<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Does &#8220;husband of one wife&#8221; disqualify women from being a Pastor?</title>
	<atom:link href="http://strivetoenter.com/wim/2007/01/28/does-%e2%80%9chusband-of-one-wife%e2%80%9d-disqualify-women-from-being-a-pastor/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://strivetoenter.com/wim/2007/01/28/does-%e2%80%9chusband-of-one-wife%e2%80%9d-disqualify-women-from-being-a-pastor/</link>
	<description>This blog is for dialogue on the issue of women in ministry and the freedom for women to teach the bible in a public setting.  It is also for questions and answers on our DVD entitled "Women in Ministry: Silenced or Set Free?"  This 4 DVD set answers the hard passages of scripture that seem to restrict women's ministry.</description>
	<pubDate>Wed, 17 Mar 2010 04:02:07 +0000</pubDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.7</generator>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
		<item>
		<title>By: Cheryl Schatz</title>
		<link>http://strivetoenter.com/wim/2007/01/28/does-%e2%80%9chusband-of-one-wife%e2%80%9d-disqualify-women-from-being-a-pastor/comment-page-1/#comment-10592</link>
		<dc:creator>Cheryl Schatz</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 05 Mar 2010 20:01:11 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://strivetoenter.com/wim/2007/01/28/does-%e2%80%9chusband-of-one-wife%e2%80%9d-disqualify-women-from-being-a-pastor/#comment-10592</guid>
		<description>Hi Dr. Willingham,
Thanks for your comments on this subject.  I am glad that you dropped in.  Also to let you know I have been delayed in completing my book, but I have not forgotten about you.  I will provide you with a copy for your comments for either the foreword or the back endorsements.  I have thought about you a lot lately as my focus is going onto finish my written work.  Your support for my defense of women in ministry is greatly appreciated!</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Hi Dr. Willingham,<br />
Thanks for your comments on this subject.  I am glad that you dropped in.  Also to let you know I have been delayed in completing my book, but I have not forgotten about you.  I will provide you with a copy for your comments for either the foreword or the back endorsements.  I have thought about you a lot lately as my focus is going onto finish my written work.  Your support for my defense of women in ministry is greatly appreciated!</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Dr. James Willingham</title>
		<link>http://strivetoenter.com/wim/2007/01/28/does-%e2%80%9chusband-of-one-wife%e2%80%9d-disqualify-women-from-being-a-pastor/comment-page-1/#comment-10564</link>
		<dc:creator>Dr. James Willingham</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 05 Mar 2010 01:22:19 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://strivetoenter.com/wim/2007/01/28/does-%e2%80%9chusband-of-one-wife%e2%80%9d-disqualify-women-from-being-a-pastor/#comment-10564</guid>
		<description>Dear Cheryl: I enjoyed and appreciated you comments on the generic usage in I Tim.3:1.  Whe I gave my address in 1985 on the subject, "Th Genius of Orthodoxy: Eldresses,"  I did not have that knowledge, though I could have, sine I have about the equivalent of a minor in Greek.  It is jut that was into the history of the interpretation of  I Tim 2, regarding exceptions as suggested by the Puritan Commentator, Matthew Poole.  Another Puritan said much the same thing, but I do not recall his name.  God bless.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Dear Cheryl: I enjoyed and appreciated you comments on the generic usage in I Tim.3:1.  Whe I gave my address in 1985 on the subject, &#8220;Th Genius of Orthodoxy: Eldresses,&#8221;  I did not have that knowledge, though I could have, sine I have about the equivalent of a minor in Greek.  It is jut that was into the history of the interpretation of  I Tim 2, regarding exceptions as suggested by the Puritan Commentator, Matthew Poole.  Another Puritan said much the same thing, but I do not recall his name.  God bless.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Cheryl Schatz</title>
		<link>http://strivetoenter.com/wim/2007/01/28/does-%e2%80%9chusband-of-one-wife%e2%80%9d-disqualify-women-from-being-a-pastor/comment-page-1/#comment-10562</link>
		<dc:creator>Cheryl Schatz</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 04 Mar 2010 23:11:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://strivetoenter.com/wim/2007/01/28/does-%e2%80%9chusband-of-one-wife%e2%80%9d-disqualify-women-from-being-a-pastor/#comment-10562</guid>
		<description>Hey Craig,
Glad you purchased my DVDs. Now I know which Craig you are!  I think you will find the DVDs very helpful especially because they deal with this subject in a very visual manner.

