Bishops/Elder/Pastors required to be married?

[BB1956]

Yes, a single Christian man can be respectable, prudent, hospitable and above reproach, etc. But he cannot, being single, be the husband of one wife, nor in such a state can he have his children under control (except he's a widower), demonstrating thereby his capacity to rule well his own household (and thus, by extension, the church).

I've known short fellows who could handle a basketball with incredible skill, dribbling circles around everybody, sinking 3-pointers consistently from the top of the key, passing brilliantly, reading the flow of play with great skill, and so on. But they were short. Too short. When it came to playing among guys nearly twice their height and weight who, though not as adept with the basketball as they were, still had above average ability, these short fellows found their athletic advantages completely nullified. Yes, they were great ball-handlers; yes, they were great 3-point shooters; yes, they could pass skillfully; yes, they were great court readers; but they were too short.

In the same way, it doesn't follow that because a single man is kept from the Elder role because of his singleness, he isn't therefore a spiritually-mature and hospitable person, able to teach well, etc.. Being married with kids teaches a man some very important things about himself and walking with God that a single man just can't learn as a bachelor. Most crucially, a man's family becomes a "mirror" of sorts in which he sees an often very unflattering reflection of himself as they test him constantly in the areas of selflessness, wisdom, spiritual leadership, and consistency (among other things). A bachelor does not have the benefit of the tempering, the refining and revealing influence, of a wife and children. As a result, he lacks experience and self-awareness that are crucial in the role of an Elder. But, again, this isn't to say he is, therefore, not at all prudent, or hospitable, or above reproach, etc.



But I didn't. You are arguing here against a Strawman assumption you've made, not my actual words.



Of course, the Holy Spirit can mature a man spiritually. But the Holy Spirit simply cannot give the single man the experiences of a married man who has navigated the intimacy and relational complexity of marriage and the many challenges unique to raising children.

I didn't marry 'til I was 39. To that point, I had been involved in many Christian ministries, teaching and leading youth, and preaching, and discipling men. I was no "novice" to the faith, that's for sure, my spiritual maturity recognized and called upon by various churches and individuals. But, man, marriage revealed things about me to which I was totally oblivious, led and matured by the Spirit though I believed I had been. Goodness! The "mirror" my wife was to me revealed a man who had some serious growing yet to do spiritually. Her relational intimacy with me, her proximity to me unique to the marriage relationship, was able to expose areas needing growth that could only have been revealed by such a relationship.

Anyway, only a single guy would assert that he can equal the spiritual growth of a married man. All married men know the silliness of this thinking.



Strawman.



It's amazing how you've talked yourself into believing I have a view that you imposed on me! The Strawman you've constructed is your construct, not mine.

I will continue to say that God's Holy Spirit can influence a single man to rule God's congregation of people properly. The man doesn't need to be married with children for God's Holy Spirit to be able to influence the single man to rule God's congregation properly. I don't believe that a man who is married with children to be the only people who can rule God's congregation properly. It's God Holy Spirit that influences a man whether he's married or not how to rule over God's congregation properly. It's going to stay that way with me. You're not going to convince me that if a man isn't married God's Holy Spirit can't influence a man to rule God's congregation properly, which is exactly what you're trying to to do. Paul wasn't saying it's a command by God that if a man isn't married he can't be a Elder or Deacon. You're trying to use the requirements of what qualifies a man to be an Elder or Deacon that there is a command by God that a man must be married with children for him to qualify to be an Elder or Deacon. You and I will continue to disagree. God is saying by using Paul that if a man is in married he should be the husband of one wife and that if he have children he should be able to rule his own house. That's because the reason the man didn't rule over his own house properly was because he didn't allow God's Holy Spirit to influence him as he should have, so that he would have ruled over his own house properly

 

[D-D-W]

If a person is married paul is stating that they should have only ONE wife--in other words NOT be poligamous!
If marriage was the requirement the scripture would have stated "must be married", it does not.

Actually it does. "Must be the husband of one wife" requires him to be married.

• 1 Timothy 3:2
  An overseer, then, must be above reproach, the husband of one wife, temperate, prudent, respectable, hospitable, able to teach,
  
  
• 1 Timothy 3:12
  Deacons must be husbands of only one wife, and good managers of their children and their own households.

In the time when this was written Poligamy was common both amongst Jews and Non-Jews, this disqualified a man from being an elder in the church, it did not disqualify him from being a Christian!

