Thoughts on Polygamist Pastors?

[Slumberfreeze]

@Pacman if that ends up being true I owe you a beer! I'll try to look at it from that perspective and see if it fits.

In a previous thread somewhere VV took me quite thoroughly through his concept of what mia meant in this verse's context, I didn't end up agreeing, but I was pretty impressed and couldn't see any flaws in his reasoning. So I do at least know that there are other perspectives on it that might just be more correct than I can understand.

 

[Verifyveritas76]

I don't think the 'mia' baptism in Ephesians 4 can be understood as the first in a sequence at all.

That’s a great verse and example I hadn’t tied in yet, but it just goes to prove the point. Most aren’t aware that a Jewish bride had a primary semi public ritual baptism at betrothal and then would be bathed by her husband pre consumation (not always but often enough)

John the baptizer mentions that he is administering a baptism of repentance but that Christ will baptize both with the Holy Ghost and fire. There is also the washing of the water of the word leading to 1 John 5:8. Three that bear record, the Spirit and the water and the blood.

The mia baptism of repentance puts you into the family as heis flesh, just as Ephesians 4 states. But that is just the first in a sequence for those who are added to the family

 

[Slumberfreeze]

Dangit VV. Now you've got me wanting to be wrong.

So then Mark 9:5? Surely in the context of Peter's quote, he only meant them to set up one tent for each of them, and sequence is nowhere in view?

 

[Verifyveritas76]

Do you think those would have been the only ones erected? It would have been possibly the first in a sequence for each of them knowing our proclivity to spread denominations

Keep in mind that their culture revolved around two primary Pharisaical schools of thought and rabbi’s galore.

 

[Slumberfreeze]

Luke 15:8? You have to give this one to me. The lady lost one coin out of ten. Just one. No possibility for it to be two.

 

[Verifyveritas76]

I don't know what you mean by that, I was drawing my example straight out of Paul's instructions for the early church for elder support.

Oy. This is one of my current hot buttons. Please don’t get me started

Maybe sometime in the near future I’ll put a post up so everyone can tear it apart. I’d just encourage you to re-examine your premise from the standpoint that Paul taught that every man was supposed to labor with his own hands or go hungry Check out Acts 20 and see who he’s addressing. BTW it’s not the assembly.

On the topic of spiritual authority of one man over another man,? IMO there exists no such thing. Spiritual influence and influencers, yes! Authority? No way!

 

[Pacman]

Luke 15:8? You have to give this one to me. The lady lost one coin out of ten. Just one. No possibility for it to be two.

Bro I acknowledge that it sometimes does mean only one but definitely not always... and the balance of scripture lacks support for the idea of an elder being limited to one wife.

 

[Cap]

Here is some food for thought: Paul argues strenuously that although he does not partake in it, a minister of the gospel (and specifically an Elder) has a God-given right to expect material support from the Church. There are some represented in this forum who take the words "be fruitful and multiply" very seriously indeed. This could partly be a limiter keeping the church in a given city from having to support an elder who is functionally a tribe's worth of mouths.

I also believe that women take up a lot of a man's time, and that the job of an elder as portrayed in scripture (as opposed to common practice) is a very busy one. Remember that in Jerusalem they didn't have time to worry about which widows were getting what because their primary job of preaching left no room for it.

I also believe that the limiting factor is there to keep elders from schlooping up all the hotties leaving the young men with slim pickins. There's sort of a feedback-loop that I foresee. Women are attracted to power and money. An elder has authority and God gives him the right to eat based on his ministry.

I also believe that just like an Elder shouldn't be "greedy for money" he shouldn't be "greedy for wimmins". If he feels impoverished with only one wife.... maybe his focus is a little skewed?



And I mean this with all due respect, because I really do respect you: But that's kinda the attitude I wouldn't want in an Elder in the first place. I may be guilty of expecting too much, but I think an Elder should only be an Elder if feeding the flock is worth any sacrifice to him. "Woe to the shepherds that feed themselves" and all that.

If I can be mystical and wacky for a moment: The priests in the prophesied temple in Ezekiel were not allowed to have long hair nor be shaven, but were to be trimmed at all times. Not too much, nor nothing at all, but just a little. Not starving nor fat, but lean guard dogs.