Now as far as Titus 1:5-9 this is very similar to 1 Timothy 3 where Paul makes sure that women are included by saying "likewise women".  However in the Titus passage the translators have put chapter divisions that were not there in the original so you have to keep reading through to the next chapter to see women included.

&lt;blockquote&gt;Titus 2:3 (NASB)
 3 Older women likewise are to be reverent in their behavior, not malicious gossips nor enslaved to much wine, teaching what is good, &lt;/blockquote&gt;

In Titus 1:5 Paul says that Titus was left behind to appoint "presbyteros" (elders) and in chapter 2 Paul gives the qualifications for men Titus 2:2 and then for women Titus 2:3.  It is worthy of note that Paul only identifies the requirement of being a teacher to the women, but we can understand that the entire list works for all as Paul connects the different peoples (men, women, young men) with the terms "likewise" in verses 3 &#38; 6 so we can understand that the qualifications are all about moral character and maturity.  Once again we see that Paul not only includes women, but in the qualification he never says that women are "forbidden" to be presbyteros.

Also another note is that when men and women are included in the same group the grammar rule is that the masculine term is used.  This means that the Greek term presbyteros is the masculine grammar but the masculine plural is not meant to exclude women.  In fact it clearly includes women by Paul putting the qualifications together with the men and saying "likewise".

I hope this helps.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Hey Craig,<br />
Glad you purchased my DVDs. Now I know which Craig you are!  I think you will find the DVDs very helpful especially because they deal with this subject in a very visual manner.</p>
<p>Now as far as Titus 1:5-9 this is very similar to 1 Timothy 3 where Paul makes sure that women are included by saying &#8220;likewise women&#8221;.  However in the Titus passage the translators have put chapter divisions that were not there in the original so you have to keep reading through to the next chapter to see women included.</p>
<blockquote><p>Titus 2:3 (NASB)<br />
 3 Older women likewise are to be reverent in their behavior, not malicious gossips nor enslaved to much wine, teaching what is good, </p></blockquote>
<p>In Titus 1:5 Paul says that Titus was left behind to appoint &#8220;presbyteros&#8221; (elders) and in chapter 2 Paul gives the qualifications for men Titus 2:2 and then for women Titus 2:3.  It is worthy of note that Paul only identifies the requirement of being a teacher to the women, but we can understand that the entire list works for all as Paul connects the different peoples (men, women, young men) with the terms &#8220;likewise&#8221; in verses 3 &amp; 6 so we can understand that the qualifications are all about moral character and maturity.  Once again we see that Paul not only includes women, but in the qualification he never says that women are &#8220;forbidden&#8221; to be presbyteros.</p>
<p>Also another note is that when men and women are included in the same group the grammar rule is that the masculine term is used.  This means that the Greek term presbyteros is the masculine grammar but the masculine plural is not meant to exclude women.  In fact it clearly includes women by Paul putting the qualifications together with the men and saying &#8220;likewise&#8221;.</p>
<p>I hope this helps.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Craig</title>
		<link>http://strivetoenter.com/wim/2007/01/28/does-%e2%80%9chusband-of-one-wife%e2%80%9d-disqualify-women-from-being-a-pastor/comment-page-1/#comment-10531</link>
		<dc:creator>Craig</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 04 Mar 2010 12:42:08 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://strivetoenter.com/wim/2007/01/28/does-%e2%80%9chusband-of-one-wife%e2%80%9d-disqualify-women-from-being-a-pastor/#comment-10531</guid>
		<description>Thanks very much Cheryl for your prompt reply. It was indeed very helpful. Do you have any comments on Titus 1:5-9. Paul seems to have men in view when discussing eldership. No mention of women is made here. Our church teaches that elders/pastors should be men and I am finding your material helpful in rethinking these issues. I have ordered your DVD's.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Thanks very much Cheryl for your prompt reply. It was indeed very helpful. Do you have any comments on Titus 1:5-9. Paul seems to have men in view when discussing eldership. No mention of women is made here. Our church teaches that elders/pastors should be men and I am finding your material helpful in rethinking these issues. I have ordered your DVD&#8217;s.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Cheryl Schatz</title>
		<link>http://strivetoenter.com/wim/2007/01/28/does-%e2%80%9chusband-of-one-wife%e2%80%9d-disqualify-women-from-being-a-pastor/comment-page-1/#comment-10497</link>
		<dc:creator>Cheryl Schatz</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 03 Mar 2010 15:14:35 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://strivetoenter.com/wim/2007/01/28/does-%e2%80%9chusband-of-one-wife%e2%80%9d-disqualify-women-from-being-a-pastor/#comment-10497</guid>
		<description>Hi Craig and welcome to my blog!