Actually, polygany (multiple wives) was rather rare in Jewish culture, but not uncommon in Greek and Roman society.

Poligamous men were not required to divorce wives in order to become followers of Jesus. This I write concerning those that become Christians not those that already are Christians! I do not believe that followers of Jesus should take multiple wives!

The only prohibition was on congregational leadership, not the general congregants.

 

[Hopeful 2]

I agree with Paul, you're the one saying Paul was saying a single man can't be an Elder or Deacon, however I recognize that it's you saying that, not Paul. I agree with Paul when he saids that a single man can do better at focusing on sacred things than married men. That would include being an Elder or Deacon. You have the right to disagree with him, but I choose to agree with him.

Show how you managed your wife and children perfectly.
Oh, but you can't...you are single !

 

[Tenchi]

I will continue to say that God's Holy Spirit can influence a single man to rule God's congregation of people properly.

Well, as a Christian, I don't care, really, what you are determined to say in this matter. What is important to me is what God says to me in His word.

The man doesn't need to be married with children for God's Holy Spirit to be able to influence the single man to rule God's congregation properly.

Repeating yourself doesn't somehow make your statements true. Doing so certainly doesn't prove you're right.

You're not going to convince me that if a man isn't married God's Holy Spirit can't influence a man to rule God's congregation properly, which is exactly what you're trying to to do.

No, I'm not in the least interested in persuading you to a different view from the one you presently hold. Hold whatever view you like. My purpose in posting in this thread was to point out what Scripture actually says about the role of Elder and being single. That's it. Deny what Scripture says all you want. It's a free internet. No one can stop you.

You and I will continue to disagree.

No, you and God will continue to disagree. I've just been pointing out what He says in His word. If you don't want to agree with Him, well, that's no skin off my nose. You don't answer to me, right? It's to God to whom you'll have to answer for your denial of His plain statement in Scripture.

God is saying by using Paul that if a man is in married he should be the husband of one wife and that if he have children he should be able to rule his own house.

There are no "ifs" in Paul's words to Timothy or Titus about the role of Elder.

 

[Carry_Your_Name]

Well, as a Christian, I don't care, really, what you are determined to say in this matter. What is important to me is what God says to me in His word.

No, I'm not in the least interested in persuading you to a different view from the one you presently hold. Hold whatever view you like. My purpose in posting in this thread was to point out what Scripture actually says about the role of Elder and being single. That's it. Deny what Scripture says all you want. It's a free internet. No one can stop you.

What God says in His word is no polygamy, the emphasis is on ONE WIFE, as opposed to multiple paramours. If Paul really meant that church leader must be married, he would've written plainly that a bishop must be "married", instead of "husband of one wife". God is not a god of confusion, but clarity. Besides, I told you this before, Paul himself was not married, he had no authority or credibility to mandate marriage on anybody.

 

[Carry_Your_Name]

Actually it does. "Must be the husband of one wife" requires him to be married.

• 1 Timothy 3:2
  An overseer, then, must be above reproach, the husband of one wife, temperate, prudent, respectable, hospitable, able to teach,
  
  
• 1 Timothy 3:12
  Deacons must be husbands of only one wife, and good managers of their children and their own households.

What about churches that don't have clerical positions of overseer or deacon, and their leaders are addressed with other titles? Do they get to skirt around these requirement? If you take the legalistic route and read these instructions in a strictly literal sense, then that is the result you'll get - a name game.

 

[Carry_Your_Name]

I will continue to say that God's Holy Spirit can influence a single man to rule God's congregation of people properly. The man doesn't need to be married with children for God's Holy Spirit to be able to influence the single man to rule God's congregation properly. I don't believe that a man who is married with children to be the only people who can rule God's congregation properly. It's God Holy Spirit that influences a man whether he's married or not how to rule over God's congregation properly. It's going to stay that way with me. You're not going to convince me that if a man isn't married God's Holy Spirit can't influence a man to rule God's congregation properly, which is exactly what you're trying to to do. Paul wasn't saying it's a command by God that if a man isn't married he can't be a Elder or Deacon. You're trying to use the requirements of what qualifies a man to be an Elder or Deacon that there is a command by God that a man must be married with children for him to qualify to be an Elder or Deacon. You and I will continue to disagree. God is saying by using Paul that if a man is in married he should be the husband of one wife and that if he have children he should be able to rule his own house. That's because the reason the man didn't rule over his own house properly was because he didn't allow God's Holy Spirit to influence him as he should have, so that he would have ruled over his own house properly

