• Biblical Families is not a dating website. It is a forum to discuss issues relating to marriage and the Bible, and to offer guidance and support, not to find a wife. Click here for more information.

Paul the presbytēs objection to polygyny

D

DiscussingTheTopic

Member
Male
My not entirely accurate description of a discussion with someone

Someone told me that the verses in 1 Timothy and or Titus forbid polygyny

I said they only apply to the people in the groups listed

I mentioned that the three offices listed in Titus and 1 Timothy might be required to have at least one wife rather than one wife or less but that it is irrelevant because it only applies to people in those offices. And if the one meant exactly one than if Jesus was unmarried (for even a second) and those verses apply to all people at all time than Jesus would be in sin for having zero wives instead of exactly one wife.

He said what about Peter, Peter was an elder (See 1 Peter 5:1)

http://www.blueletterbible.org/Bible.cf ... KJV#conc/1

I said but Peter was married so what is your point?

He said I will have to think about that.

But then I thought what if he say Paul was unmarried and he was an elder (See Philemon)

The word aged (KJV) in Philemon has a difference strong concordance number than elder in Titus 1:5 KJV but the two words look similar in the masculine nominative singluar form commonly used with strong concordance numbers πρεσβύτερος presbyteros verses πρεσβύτης presbytēs

http://www.blueletterbible.org/Bible.cf ... KJV#conc/5

http://www.blueletterbible.org/lang/lex ... 4245&t=KJV

http://www.blueletterbible.org/Bible.cf ... mon#conc/9

http://www.blueletterbible.org/lang/lex ... 4246&t=KJV


So if someone tried to claim that Paul was unmarried and that Paul was in one of those three offices how would you respond? I have some additional ideas of responses other than the words do not have the same strong concordance number in Philemon and Titus but I want to hear other people's responses. Is there any Bible verse that would classify Paul or any other leader, prophet, etc type who they claim as unmarried is in one of those three offices?
 
You got me thinking a bit there. I think this supports the interpretation of "mia" as "first" in those passages. You are obviously aware it can mean "one", "a" or "first". "One" might work, and is the usual interpretation, and would not preclude polygamy for most Christians - but Paul's situation does throw a spanner in the works there. Same goes for "A". But if "First" is taken to mean "not divorced", then Paul fits the bill fine, as do many monogamists and polygamists. It does seem that there are fewer problems with this interpretation.
 
Could you share the passage that calls Paul an overseer, elder, or deacon? I can't recall anything but being called an apostle, which does not have any qualifications except being gifted by Christ as in Eph 4
 
Cow fam said:
Could you share the passage that calls Paul an overseer, elder, or deacon? I can't recall anything but being called an apostle, which does not have any qualifications except being gifted by Christ as in Eph 4
Click to expand...

For this cause left I thee in Crete, that thou shouldest set in order the things that are wanting, and ordain elders in every city, as I had appointed thee:

Titus 1:5 KJV

http://www.blueletterbible.org/Bible.cf ... KJV#conc/5

Yet for love's sake I rather beseech [thee], being such an one as Paul the aged, and now also a prisoner of Jesus Christ.

Philemon 1:9 KJV

http://www.blueletterbible.org/Bible.cf ... KJV#conc/9

one calls him the "aged" the other "elder" the Greek words look like they are spelled a little similar but they are not the exactly same
 
DiscussingTheTopic said:
Cow fam said:
Could you share the passage that calls Paul an overseer, elder, or deacon? I can't recall anything but being called an apostle, which does not have any qualifications except being gifted by Christ as in Eph 4
Click to expand...

For this cause left I thee in Crete, that thou shouldest set in order the things that are wanting, and ordain elders in every city, as I had appointed thee:

Titus 1:5 KJV

http://www.blueletterbible.org/Bible.cf ... KJV#conc/5

Yet for love's sake I rather beseech [thee], being such an one as Paul the aged, and now also a prisoner of Jesus Christ.

Philemon 1:9 KJV

http://www.blueletterbible.org/Bible.cf ... KJV#conc/9

one calls him the "aged" the other "elder" the Greek words look like they are spelled a little similar but they are not the exactly same
Click to expand...

It seems to me that Paul calls himself old, and then tells Titus to appoint or note those qualified as elders, but I see nothing in these verses that calls Paul an elder in the sense of a local church leader. That was kind of my point, that I see Paul called an apostle, a bond servant of Christ, and was one who personally saw the risen Christ. That doesn't make him an elder in the sense of church leadership (his calling seems higher to me) but then again there doesn't seem to be a great list of rights and responsibilities for elders/bishops/presbyters. The word for elder can denote visitation, we see in James 5 that they are called to pray for the sick, but these passages and others in that vein don't seem to say anything about the work they do. I feel like I am missing other passages

For that matter, Hebrews is written to... Hebrews (profitable for the church, but not sure if we can strike church mandates over it) and says to obey those that have the rule over you as those who will give an account. This could be general to all or specific to the Jews, or even could be speaking as in Romans 13 and 1 Peter 2 about those God has placed over us in government. I just can't justify from these passages that the presbyters have any grand authority to lead the churches as clergy as the status quo seems to accept.

I was talking to Brian the other day we discussed local Christian fellowships and the issues that come with larger churches. I believe bureaucracy has taken over the church and have to ask a few questions concerning this "elder rule" that the PB have been teaching. I didn't share that point with him, but noted that there is blessing in meeting with the saints no matter the place, occasion, or liturgy.