1 Timothy 3:11 fits in really well with 1 Timothy 3:1 where Paul states that "anyone" can desire the work of an overseer.  The issue of "husband of one wife" is specifically set up to refer to men's qualifications in both the overseer (elder) and deacon since only men were allowed to be polygamists but in case anyone would think this would qualify only men to do he work of an elder or deacon Paul specifically mentions women in verse 11.  Some will attach women only to deacons by saying that these women are the deacon's wives but this seems highly unlikely.  First of all there is no possessive form for women that would make these the wives of the deacons.  Secondly if one makes "women" attached only to deacons, it would not be understandable why only the deacon's wives would have to have qualifications and elder's wives would not.

I believe that the most consistent understand of "women" in 1 Tim. 3:11 is that Paul is specifically giving the same qualifications to women who desire to be elders or deacons.  He wouldn't even need to mention women in the text for the entire set of qualifications to refer to women except for the phrase "husband of one wife".  Thus the term "likewise" will connect the qualifications of women to both deacons and elders.

Some will say that since Phoebe was a woman deacon, then the "likewise" can connect women to deacons but they refuse to allow women also to be qualified to elders saying that they see the women only attached to deacons.  But Paul has already qualified in 1 Timothy 3:1 that "anyone" can desire to the work of an overseer.  If "anyone" can desire this work, and Paul does not say "any male may desire the work", then we should be able to understand that "women likewise" connects the qualifications of overseer/elder and deacon with women.

The biggest problem for complementarians has been trying to explain how women can be deacons yet they cannot be elders when the term "husband of one wife" is used for both.  I have yet to hear any clear answer to this problem for the complementarian camp.

My answer would be that the issue of polygamy which apparently was a problem in the early church caused Paul to specifically set up a qualification that would not allow those who are polygamists to act in any kind of service to the church that would set them up as leaders to follow their example.  While they could be part of the body of Christians and they were not required to divorce all their wives but one to be baptized, they were not allowed to be set up as examples to the flock.  Women didn't have that problem as there was no legal precedent that allowed women to have more than one husband, but their inclusion in the list "women likewise" showed that Paul's setting up qualifications was not meant to exclude women, but only to exclude polygamists.