Yeah, please beware that there's an idolatry of marriage in many churches, where marriage is taught not as a God-ordained instutition and a foretaste of our union with Jesus, but a magic fix for all kinds of sexual brokenness. Once you get married, you'll stop watching porn and sleeping around, you'll settle down, grow up and enjoy heavenly sex. Marriage is equated with spiritual maturity, you'll never be a real man or a real woman unless you get married. Church leaders brag their own happy marriage life and their children, using 1 Tim. 3:2 and 3:12 to justify that, and single folks are looked down upon. This is a subtle form of prosperity gospel, not the word of God.

 

[D-D-W]

What about churches that don't have clerical positions of overseer or deacon, and their leaders are addressed with other titles? Do they get to skirt around these requirement? If you take the legalistic route and read these instructions in a strictly literal sense, then that is the result you'll get - a name game.

It is not the "name game," but the function. Overseer, elder, pastor, priest, shepherd, etc. are all the same office. And scripture requires them to be married.
The same with deacons, administrators, or whatever you want to call anyone else that oversees the physical functionality of the local congregation.

 

[D-D-W]

What God says in His word is no polygamy, the emphasis is on ONE WIFE, as opposed to multiple paramours.

Remember, this is speaking ONLY to local congregational leadership.

If Paul really meant that church leader must be married, he would've written plainly that a bishop must be "married", instead of "husband of one wife".

Please explain to me how a man can be the "husband of one wife" if he is not married.

 

[Tenchi]

What God says in His word is no polygamy, the emphasis is on ONE WIFE, as opposed to multiple paramours. If Paul really meant that church leader must be married, he would've written plainly that a bishop must be "married", instead of "husband of one wife". God is not a god of confusion, but clarity. Besides, I told you this before, Paul himself was not married, he had no authority or credibility to mandate marriage on anybody.

But Paul did say an Elder must be a husband - and have children. And to say "the husband of one wife" is to say "married." This is entirely obvious - to me, anyway. One can't be a husband to a wife if one isn't married. Again, obviously. I don't see, then, anything confusing about "the husband of one wife" meaning "married."

Paul was not an Elder but a missionary (i.e. an apostle - "sent out one"), evangelizing the Gentiles and founding churches throughout Asia Minor, producing much of the NT canon and codifying Christian doctrine, as well. Paul did not need to be married to possess the spiritual authority of a Christ-ordained apostle of the Early Church who was responsible for establishing and disseminating Christian doctrine.

 

[BB1956]

Show how you managed your wife and children perfectly.
Oh, but you can't...you are single ![/QUOTE\]

A Christian man manages his wife and children perfectly by allowing God's Holy Spirit to influence him how he is to manage his wife and children perfectly by being obedient to God when God influences him with his Holy Spirit how the man's house is to be managed. You want to believe that a single man can't manage God's house perfectly simply and only because he's never had a wife and children, so be it, you believe that. However I know for a fact that God's Holy Spirit can influence a man to manage God's house perfectly and it won't matter if the man has ever been married or not, or if he has ever had children or not. God's Ho!y Spirit isn't as weak as you make God's Holy Spirit out to be. For anyone to teach or even imply that God can't teach a man how to manage God's house because that man hasn't ever been married, and never had children, I'm not going to agree with. The only reason a man won't manage God's house is because he's not allowing God's Holy Spirit to influence him how God's house should be managed and it has nothing to do with whether that man has been married or not, or whether he's had children or not.

 

[BB1956]

Techni said in post #103,
"Does this passage forbid an Elder who becomes a widower from continuing as an Elder (Overseer/Bishop/Pastor)? No. But to become an Elder in the first place requires that the man installed in the role be a monogamously married man, preferably with children, demonstrating in his dignified, well-managed/controlled household his fitness to oversee the flock of God." [/QUOTE\]

I don't agree that God or Paul in these scriptures at 1 Timothy 3:1-7 or Titus 1:5-9 that they were forbidding a man to be single if he wants to be an Elder or Deacon. A Christian man can be single or married if he wants to be an Elder or Deacon. Neither God or Paul forbids a man be married or single if he wants to be in these kinds of positions in the congregation. So I don't agree that when a person reads in the scriptures at 1 Timothy 3:2 or at Titus 1:6 the phrase, "the husband of one wife," that it means God is forbidding the man to be single if he wants to be a Elder or Deacon.