I respect you too my friend and I know this is an important topic to you. I didn't mean to belittle the position of elder or other leaders of the church. I was just trying to make a point that, I think, families are the cornerstone of God's creation and I just don't know why He would limit a man who has come to qualify for that position, which is really a leader of a larger family to be limited to one wife. Really just doesn't make sense to me. But I hear you in what you saying.

 

[Soldier's Psalm]

Oy. This is one of my current hot buttons. Please don’t get me started

Maybe sometime in the near future I’ll put a post up so everyone can tear it apart. I’d just encourage you to re-examine your premise from the standpoint that Paul taught that every man was supposed to labor with his own hands or go hungry Check out Acts 20 and see who he’s addressing. BTW it’s not the assembly.

On the topic of spiritual authority of one man over another man,? IMO there exists no such thing. Spiritual influence and influencers, yes! Authority? No way!

I have to disagree with this. We are all under some form of authority and should be. If you don't believe me go Rob a bank. But spiritually speaking... The first Gentile to get a miracle from Jesus and the first that Jesus wasn't in person to do was for a man who understood authority and therefore perceived Jesus was a man of authority. If anything I would say a lack of authority and knowledge of authority is a big problem for the body now. No one wants to submit and I get the feeling most men here feel they don't need to submit to anyone. Maybe it's my time in the military but the body of Christ cannot function like the army it was designed too if it a soldiers can't fall into a hierachy.

 

[Pacman]

I have to disagree with this. We are all under some form of authority and should be. If you don't believe me go Rob a bank. But spiritually speaking... The first Gentile to get a miracle from Jesus and the first that Jesus wasn't in person to do was for a man who understood authority and therefore perceived Jesus was a man of authority. If anything I would say a lack of authority and knowledge of authority is a big problem for the body now. No one wants to submit and I get the feeling most men here feel they don't need to submit to anyone. Maybe it's my time in the military but the body of Christ cannot function like the army it was designed too if it a soldiers can't fall into a hierachy.

Please show this supposed hierarchy from scripture. The only one I find is: Yah, Yeshua, man, woman.

1 Corinthians 11:3 NASB
[3] But I want you to understand that Christ is the head of every man, and the man is the head of a woman, and God is the head of Christ.

 

[Soldier's Psalm]

Please show this supposed hierarchy from scripture. The only one I find is: Yah, Yeshua, man, woman.

1 Corinthians 11:3 NASB
[3] But I want you to understand that Christ is the head of every man, and the man is the head of a woman, and God is the head of Christ.

Hebrews 13:7 Remember them which have the rule over you, who have spoken unto you the word of God: whose faith follow, considering the end of their conversation.

Hebrews 13: 17 Obey them that have the rule over you, and submit yourselves: for they watch for your souls, as they that must give account, that they may do it with joy, and not with grief: for that is unprofitable for you.

Word: hgeomai

Pronounce: hayg-eh'-om-ahee

Strongs Number: G2233

Orig: middle voice of a (presumed) strengthened form of 71; to lead, i.e. command (with official authority); figuratively, to deem, i.e. consider:--account, (be) chief, count, esteem, governor, judge, have the rule over, suppose, think. G71

1 Timothy 5:17 Let the elders that rule well be counted worthy of double honor, especially they who labor in the word and doctrine.

1 Peter 2:18 Servants, be subject to your masters with all respect, not only to the good and gentle but also to the unjust. mindful of God, one endures sorrows while suffering unjustly. if when you do good and suffer for it you endure, this is a gracious thing in the sight of God.

Word: upotassw

Pronounce: hoop-ot-as'-so

Strongs Number: G5293

Orig: from 5259 and 5021; to subordinate; reflexively, to obey:--be under obedience (obedient), put under, subdue unto, (be, make) subject (to, unto), be (put) in subjection (to, under), submit self unto. G5259

Use: TDNT-8:39,1156 Verb

1. 
   1) to arrange under, to subordinate
   2) to subject, put in subjection
   3) to subject one's self, obey
   4) to submit to one's control
   5) to yield to one's admonition or advice
   6) to obey, be subject
   ++++
   A Greek military term meaning "to arrange [troop divisions] in a military fashion under the command of a leader". In non-military use, it was "a voluntary attitude of giving in, cooperating, assuming responsibility, and carrying a burden".