Is this helpful?</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Hi Craig and welcome to my blog!</p>
<p>1 Timothy 3:11 fits in really well with 1 Timothy 3:1 where Paul states that &#8220;anyone&#8221; can desire the work of an overseer.  The issue of &#8220;husband of one wife&#8221; is specifically set up to refer to men&#8217;s qualifications in both the overseer (elder) and deacon since only men were allowed to be polygamists but in case anyone would think this would qualify only men to do he work of an elder or deacon Paul specifically mentions women in verse 11.  Some will attach women only to deacons by saying that these women are the deacon&#8217;s wives but this seems highly unlikely.  First of all there is no possessive form for women that would make these the wives of the deacons.  Secondly if one makes &#8220;women&#8221; attached only to deacons, it would not be understandable why only the deacon&#8217;s wives would have to have qualifications and elder&#8217;s wives would not.</p>
<p>I believe that the most consistent understand of &#8220;women&#8221; in 1 Tim. 3:11 is that Paul is specifically giving the same qualifications to women who desire to be elders or deacons.  He wouldn&#8217;t even need to mention women in the text for the entire set of qualifications to refer to women except for the phrase &#8220;husband of one wife&#8221;.  Thus the term &#8220;likewise&#8221; will connect the qualifications of women to both deacons and elders.</p>
<p>Some will say that since Phoebe was a woman deacon, then the &#8220;likewise&#8221; can connect women to deacons but they refuse to allow women also to be qualified to elders saying that they see the women only attached to deacons.  But Paul has already qualified in 1 Timothy 3:1 that &#8220;anyone&#8221; can desire to the work of an overseer.  If &#8220;anyone&#8221; can desire this work, and Paul does not say &#8220;any male may desire the work&#8221;, then we should be able to understand that &#8220;women likewise&#8221; connects the qualifications of overseer/elder and deacon with women.</p>
<p>The biggest problem for complementarians has been trying to explain how women can be deacons yet they cannot be elders when the term &#8220;husband of one wife&#8221; is used for both.  I have yet to hear any clear answer to this problem for the complementarian camp.</p>
<p>My answer would be that the issue of polygamy which apparently was a problem in the early church caused Paul to specifically set up a qualification that would not allow those who are polygamists to act in any kind of service to the church that would set them up as leaders to follow their example.  While they could be part of the body of Christians and they were not required to divorce all their wives but one to be baptized, they were not allowed to be set up as examples to the flock.  Women didn&#8217;t have that problem as there was no legal precedent that allowed women to have more than one husband, but their inclusion in the list &#8220;women likewise&#8221; showed that Paul&#8217;s setting up qualifications was not meant to exclude women, but only to exclude polygamists.</p>
<p>Is this helpful?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Craig</title>
		<link>http://strivetoenter.com/wim/2007/01/28/does-%e2%80%9chusband-of-one-wife%e2%80%9d-disqualify-women-from-being-a-pastor/comment-page-1/#comment-10490</link>
		<dc:creator>Craig</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 03 Mar 2010 10:10:31 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://strivetoenter.com/wim/2007/01/28/does-%e2%80%9chusband-of-one-wife%e2%80%9d-disqualify-women-from-being-a-pastor/#comment-10490</guid>
		<description>I was wondering if anyone has any comments on 1 Timothy 3:11 and its relationship to this topic. When Paul says "Women, likewise...." it would seem that he has had men in mind in his previous comments in verses 1-10 and now turns to the women.
 He says "The overseer must be....." vs 1-7
"Deacons likewise....." vs 8-10
"Women likewise....." vs 11
I have found this site very helpful in thinking through these issues but I haven't found any comments yet on this verse.
Thank you
Craig</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I was wondering if anyone has any comments on 1 Timothy 3:11 and its relationship to this topic. When Paul says &#8220;Women, likewise&#8230;.&#8221; it would seem that he has had men in mind in his previous comments in verses 1-10 and now turns to the women.<br />
 He says &#8220;The overseer must be&#8230;..&#8221; vs 1-7<br />
&#8220;Deacons likewise&#8230;..&#8221; vs 8-10<br />
&#8220;Women likewise&#8230;..&#8221; vs 11<br />
I have found this site very helpful in thinking through these issues but I haven&#8217;t found any comments yet on this verse.<br />
Thank you<br />
Craig</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: 1Timothy2 Challenge - Page 12 - Christian Forums</title>
		<link>http://strivetoenter.com/wim/2007/01/28/does-%e2%80%9chusband-of-one-wife%e2%80%9d-disqualify-women-from-being-a-pastor/comment-page-1/#comment-6622</link>
		<dc:creator>1Timothy2 Challenge - Page 12 - Christian Forums</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 23 Jun 2009 02:58:52 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://strivetoenter.com/wim/2007/01/28/does-%e2%80%9chusband-of-one-wife%e2%80%9d-disqualify-women-from-being-a-pastor/#comment-6622</guid>
		<description>[...] Originally Posted by CmRoddy   Bump for anyone interested...   CmRoddy, you might be interested to read here:     2. The Greek is written in such a way that allows both men and women to aspire to being a Pastor/Elder/Overseer.  1 Timothy 3:1 says: Trustworthy [is] the word: If anyone aspires to [the] position of overseer [Gr. episkope], he desires a good work. (Analytical-Literal Translation) The Greek word used is NOT ?aner? which would mean ?If any male aspires?? Instead of the Greek word for males, the generic Greek word for?anyone? is used which is ?tis?. ?Tis? means men or women and has the exact same Greek grammatical structure as ?anyone? in John 6:51 and every other passage concerning salvation.  John 6:51 ?I am the living bread that came down out of heaven; if anyone eats of this bread, he will live forever?  All of the salvation verses are just like 1 Timothy 3:1 and they are singular masculine in the Greek grammar but all of them use the generic Greek wording which includes men and women. If we dispute that the Greek can include men and women because the grammar is singular masculine, then we must also be consistent and disallow women to be saved since all of the salvation passages are written in the same way as 1 Timothy 3:1 with generic words having a singular masculine tense in the Greek.     Women In Ministry Blog Archive Does ?husband of one wife? disqualify women from being a Pastor? [...]</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[...] Originally Posted by CmRoddy   Bump for anyone interested&#8230;   CmRoddy, you might be interested to read here:     2. The Greek is written in such a way that allows both men and women to aspire to being a Pastor/Elder/Overseer.  1 Timothy 3:1 says: Trustworthy [is] the word: If anyone aspires to [the] position of overseer [Gr. episkope], he desires a good work. (Analytical-Literal Translation) The Greek word used is NOT ?aner? which would mean ?If any male aspires?? Instead of the Greek word for males, the generic Greek word for?anyone? is used which is ?tis?. ?Tis? means men or women and has the exact same Greek grammatical structure as ?anyone? in John 6:51 and every other passage concerning salvation.  John 6:51 ?I am the living bread that came down out of heaven; if anyone eats of this bread, he will live forever?  All of the salvation verses are just like 1 Timothy 3:1 and they are singular masculine in the Greek grammar but all of them use the generic Greek wording which includes men and women. If we dispute that the Greek can include men and women because the grammar is singular masculine, then we must also be consistent and disallow women to be saved since all of the salvation passages are written in the same way as 1 Timothy 3:1 with generic words having a singular masculine tense in the Greek.     Women In Ministry Blog Archive Does ?husband of one wife? disqualify women from being a Pastor? [...]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Dr. James Willingham</title>
		<link>http://strivetoenter.com/wim/2007/01/28/does-%e2%80%9chusband-of-one-wife%e2%80%9d-disqualify-women-from-being-a-pastor/comment-page-1/#comment-6335</link>
		<dc:creator>Dr. James Willingham</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 23 May 2009 03:03:41 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://strivetoenter.com/wim/2007/01/28/does-%e2%80%9chusband-of-one-wife%e2%80%9d-disqualify-women-from-being-a-pastor/#comment-6335</guid>
		<description>I would add that my research suggests that the term eldress actually fits the aged women in I Tim.5:2 so consequently Paul could actually being speaking about women ministers.  And the term for eldresses is actully used a number of times in the pastorals. It was this along with Matthew Poole's commnt about exceptions to I Tim 2 that gave me the idea of how Sandy Creek Baptist Church coul have hqd eldresses in the 1700s in a period when they would not dream of disobeying the scripture.  The fact that the Separate Baptists were actually Puritan Congregationalists who had become Baptists in ecclesiology and the ordinance of baptism ad who probably were among the high level puritants who took notes on sermons and discussed every point in detail.  IT IS VERY LIKELY, ALL THINGS CONSIDERED, THAT SOME ONE IN THE GROUP KNEW GREEK.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I would add that my research suggests that the term eldress actually fits the aged women in I Tim.5:2 so consequently Paul could actually being speaking about women ministers.  And the term for eldresses is actully used a number of times in the pastorals. It was this along with Matthew Poole&#8217;s commnt about exceptions to I Tim 2 that gave me the idea of how Sandy Creek Baptist Church coul have hqd eldresses in the 1700s in a period when they would not dream of disobeying the scripture.  The fact that the Separate Baptists were actually Puritan Congregationalists who had become Baptists in ecclesiology and the ordinance of baptism ad who probably were among the high level puritants who took notes on sermons and discussed every point in detail.  IT IS VERY LIKELY, ALL THINGS CONSIDERED, THAT SOME ONE IN THE GROUP KNEW GREEK.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Truthseeker</title>
		<link>http://strivetoenter.com/wim/2007/01/28/does-%e2%80%9chusband-of-one-wife%e2%80%9d-disqualify-women-from-being-a-pastor/comment-page-1/#comment-3183</link>
		<dc:creator>Truthseeker</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 22 Apr 2008 20:56:13 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://strivetoenter.com/wim/2007/01/28/does-%e2%80%9chusband-of-one-wife%e2%80%9d-disqualify-women-from-being-a-pastor/#comment-3183</guid>
		<description>I just read in David Instone-Brewer's book, Divorce and Remarriage in the Church, on page 187, that "In New Testament times, those phrases (man of one woman or woman of one man-I Tim. 3:2, and I Tim. 5:9) meant someone who was faithful."  He footnotes with a reference stating that the Greek 'monandros' or its Latin equivalent 'univera' is common on funeral inscriptions in praise of someone who was faithful to her husband.  References Craig Keener, ...And Marries Another (Peabody, Mass.; Hendrickson, 1991, pp. 92-93.)</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I just read in David Instone-Brewer&#8217;s book, Divorce and Remarriage in the Church, on page 187, that &#8220;In New Testament times, those phrases (man of one woman or woman of one man-I Tim. 3:2, and I Tim. 5:9) meant someone who was faithful.&#8221;  He footnotes with a reference stating that the Greek &#8216;monandros&#8217; or its Latin equivalent &#8216;univera&#8217; is common on funeral inscriptions in praise of someone who was faithful to her husband.  References Craig Keener, &#8230;And Marries Another (Peabody, Mass.; Hendrickson, 1991, pp. 92-93.)</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Cheryl</title>
		<link>http://strivetoenter.com/wim/2007/01/28/does-%e2%80%9chusband-of-one-wife%e2%80%9d-disqualify-women-from-being-a-pastor/comment-page-1/#comment-2257</link>
		<dc:creator>Cheryl</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 29 Jan 2008 04:02:05 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://strivetoenter.com/wim/2007/01/28/does-%e2%80%9chusband-of-one-wife%e2%80%9d-disqualify-women-from-being-a-pastor/#comment-2257</guid>
		<description>Dennis #13,