1 Cor. 11 speaks of Christ as Head of the body, and husband as head of wife. No indication is given that there are other levels inside the body of Christ, nor between the husband and Christ.

Ephesians 5 says that wives submit to their husbands as to the Lord in everything. This command is not given about submitting to one another or elders. It is seemingly general and without structure as to when we should submit one to another, whereas the husband/wife and Christ/church are specified as "in everything"

1Peter 3 speaks of a woman respecting and obeying her husband even when he is disobedient to the word, being won without a word. There is no indication that the same applies in the local church.

Ephesians 4 speaks of gifts that Christ gave, differing from the gifts of the Holy Spirit, and without qualification except the calling of Christ. Do these apostles, prophets, evangelists, pastors, and teachers subject themselves to the body, the elders, or directly to Christ who sent them out? Paul refers to himself as a prisoner to intro this thought and then speaks of Christ leading captives/prisoners (I understand the thought of freeing them from slavery of sin) and wonder if this is about slavery to sin or a calling to the bond servants role. Could these gifts be specifically called out bond servants(willing slaves) who take orders directly from Christ or do they submit to local elders? If elders, what passage would we look at to show that?

I have been enjoying listening to Ephesians on MP3, have listened to it dozens of times this week and have been blessed and convicted by chapters 4,5, and 6 especially.
 
*sing-song voice* Somebody's stirring up trouuuuble... :lol:
 
1. Pauls martial history is unknown, we only know he was single when writing to the Corinthians.

2. Paul was a traveling minister, apostle, ect, not a local overseer. A local overseer needs roots in the community. Being old is not the same as being appointed elder.
 
Remember also that Paul HAD BEEN a member of the Sanhedrin.

Membership REQUIRED that he be married.

In Jewish culture, for a young man to refuse to marry was considered a very self centered aberration, anti-social, and a shirking of one's responsibility to the community as well as dishonoring to one's parents by refusing to carry on your father's name.

So the undocumented and undocumentable LIKELIHOOD is that he was married at one time, regardless of his state during the time of his travels and mission.

In fact, I'm not entirely certain that he was actually single during that time. He could have been so consumed by his mission that he lived and traveled and ministered absolutely abandoned to all earthly ties -- though having them adequately provided for.

What IS clear is that he had his "urge to merge" so sublimated at the time of the writing, that it did not drive him to travel with a wife.
 
i have heard (undocumentable) the idea that though paul was married, his wife was estranged from him because she did not appreciate the direction that his life took after his on-the-road-to-damascus experience.

btw: i love that word, damascus. it is wonderful to recieve the light and realize that i have been a dumb-axx-cuss. ;)
 
CecilW said:
Remember also that Paul HAD BEEN a member of the Sanhedrin.

Membership REQUIRED that he be married.
Click to expand...
That's fascinating Cecil. Do you have a reference for that you could post for the record? Could be interesting to read into further.
 
No. It IS available somewhere on the web. Read it years ago. Don't have the research time to go hunt it down now. But do consider it reliable.

The bit about voluntary celibacy and refusal to marry and father children as disrespectful to parents, irresponsible to community, and the height of stingy selfishness II read both on the web and in books.

I'm satisfied as to the truth of what I blatted out there. *grin*, but readily admit to not having the resources at my finger tips.

Ow wait! 2 Witnesses. 1 Conjecture 3:19 and Opinions 12:7 :lol:
 
CecilW said:
No. It IS available somewhere on the web. Read it years ago. Don't have the research time to go hunt it down now. But do consider it reliable.

The bit about voluntary celibacy and refusal to marry and father children as disrespectful to parents, irresponsible to community, and the height of stingy selfishness II read both on the web and in books.

I'm satisfied as to the truth of what I blatted out there. *grin*, but readily admit to not having the resources at my finger tips.

Ow wait! 2 Witnesses. 1 Conjecture 3:19 and Opinions 12:7 :lol:
Click to expand...

Much of "Orthodox" Judaism was written down later than the new testament in writings that are full of contradictions with the old testament.
 
The general conjecture in my area (among my mainstream brethren) is that he was a widower. There was a sizable conflict at a church in my area where they wanted to kick someone off the board because his wife died (and an elder had to be a husband). It was settled by declaring that it was most likely Paul was a widower, and he still served the church, so he would be allowed to stay.


Much of those events have considerable logical problems with them, but it was an interesting happening that this thread remind me of. It's kind of the same thing in reverse.
 
CecilW said:
Remember also that Paul HAD BEEN a member of the Sanhedrin.

Membership REQUIRED that he be married.

In Jewish culture, for a young man to refuse to marry was considered a very self centered aberration, anti-social, and a shirking of one's responsibility to the community as well as dishonoring to one's parents by refusing to carry on your father's name.

So the undocumented and undocumentable LIKELIHOOD is that he was married at one time, regardless of his state during the time of his travels and mission.

In fact, I'm not entirely certain that he was actually single during that time. He could have been so consumed by his mission that he lived and traveled and ministered absolutely abandoned to all earthly ties -- though having them adequately provided for.

What IS clear is that he had his "urge to merge" so sublimated at the time of the writing, that it did not drive him to travel with a wife.
Click to expand...

1. How do we know membership required marriage

2. What if he was married when he joined and then his wife died and or he got a divorce. Did Jewish people really get divorces over burnt toast?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top