Prior Book | Prior Chapter | Prior Verse | Next Verse | Next Chapter | Next Book | Viewing NASB and Amplified 2015 | |
NASB | 1 Timothy 3:2 An overseer, then, must be above reproach, the husband of one wife, temperate, prudent, respectable, hospitable, able to teach, |
AMPLIFIED 2015 | 1 Timothy 3:2 Now an overseer must be blameless and beyond reproach, the husband of one wife, self-controlled, sensible, respectable, hospitable, able to teach, |
Bible Question:
I'd like to focus on the phrase "husband of one wife" which is repeated in Titus 1:6. These passages are used as standards, by many, to which men must suitably measure up in order to be eligible for the office of elder. This "husband of one wife" measure is the only item in the list that appears to be very objective, while all the rest are very subjective; i.e., "how hospitable?" "how well able to teach?" etc. The Greek from which these phrases were translated might be, with impunity, rendered "one woman man." I would like to submit for deliberation, very humbly, the suggestion that perhaps this was not intended to be objective but subjective like the other attributes. Perhaps, together, they represent an ideal. Thus, a "one woman man" might be a man who has never in his life loved more than one single woman. The standard would be much higher than the common interpretation. Perhaps in our day we are blinded to other posibilities because divorce and remarriage are such common issues. If you are the member of a tradition that uses these passages to select elders, I'd like to hear your thoughts -- either for or against -- on my suggestion. (By the way, there is precedence in scripture for setting up ideals for the purpose of making the best possible choice among a variety of candidates: Proverbs 31.) [Disclaimer: I am not trying to stir debate. I am not being dogmatic. I am not being speculative. I am not representing a specific theological view point. I am not being critical of a specific theological view point.] |
Bible Answer: I doubt you mean it this way, but your thought could very well escalate in the same manor. In such a day as this, your phrase "one woman man" reeks with the stench of the same arguments that grew to advocate same sex marriage. Your thought could very well be interpreted as anti marriage. I know what you appear to be saying, but personally I do not feel right debating a matter which, stated as you have put it, could very well be the opposite of what it appears. If your question is sincere, you might wish to word it a little differently, for I wouldn’t know whether to debate your thought, or light a fire under it. GB |