You will never walk in victory if you cannot operate as a soldier in God's army. Paul is setting between two Roman soldiers in the book of Ephesians writing about the whole armor of God to remind us that we are in a war. The thing is the Romans he is setting in between didn't conquer the world because of their armor. They conquered it because of there ability to have thousands of men fight and move as one. That requires leadership and subjection. The Angels have a hierarchy, the satanic kingdom has a hierarchy and even nature itself has one. But you say men don't?

 

[Slumberfreeze]

Bro I acknowledge that it sometimes does mean only one but definitely not always...

That is the more common stance. I'm only being a butt about it because VV said:

Anywho, it is true that the word Mia can be used as “one”, but only as the first one in a sequence. . . . Ever.

Which is a pretty stout proclamation so I wanted to kick the tires.

 

[Slumberfreeze]

Maybe sometime in the near future I’ll put a post up so everyone can tear it apart. I’d just encourage you to re-examine your premise from the standpoint that Paul taught that every man was supposed to labor with his own hands or go hungry Check out Acts 20 and see who he’s addressing. BTW it’s not the assembly.

On the topic of spiritual authority of one man over another man,? IMO there exists no such thing. Spiritual influence and influencers, yes! Authority? No way!

These are both topics I'd be interested in crossing swords over if a thread ever gets made for them.

 

[Pacman]

Hebrews 13:7 Remember them which have the rule over you, who have spoken unto you the word of God: whose faith follow, considering the end of their conversation.

Hebrews 13: 17 Obey them that have the rule over you, and submit yourselves: for they watch for your souls, as they that must give account, that they may do it with joy, and not with grief: for that is unprofitable for you.

Word: hgeomai

Pronounce: hayg-eh'-om-ahee

Strongs Number: G2233

Orig: middle voice of a (presumed) strengthened form of 71; to lead, i.e. command (with official authority); figuratively, to deem, i.e. consider:--account, (be) chief, count, esteem, governor, judge, have the rule over, suppose, think. G71

1 Timothy 5:17 Let the elders that rule well be counted worthy of double honor, especially they who labor in the word and doctrine.

1 Peter 2:18 Servants, be subject to your masters with all respect, not only to the good and gentle but also to the unjust. mindful of God, one endures sorrows while suffering unjustly. if when you do good and suffer for it you endure, this is a gracious thing in the sight of God.

Word: upotassw

Pronounce: hoop-ot-as'-so

Strongs Number: G5293

Orig: from 5259 and 5021; to subordinate; reflexively, to obey:--be under obedience (obedient), put under, subdue unto, (be, make) subject (to, unto), be (put) in subjection (to, under), submit self unto. G5259

Use: TDNT-8:39,1156 Verb

1. 
   1) to arrange under, to subordinate
   2) to subject, put in subjection
   3) to subject one's self, obey
   4) to submit to one's control
   5) to yield to one's admonition or advice
   6) to obey, be subject
   ++++
   A Greek military term meaning "to arrange [troop divisions] in a military fashion under the command of a leader". In non-military use, it was "a voluntary attitude of giving in, cooperating, assuming responsibility, and carrying a burden".

You will never walk in victory if you cannot operate as a soldier in God's army. Paul is setting between two Roman soldiers in the book of Ephesians writing about the whole armor of God to remind us that we are in a war. The thing is the Romans he is setting in between didn't conquer the world because of their armor. They conquered it because of there ability to have thousands of men fight and move as one. That requires leadership and subjection. The Angels have a hierarchy, the satanic kingdom has a hierarchy and even nature itself has one. But you say men don't?

Your conflating things here. Master servant relationship is a family thing and applies to actual biological or adopted family under the headship of the patriarch as well as the purchased or hired servants or slaves. Government is government those are not “church authority”

There is an order to things within an assembly on the human level but it’s about facilitating and less about authority. As far as “authority” such as church discipline or some such that lies with the men of the assembly there is no specific human hierarchy spelled out in scripture. Certainly nothing coming close to resembling the single bishop model that is embraced by many churches. Or even the Pastor being the “lead elder” with unilateral authority.

