is acceptable for the church to
examine the candidate’s past sins in order to ascertain the content of his character, it is inappropriate for the church to use 1 Timothy 3:2 as a basis of holding a candidate’s past sins against him in isolation of his current character. The church can best maintain balance in this area by following
Paul’s intent behind 1 Timothy 3:2 rather than by adding to what Paul said even for the noble purpose of maintaining high standards for church leadership.

From what I've gleaned from the discussion last night and from this search this morning, am I to understand the most logical intent of "The Husband of One Wife" to be the opposite of what most churches preach and demand?

The husband of one wife = a one woman man.

...goodness.

The fundamentalists you speak of are not much different than popes concerning the authority of the Scriptures. Their fundamental preachers speak ex cathedra and their heroes like Jack Hyles, etc... are not much different than The Holy Roman Emperor of old, in my experience.

I think any child of God ought to take a box of salt with about 90% of what comes out of those pulpits.

This doctrine about marriage and divorce, especially as it applies to pastors is extrabiblical for certain.


Away with such tripe as they proclaim.

 

[Luke2427]

I couldn't help but think of this when I read the title of this thread:

One Woman Man.

 

[HAMel]

The fundamentalists you speak of are not much different than popes concerning the authority of the Scriptures. Their fundamental preachers speak ex cathedra and their heroes like Jack Hyles, etc... are not much different than The Holy Roman Emperor of old, in my experience.

Why all the dogma? Why the agenda? Why the need to control?

 

[idonthavetimeforthis]

The fundamentalists you speak of are not much different than popes concerning the authority of the Scriptures. Their fundamental preachers speak ex cathedra and their heroes like Jack Hyles, etc... are not much different than The Holy Roman Emperor of old, in my experience.

Why all the dogma? Why the agenda? Why the need to control?

Why the need to control? Because they don't really believe that the Holy Spirit can lead someone (though they would not admit it).

Overheard at a church with this kind of leadership immediately after a woman who was living in fornication (shacked up) walked the aisle & trusted the Lord - "Well, she needs to know that she is living in sin!" Never mind praising the Lord for the work He accomplished in her life, we need to make sure that she gets out of this relationship immediately! Why? Because this is what they feel called to do - separate from everyone who is not like them & live in bondage to non-biblical standards & to what their fellow preachers think of them.

I know this was off topic, but that's my 2 cents to your question.

 

[Luke2427]

Why the need to control? Because they don't really believe that the Holy Spirit can lead someone (though they would not admit it).

Overheard at a church with this kind of leadership immediately after a woman who was living in fornication (shacked up) walked the aisle & trusted the Lord - "Well, she needs to know that she is living in sin!" Never mind praising the Lord for the work He accomplished in her life, we need to make sure that she gets out of this relationship immediately! Why? Because this is what they feel called to do - separate from everyone who is not like them & live in bondage to non-biblical standards & to what their fellow preachers think of them.

I know this was off topic, but that's my 2 cents to your question.

PREACH!

Plow there a while! :applause:

 

[freeatlast]

I found myself into a discussion last evening regarding the meaning and intent
of 1 Timothy 3:2. The Husband of One Wife. (I kept my mouth shut and listened)

Having been raised Independent, Fundamental Baptist, the rule was that once married that was it. End of subject. Only as a result of death could one remarry.

I did a search and found the following link that provides several views on the subject, at

http://www.spiritandtruth.org/teaching/documents/articles/15/15.pdf

To save a lot of space I'll just provide the summary paragraph which reads as follows,

This paper has examined various interpretations of the phrase “husband of one wife” found in 1 Timothy 3:2. After examining the merits and deficiencies of each approach, it was concluded that the best interpretation is to translate the phrase “a one woman man” and to view the phrase as
requiring fidelity in the character of a candidate for the office of elder. Thus, this phrase does not deal with the candidate’s legal married status but rather pertains to fidelity as part of the candidate’s character at the time he is considered for the office. Although it is acceptable for the church to
examine the candidate’s past sins in order to ascertain the content of his character, it is inappropriate for the church to use 1 Timothy 3:2 as a basis of holding a candidate’s past sins against him in isolation of his current character. The church can best maintain balance in this area by following
Paul’s intent behind 1 Timothy 3:2 rather than by adding to what Paul said even for the noble purpose of maintaining high standards for church leadership.

From what I've gleaned from the discussion last night and from this search this morning, am I to understand the most logical intent of "The Husband of One Wife" to be the opposite of what most churches preach and demand?