Polygamy was allowed in the Jewish tradition and we know that there were Jews in Corinth because their law was appealed to in 1 Cor. 14:34-35.  The oral law of the Jews allowed for polygamy.  Jeb 65a says A man may marry as many wives as he pleases.  Another on of the rabbis limited the number to four (Jeb 44a)  The one agreement that all the Rabbis had was that there was to be no polygamy for the High Priest (Joma 13a).  Everyman's Talmud by Abraham Cohen says "While there can be no doubt that among the masses polygamy was practiced, there is no record of any Rabbi having resorted to it."</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Dennis #13,</p>
<p>Polygamy was allowed in the Jewish tradition and we know that there were Jews in Corinth because their law was appealed to in 1 Cor. 14:34-35.  The oral law of the Jews allowed for polygamy.  Jeb 65a says A man may marry as many wives as he pleases.  Another on of the rabbis limited the number to four (Jeb 44a)  The one agreement that all the Rabbis had was that there was to be no polygamy for the High Priest (Joma 13a).  Everyman&#8217;s Talmud by Abraham Cohen says &#8220;While there can be no doubt that among the masses polygamy was practiced, there is no record of any Rabbi having resorted to it.&#8221;</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Cheryl</title>
		<link>http://strivetoenter.com/wim/2007/01/28/does-%e2%80%9chusband-of-one-wife%e2%80%9d-disqualify-women-from-being-a-pastor/comment-page-1/#comment-2078</link>
		<dc:creator>Cheryl</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 01 Jan 2008 07:32:15 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://strivetoenter.com/wim/2007/01/28/does-%e2%80%9chusband-of-one-wife%e2%80%9d-disqualify-women-from-being-a-pastor/#comment-2078</guid>
		<description>Michael,
There is no restriction on women regarding if they are not the only wife of their husband.  Hanna was blessed by God in giving birth to Samuel and she was the barren wife of a man who had another wife.  In those days a woman had no choice.  If a man desired to take another wife he did not consult with her or get her permission.  He did as he pleased.  She could not divorce him because he took another wife.  Therefore a wife who had a husband who had multiple wives was not guilty of having being immoral.  Paul did not have a restriction on her in this regard.  I would think it doubtful that such a woman would be in a place of seeking servanthood in the church by overseeing the flock, yet it certainly could still be possible.  The rule would be that if scripture does not forbid someone from serving the body of Christ, then they should be allowed.  Paul did not forbid Gentiles from being overseers even though the early church originally only had Jewish leadership.  Since Gentiles were not forbidden to serve the congregation, then they should be allowed.  The same would go for women who were married to polygamists.  It is only the men who were the ones who themselves took on the additional wives who were held responsible and kept from being the spiritual examples to the congregation.