 

[BB1956]

Yeah, please beware that there's an idolatry of marriage in many churches, where marriage is taught not as a God-ordained instutition and a foretaste of our union with Jesus, but a magic fix for all kinds of sexual brokenness. Once you get married, you'll stop watching porn and sleeping around, you'll settle down, grow up and enjoy heavenly sex. Marriage is equated with spiritual maturity, you'll never be a real man or a real woman unless you get married. Church leaders brag their own happy marriage life and their children, using 1 Tim. 3:2 and 3:12 to justify that, and single folks are looked down upon. This is a subtle form of prosperity gospel, not the word of God.

Yeah I agree that a Christian should actually be a mature Christian with all the spiritual qualifications that make a mature Christian before getting married. Thinking that marriage is some quick fix that will prevent you from watching porn or stop you from sleeping around isn't going to happen. As a mature spiritual Christian you should have already have these kinds of things under control if you're listening to God's Holy Spirit and being obedient to it's influences.
The point I'm trying to make regarding 1 Timothy 3:1-7 and Titus 1:5-9 is that when one reads the phrase, "the husband of one wife," at 1 Timothy 3:2 and Titus 1:6 God isn't saying that a Christian man is forbidden to be single if he wants to be and Elder or Deacon. God isn't commanding the single man if you want to be an Elder or Deacon you have to get married and have children. God doesn't forbid a Christian man to be single or married if he wants to be an Elder or Deacon. When someone says to me that when the scriptures say that how can a Christian man who can't manage his own household be able to manage God's house. I'll say to them the man who is married with children who didn't manage his own house properly, didn't manage his house properly because the man didn't listen and obey what God's Holy Spirit was influencing him to do when God's Holy Spirit was influencing the Christian man, how he should manage his own house. So of course if the man will not listen to God's Holy Spirit when God's Holy Spirit influences the man how the man should manage his own house, and the man doesn't listen then the man isn't going to listen to how God's Holy Spirit is telling or influencing the man how he should manage God's house either. God's Holy Spirit can influence a single man how to manage God's house. For someone to say to me or even imply that God's Holy Spirit can't influence a Christian single man how to manage God's house simply because the Christian man has never been married or had children, I'm just not going to agree with that.

 

[Carry_Your_Name]

It is not the "name game," but the function. Overseer, elder, pastor, priest, shepherd, etc. are all the same office. And scripture requires them to be married.
The same with deacons, administrators, or whatever you want to call anyone else that oversees the physical functionality of the local congregation.

Then tell me why Paul himself who issued this requirement was not married. Was he not a rabbi? A pastor? An overseer? In 1 Cor. 7 he only gave advice on marriage, not commandment, how come that he now mandate church leaders to be married? Scripture doesn’t contradict itself.

“I say this as a concession, not as a commandment, for I wish that all men were even as I myself, but each one has his own gift, one in this manner and another in that. But I say to the unmarried and to the widows: it is good for them if they remain as I am.” (1 Cor. 7:6-8)

Please explain to me how a man can be the "husband of one wife" if he is not married.

Please explain to me, again, how Paul himself was NOT “husband of one wife” when he wrote this letter.

 

[Carry_Your_Name]

But Paul did say an Elder must be a husband - and have children. And to say "the husband of one wife" is to say "married." This is entirely obvious - to me, anyway. One can't be a husband to a wife if one isn't married. Again, obviously. I don't see, then, anything confusing about "the husband of one wife" meaning "married."

But Paul also warned about hypocrisy: “you therefore, who teach another, do you not teach yourself? You who preach that a man should not steal, do you steal?” (Rom. 2:21) If God really required church leaders to be married with children, he would’ve chosen someone else who was married with children to teach this, instead of Paul who was unmarried, childless, and had preferred singles to remain single in 1 Cor. 7.

Paul was not an Elder but a missionary (i.e. an apostle - "sent out one"), evangelizing the Gentiles and founding churches throughout Asia Minor, producing much of the NT canon and codifying Christian doctrine, as well. Paul did not need to be married to possess the spiritual authority of a Christ-ordained apostle of the Early Church who was responsible for establishing and disseminating Christian doctrine.

So church leaders can just ditch the titles of elders, deacons and bishops, and call themselves missionaries and apostles, then they’d be exempted from the “marriage mandate”, is that what you’re suggesting?