They have zero scriptural authority within the life of the individual believer. That hierarchy is spelled out in 1 Corinthians 11 Also you need to be careful to recognize translator bias especially within the KJV and other translations that are heavily influenced by it. One major goal with that translation was to undergird the “authority of the church” that never actually existed in the first place. For instance one of the supporting verses you quoted:

Hebrews 13:7 KJV
[7] Remember them which have the rule over you, who have spoken unto you the word of God: whose faith follow, considering the end of their conversation.


Hebrews 13:7 NASB
[7] Remember those who led you, who spoke the word of God to you; and considering the result of their conduct, imitate their faith.

 

[Soldier's Psalm]

Your conflating things here. Master servant relationship is a family thing and applies to actual biological or adopted family under the headship of the patriarch as well as the purchased or hired servants or slaves. Government is government those are not “church authority”

There is an order to things within an assembly on the human level but it’s about facilitating and less about authority. As far as “authority” such as church discipline or some such that lies with the men of the assembly there is no specific human hierarchy spelled out in scripture. Certainly nothing coming close to resembling the single bishop model that is embraced by many churches. Or even the Pastor being the “lead elder” with unilateral authority.

They have zero scriptural authority within the life of the individual believer. That hierarchy is spelled out in 1 Corinthians 11 Also you need to be careful to recognize translator bias especially within the KJV and other translations that are heavily influenced by it. One major goal with that translation was to undergird the “authority of the church” that never actually existed in the first place. For instance one of the supporting verses you quoted:

Hebrews 13:7 KJV
[7] Remember them which have the rule over you, who have spoken unto you the word of God: whose faith follow, considering the end of their conversation.


Hebrews 13:7 NASB
[7] Remember those who led you, who spoke the word of God to you; and considering the result of their conduct, imitate their faith.

I included the strongs so you can see the words meant to rule or judge over.

Hebrews 13:7 Remember them which have the rule over you, who have spoken unto you the word of God: whose faith follow, considering the end of their conversation.


Hebrews 13: 17 Obey them that have the rule over you, and submit yourselves: for they watch for your souls, as they that must give account, that they may do it with joy, and not with grief: for that is unprofitable for you.

The word translated to
Obey is the Greek pi'-tho and means - obey, persuade, trust, yield
Rule is the Greek hayg-eh'-om-ahee and means - rule, command, lead, to be a prince
Submit is the Greek hoop-i'-ko and means - to surrender, yield to authority, submit, resist no longer

So submit, obey, yield, trust those who command, rule, lead you for they watch over your souls and must give an account for you.
Paul isn't addressing a family or house here in the book of Hebrews. He is telling the people to get in line with leadership. This conversation reminds me of the time the dude was sleeping with his step mom

1 Corinthians 5 It is actually reported that there is sexual immorality among you, and of a kind that even pagans do not tolerate: A man is sleeping with his father’s wife. so that his spirit may be saved on the day of the Lord. 2 And you are proud! Shouldn’t you rather have gone into mourning so that his spirit may be saved on the day of the Lord. 3 For my part, even though I am not physically present, I am with you in spirit. As one who is present with you in this way, I have already passed judgment in the name of our Lord Jesus on the one who has been doing this. 4 So when you are assembled and I am with you in spirit, and the power of our Lord Jesus is present, 5 hand this man over so that his spirit may be saved on the day of the Lord.

Sounds like Paul here is exercising a little Authority in a body of believers.

1. 
   

 

[Pacman]

I included the strongs

Bro strongs from the kjv isn’t going to convince me. It’s based on the same bias...

 

[PeteR]

Bro strongs from the kjv isn’t going to convince me. It’s based on the same bias...

Gots to pull out BDB or Thayers...

 

[Verifyveritas76]

I included the strongs so you can see the words meant to rule or judge over.

Hebrews 13:7 Remember them which have the rule over you, who have spoken unto you the word of God: whose faith follow, considering the end of their conversation.


Hebrews 13: 17 Obey them that have the rule over you, and submit yourselves: for they watch for your souls, as they that must give account, that they may do it with joy, and not with grief: for that is unprofitable for you.