The husband of one wife = a one woman man.

...goodness.

.

I am afraid that it is very unfortunate that the translators of the bible have decided to change what the text really says. The qualification for an elder/pastor and deacon is not "husband of one wife" as translated. The text does read a "one woman man." That makes a big difference. The passage is not dealing specifically with the man of God having just one wife at a time or one wife for all time although it would be included in the original writings. The text is dealing with the character of the man instead and is far broader in its meaning then what has been put into our bibles as "husband of one wife".

A man can be the husband of one wife and still not be a one woman man which is what scripture teaches. Many men marry and never divorce, but they have eyes for other women and flirt. They may never go as far as physical infidelity but their hearts are divided. The man of God must be a man that is above reproach as seen by those around him and as is even if not seen. He sees no other woman then his wife, she and she alone is the apple of his eye and no other women temp him to look, or seek any pleasure elsewhere even the pleasure of the eyes.

Next i will say that the article you gave is incorrect about not holding past sins against the one seeking office. First it depends when those sins were committed. If prior to coming to Christ then there is more room. if after coming to Christ depending on the sin the person could easily be disqualified for the office. The timothy passage also says that he must be above reproach. That means he has nothing in his life past or present that anyone can point to and which is continuing to hinder and that would bring harm to the name of the Lord. This does not require sinless perfection. it does however require that the person seeking the office does show by his actions that he is a honorable and godly man. For some this may take years if they have certain issues i their past, but the bottom line s that the man must show forth a holy life in his present condition which has been proven over reasonable time.

 

[glfredrick]

Very difficult passage because we don't really know for sure what Paul was getting at with the "one woman man" language.

That the text says "one woman man" however, is sure. That is what it says. I would take that, coupled with other biblical teaching about the subject of marriage and divorce to mean that we ought be married to one woman at a time (versus polygamy) and that we should avoid divorce (and after divorce not re-marry), but I think that we would be twisting the bounds of Scripture to suggest that once divorced (if living according to the other biblical requirements) that no further service to God or the church can or could be rendered.

Divorce is not the un-pardonable sin. Those who have divorced will carry the scars of that divorce with them for this lifetime, but that does not mean that they are not saved or cannot serve.

 

[freeatlast]

Very difficult passage because we don't really know for sure what Paul was getting at with the "one woman man" language.

That the text says "one woman man" however, is sure. That is what it says. I would take that, coupled with other biblical teaching about the subject of marriage and divorce to mean that we ought be married to one woman at a time (versus polygamy) and that we should avoid divorce (and after divorce not re-marry), but I think that we would be twisting the bounds of Scripture to suggest that once divorced (if living according to the other biblical requirements) that no further service to God or the church can or could be rendered.

Divorce is not the un-pardonable sin. Those who have divorced will carry the scars of that divorce with them for this lifetime, but that does not mean that they are not saved or cannot serve.

Mostly I agree with you but here I do not. Any suggestion that the passage cannot be understood or even is difficult to understand is simply incorrect. I agree that it is not understood but not because of any problem with the passage. The problem is with us. We have a problem with the idea that God would require such a high standard so we decide that the passage just cannot mean what it looks like it does. The passage is a character issue and one that sets the man of God apart who is seeking the position of elder/pastor or deacon from all others. In acts we get a glimpse at what this man is to be like.
Men of honest report, full of the Holy Ghost and wisdom, whom we may appoint over this business.
We all know that lust has brought down a many a men and with others it come behind. This passage is saying that the man of God must show himself to be a man that does not have desires or even eyes for any woman except for his own bride. he has the heart of Christ for His bride. His character is impeccable in this area. It is not enough for him to be married an never divorced, he must be a one woman man in both deed and thought. If this were followed when we seek the position and choose a man the church would be more in tune with what Christ called her to.

 

[HAMel]

I am aware of a man who had started a career in Law Enforcement and a couple of years after his conversion felt as though he was being called into the ministry.

After college he married and shortly thereafter was called one afternoon by the local PD as they had arrested his wife for running down their road totally in the nude. Needless to say they soon divorced.

He continues to preach and has since remarried. What's a man or wife supposed to do when the spouse goes high and to the right?

 

[freeatlast]

I am aware of a man who had started a career in Law Enforcement and a couple of years after his conversion felt as though he was being called into the ministry.

After college he married and shortly thereafter was called one afternoon by the local PD as they had arrested his wife for running down their road totally in the nude. Needless to say they soon divorced.