That is my two cents anyway :)</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Michael,<br />
There is no restriction on women regarding if they are not the only wife of their husband.  Hanna was blessed by God in giving birth to Samuel and she was the barren wife of a man who had another wife.  In those days a woman had no choice.  If a man desired to take another wife he did not consult with her or get her permission.  He did as he pleased.  She could not divorce him because he took another wife.  Therefore a wife who had a husband who had multiple wives was not guilty of having being immoral.  Paul did not have a restriction on her in this regard.  I would think it doubtful that such a woman would be in a place of seeking servanthood in the church by overseeing the flock, yet it certainly could still be possible.  The rule would be that if scripture does not forbid someone from serving the body of Christ, then they should be allowed.  Paul did not forbid Gentiles from being overseers even though the early church originally only had Jewish leadership.  Since Gentiles were not forbidden to serve the congregation, then they should be allowed.  The same would go for women who were married to polygamists.  It is only the men who were the ones who themselves took on the additional wives who were held responsible and kept from being the spiritual examples to the congregation.</p>
<p>That is my two cents anyway <img src='http://strivetoenter.com/wim/wp-includes/images/smilies/icon_smile.gif' alt=':)' class='wp-smiley' /> </p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Michael Terran</title>
		<link>http://strivetoenter.com/wim/2007/01/28/does-%e2%80%9chusband-of-one-wife%e2%80%9d-disqualify-women-from-being-a-pastor/comment-page-1/#comment-2076</link>
		<dc:creator>Michael Terran</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 01 Jan 2008 04:49:12 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://strivetoenter.com/wim/2007/01/28/does-%e2%80%9chusband-of-one-wife%e2%80%9d-disqualify-women-from-being-a-pastor/#comment-2076</guid>
		<description>Cheryl Quote