The word translated to
Obey is the Greek pi'-tho and means - obey, persuade, trust, yield
Rule is the Greek hayg-eh'-om-ahee and means - rule, command, lead, to be a prince
Submit is the Greek hoop-i'-ko and means - to surrender, yield to authority, submit, resist no longer

So submit, obey, yield, trust those who command, rule, lead you for they watch over your souls and must give an account for you.
Paul isn't addressing a family or house here in the book of Hebrews. He is telling the people to get in line with leadership. This conversation reminds me of the time the dude was sleeping with his step mom

1 Corinthians 5 It is actually reported that there is sexual immorality among you, and of a kind that even pagans do not tolerate: A man is sleeping with his father’s wife. so that his spirit may be saved on the day of the Lord. 2 And you are proud! Shouldn’t you rather have gone into mourning so that his spirit may be saved on the day of the Lord. 3 For my part, even though I am not physically present, I am with you in spirit. As one who is present with you in this way, I have already passed judgment in the name of our Lord Jesus on the one who has been doing this. 4 So when you are assembled and I am with you in spirit, and the power of our Lord Jesus is present, 5 hand this man over so that his spirit may be saved on the day of the Lord.

Sounds like Paul here is exercising a little Authority in a body of believers.

1. 
   

Ive yet to have anyone show me that these verses are talking about a church hierarchy instead of a father and head of household. The context of the passage moves from the marriage bed to ones that have the rule over. The father and head of household is to be the one whose faith the family follows as 1 Corinthians 14:35 states. Ive also not seen where the hierarchy is ever responsible to give an account for those in the assembly. (Perhaps for what happens in the assembly itself, but not for those attending the assembly) IF we were still under a Levitical priesthood, that maybe might kinda sorta hold a smidgen of water. But we’re not. There is no mediator except Christ, thus the stated chain of command.

You also have to realize that 1 Cor 5 follows chapter 4 where Paul states And these things, brethren, I have in a figure transferred to myself and to Apollos for your sakes; that ye might learn in us not to think of men above that which is written, that no one of you be puffed up for one against another.
For who maketh thee to differ from another? and what hast thou that thou didst not receive?†? now if thou didst receive it, why dost thou glory, as if thou hadst not received it?
Now ye are full, now ye are rich, ye have reigned as kings without us: and I would to God ye did reign, that we also might reign with you.

He follows this with language that fully describes an influence approach verses 9-17 not an authoritarian approach. Even his mention of using the rod in verses 18 - 21 is not stating that he’d beat them, but that he’d let the hot air out and demonstrate the power of God. His only resort to “rule” by authority is that of a father who is not shaming them, but warning them. Sounds more like influence than authority to me.

Also chapter four follows chapter 3 which ends with:
Therefore let no man glory in men. For all things are yours;
Whether Paul, or Apollos, or Cephas, or the world, or life, or death, or things present, or things to come; all are yours;
And ye are Christ’s; and Christ is God’s.

Yet another passage that disregards the apostles themselves as being part of a chain of command. If they aren’t part of it, how could a bishop or deacon be part of the chain of command?

 

[FollowingHim]

Luke 15:8? You have to give this one to me. The lady lost one coin out of ten. Just one. No possibility for it to be two.

She owned "one" coin. And nine other coins.
Which shows conclusively that just because you have "one" wife, does not mean you don't also have nine other wives.

In other words, she lost a coin. "A" means "one" but not necessarily "the only one".

 

[Verifyveritas76]

Luke 15:8? You have to give this one to me. The lady lost one coin out of ten. Just one. No possibility for it to be two.

But was it the first one? Seemed like she still had the other nine. So that would make this the first one that she’d lost.

Cultural context is big here also. Often, these coins were a part of her ornamentation and a portion of her dowry. A woman who used them was considered a poor steward of finances or a poor wife. Her neighbors wouldn’t have made the distinction between losing it and using it. It was shameful either way as it was a part of her “virtue” as a wife. That’s why she called for celebration. The set was complete and virtue/reputation restored. Forgot where I saw this and probably wont take the time to refind it so take it with a grain of whatever

Anywho, seems to me it was the first of the coins that she’d lost or misplaced. If it was the second or third of the ten that she’d lost, finding just this one wouldn’t have been cause for celebration with the neighbors.