 

[BB1956]

D-D-W said,
Please explain to me how a man can be the "husband of one wife" if he is not married.[/Quote\]

People look at the phrase, "the husband of one wife," which is at 1 Timothy 3:2 & Titus 1:6 and decide that God is forbidding a Christian man to be single if he wants to be an Elder or Deacon. God doesn't forbid a Christian man to be single if he wants to be an Elder or Deacon. People by the way they reason on the scriptures are the one's forbidding a Christian man to be single if he wants to be a Elder or Deacon but God's word isn't forbidding a Christian man to be single, if he wants to be an Elder or Deacon. The only requirement concerning marriage is that the Christian man be the husband of one wife not that the Christian man has to have a wife or is commanded to have a wife, or that God is forbidding singleness, because the Christian man wants to be an Elder or Deacon.

 

[Carry_Your_Name]

Again, obviously. I don't see, then, anything confusing about "the husband of one wife" meaning "married."

Do you believe that all 66 books in the bible have a consistent narrative? Do you believe that God's word doesn't contradict itself? If you read everything in a strictly literal sense, then there would be a contradiction between 1 Cor. 7:6-8 and this "requirement". I don't believe Paul was patronizing different readers with different messages, that for one church they can serve God better without the distraction of marriage, while for another church they must get married to serve God, and I don't believe we get to pick which applies to us and which doesn't.

 

[Hopeful 2]

A Christian man manages his wife and children perfectly by allowing God's Holy Spirit to influence him how he is to manage his wife and children perfectly by being obedient to God when God influences him with his Holy Spirit how the man's house is to be managed.

Correct, and that management will be used in assaying any candidate for pastor/bishop.

You want to believe that a single man can't manage God's house perfectly simply and only because he's never had a wife and children, so be it,

The single man is like a someone applying for a job, without a resume.

you believe that. However I know for a fact that God's Holy Spirit can influence a man to manage God's house perfectly and it won't matter if the man has ever been married or not, or if he has ever had children or not. God's Ho!y Spirit isn't as weak as you make God's Holy Spirit out to be. For anyone to teach or even imply that God can't teach a man how to manage God's house because that man hasn't ever been married, and never had children, I'm not going to agree with. The only reason a man won't manage God's house is because he's not allowing God's Holy Spirit to influence him how God's house should be managed and it has nothing to do with whether that man has been married or not, or whether he's had children or not.

Get the "Help Wanted" ad for the position of pastor/bishop, and look at the requirements for the job.
Being married is one of the requirements.

 

[Hopeful 2]

Do you believe that all 66 books in the bible have a consistent narrative?

Yes, Love God above anything else, and love your neighbor as you love yourself.

Do you believe that God's word doesn't contradict itself?

Yes.

If you read everything in a strictly literal sense, then there would be a contradiction between 1 Cor. 7:6-8 and this "requirement".

Not at all, as Paul isn't discussing a bishop's requirements in 1 Cor. 7.

I don't believe Paul was patronizing different readers with different messages, that for one church they can serve God better without the distraction of marriage, while for another church they must get married to serve God,

Where do you get the idea anyone said "we have to be married to serve God" ?

and I don't believe we get to pick which applies to us and which doesn't.

If, like Paul, you are going to be a wandering apostle/evangelist, singleness would be preferable.
But if you are going to shepherd a church, one of the thirteen requirements is that you run a family well, first.

 

[Josef]

Should a BISHOP/ ELDER / PASTOR be married?

God's word says it is required to be married, What say you?

I believe there is a misunderstanding here.
I didn't read all of the posts But I did not see my viewpoint in any that I did read. We see the requirements for bishops, deacons, and elders in 1Timothy and Titus.

1 Timothy 3:2 A bishop then must be blameless, the husband of one wife, vigilant, sober, of good behaviour, given to hospitality, apt to teach;

1 Timothy 3:12 Let the deacons be the husbands of one wife, ruling their children and their own houses well.

Titus 1:5-6 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:
If any be blameless, the husband of one wife, having faithful children not accused of riot or unruly.

The criteria is one wife, as opposed to many wives. Polygamy still existed in Paul's day. Paul is saying God set marriage as one man and one woman. That's how it is to be practiced within the Christian church.

So can a person who has never been married, or a widower who was married, be allowed into these positions?
How does the Catholic Church allow for single men to be in these church positions?


Keep walking everybody.
May God bless,
Taz