"A polygamist could be blameless if he came to Christ after he was already a polygamist, but Paul ruled that such a one would not be a good spiritual example. He could be a Christian, but not a leader" 


Now the man could not be a leader. But what about the women (The Wifes)? No right, because there not the only wife? So the Husband and His Wifes could not be in leadership right? I guess my question is about the wifes (The Women). The women/wifes too were included in this as well, right? If she is not the "only" wife then she couldn't be a leader.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Cheryl Quote</p>
<p>&#8220;A polygamist could be blameless if he came to Christ after he was already a polygamist, but Paul ruled that such a one would not be a good spiritual example. He could be a Christian, but not a leader&#8221; </p>
<p>Now the man could not be a leader. But what about the women (The Wifes)? No right, because there not the only wife? So the Husband and His Wifes could not be in leadership right? I guess my question is about the wifes (The Women). The women/wifes too were included in this as well, right? If she is not the &#8220;only&#8221; wife then she couldn&#8217;t be a leader.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Cheryl</title>
		<link>http://strivetoenter.com/wim/2007/01/28/does-%e2%80%9chusband-of-one-wife%e2%80%9d-disqualify-women-from-being-a-pastor/comment-page-1/#comment-1788</link>
		<dc:creator>Cheryl</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 30 Oct 2007 18:45:24 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://strivetoenter.com/wim/2007/01/28/does-%e2%80%9chusband-of-one-wife%e2%80%9d-disqualify-women-from-being-a-pastor/#comment-1788</guid>
		<description>Dennis,
I have access to the books now, it is just a matter of finding them and finding the references.  It will take some time because of what is on my plate right now, but I think that this would be very helpful to post here.  The historical references are a very important consideration.  I can't tell you exactly when I will get the references up but if you have chosen to be notified about the addition of comments, then you will get an email.  It probably would be good to do a specific blog article on the evidence as well.  Right now I am in heavy research project which will be part of a DVD teaching on the Trinity so I will squeeze in what I can.