He continues to preach and has since remarried. What's a man or wife supposed to do when the spouse goes high and to the right?

I fail to see why it is needless to say that they divorced, but there is not enough here to be sure, and he may be disqualified to be an elder/deacon. There is many factors. Who sought the divorce and why and much more.

 

[gb93433]

Very difficult passage because we don't really know for sure what Paul was getting at with the "one woman man" language.

There is one qualification that is implied which is seldom looked at. If a man is not making disciples then he is not qualified. I have known very few men and women who were actively making disciples that got divorced. I have personally known about 1-2%. One who makes disciples and is praying and in the Word knows what is right. It is hard to be detracted while praying and reading God's word. The likelihood of someone being divorced and making disciples is very small.

 

[jaigner]

I think this is a step in the right direction.

Of course, I would assert that, while Paul was obviously speaking to a male audience in the 1st century, this could apply equally to men and women today. Paul saying that deacons should "be husband of one wife" is not a normative statement of gender role. It's a statement to the male leadership of the particular setting.

 

[freeatlast]

I think this is a step in the right direction.

Of course, I would assert that, while Paul was obviously speaking to a male audience in the 1st century, this could apply equally to men and women today. Paul saying that deacons should "be husband of one wife" is not a normative statement of gender role. It's a statement to the male leadership of the particular setting.

Paul does not say that a man should be the husband of one wife. Paul says that a man must be a one woman man. The qualification is clear it cannot be a woman. God does not make qualification based on culture. He is not subject to man's whims.

 

[jaigner]

Paul does not say that a man should be the husband of one wife. Paul says that a man must be a one woman man. The qualification is clear it cannot be a woman. God does not make qualification based on culture. He is not subject to man's whims.

Nobody, certainly not I, is suggesting God be subject to human whims. But God does choose to work through the framework of human constructs at times, when He deems it necessary.

This particular clause in 1 Tim. does not add or detract from the gender debate.

 

[freeatlast]

Nobody, certainly not I, is suggesting God be subject to human whims. But God does choose to work through the framework of human constructs at times, when He deems it necessary.

This particular clause in 1 Tim. does not add or detract from the gender debate.

There is no debate except from those who cannot accept the word of God as given. The passage does not cause debate, rebellion does however. The passage sets the parameters, but there are those who decide that they are greater then God for the god (of self) that they follow would never make such demands.

 

[Salty]

There is no debate except from those who cannot accept the word of God as given. The passage does not cause debate, rebellion does however. The passage sets the parameters, but there are those who decide that they are greater then God for the god (of self) that they follow would never make such demands.

Just to be clear - do you believe a man who has been divorce is automatically disqualified from being a pastor?

 

[gb93433]

There is no debate except from those who cannot accept the word of God as given. The passage does not cause debate, rebellion does however.

Don't be so sure! Many godly men have debated what some passages mean in light of their historical and literary context. Let us know when you absolute proof of the entire context of the passage. I have spent some time reading some of the ancient Greek documents, and compared to what I find among the politicians today and those who follow their ignorance I find a tremendous amount of ignorance from people that make such suggestions as you do. Those who are unable to prove a point with facts and knowledge often try to attack the person. Is that what your comment is all about? I found nothing in your post to prove anything or the correct interpretation of the OP.

 

[gb93433]

The passage sets the parameters, but there are those who decide that they are greater then God for the god (of self) that they follow would never make such demands.

Tell us what the correct parameters are for the woman it speaks of in 1 Timothy 3:11.

 

[HAMel]

Why all the debate in the first place? It's 'gotta be' mere agenda.

From what I have seen and read regarding this issue over the past few days this specific debate has been raging for years? Why? All because of agenda?

Our Pastor spoke yesterday of people asking him if a specific issue in their life is a sin or not. He responds with, "You're asking me...?" followed with, "If it's not specifically spelled out in the Word..."

Bottom line is the Lord does the convicting. Not some preacher, or institution, or past practice, or tradition, or someone's agenda. What's wrong with preaching the entire Word? Everyone is different and everyone's specific situations in life are different.

I really feel as though I have been "hoodwinked"! :BangHead:
The wind is out of my sails! :BangHead:
How much other 'agenda' have all laymen been fed? :BangHead:
It's dis-heartening.


...course, I do have the responsibility to follow up by doing my own research on such issues but I had faith I was being provided the Gospel Truth.