Blessings!
Cheryl</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Dennis,<br />
I have access to the books now, it is just a matter of finding them and finding the references.  It will take some time because of what is on my plate right now, but I think that this would be very helpful to post here.  The historical references are a very important consideration.  I can&#8217;t tell you exactly when I will get the references up but if you have chosen to be notified about the addition of comments, then you will get an email.  It probably would be good to do a specific blog article on the evidence as well.  Right now I am in heavy research project which will be part of a DVD teaching on the Trinity so I will squeeze in what I can.</p>
<p>Blessings!<br />
Cheryl</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Dennis Farrell</title>
		<link>http://strivetoenter.com/wim/2007/01/28/does-%e2%80%9chusband-of-one-wife%e2%80%9d-disqualify-women-from-being-a-pastor/comment-page-1/#comment-1779</link>
		<dc:creator>Dennis Farrell</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 30 Oct 2007 16:32:56 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://strivetoenter.com/wim/2007/01/28/does-%e2%80%9chusband-of-one-wife%e2%80%9d-disqualify-women-from-being-a-pastor/#comment-1779</guid>
		<description>Cheryl,
Thank you for the insight, clarity and revelation you bring.  Re: your response (#7 above) to David's questions "Do you have historical resources that show polygamy was practiced throughout the Roman Empire or in Ephesus specifically?" and " What are the documents that show the allowance of polygamy in the Jewish community?";  you'd stated your research books w/ the references weren't available to you at that time.   I also wondered David's questions, so I wanted to find out if your situation or their availability has changed enough to find the references in question.  Again, thank you and God bless you.
Den</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Cheryl,<br />
Thank you for the insight, clarity and revelation you bring.  Re: your response (#7 above) to David&#8217;s questions &#8220;Do you have historical resources that show polygamy was practiced throughout the Roman Empire or in Ephesus specifically?&#8221; and &#8221; What are the documents that show the allowance of polygamy in the Jewish community?&#8221;;  you&#8217;d stated your research books w/ the references weren&#8217;t available to you at that time.   I also wondered David&#8217;s questions, so I wanted to find out if your situation or their availability has changed enough to find the references in question.  Again, thank you and God bless you.<br />
Den</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Don Johnson</title>
		<link>http://strivetoenter.com/wim/2007/01/28/does-%e2%80%9chusband-of-one-wife%e2%80%9d-disqualify-women-from-being-a-pastor/comment-page-1/#comment-923</link>
		<dc:creator>Don Johnson</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 26 Aug 2007 22:46:55 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://strivetoenter.com/wim/2007/01/28/does-%e2%80%9chusband-of-one-wife%e2%80%9d-disqualify-women-from-being-a-pastor/#comment-923</guid>
		<description>The point is that the term "one-woman man" was a "buzz phrase" that meant someone who was faithful to their one spouse (assuming they had one).  This is why it can apply to both men and women when found on a tombstone in Ephesus.

Pagan women were expected to be faithful, but pagan men were not.

The reverse phrase "one-man woman" is also in 1 Tim in discussing widows.  We know women could not be polygamous in any Roman controlled area.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>The point is that the term &#8220;one-woman man&#8221; was a &#8220;buzz phrase&#8221; that meant someone who was faithful to their one spouse (assuming they had one).  This is why it can apply to both men and women when found on a tombstone in Ephesus.</p>
<p>Pagan women were expected to be faithful, but pagan men were not.</p>
<p>The reverse phrase &#8220;one-man woman&#8221; is also in 1 Tim in discussing widows.  We know women could not be polygamous in any Roman controlled area.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
