Two Extremes: The Single vs. The Married

Status
Not open for further replies.

Petra

Puritan Board Freshman
1 Corinthians 12:14-20

(14 For the body does not consist of one member but of many. 15 If the foot should say, "Because I am not a hand, I do not belong to the body," that would not make it any less a part of the body. 16 And if the ear should say, "Because I am not an eye, I do not belong to the body," that would not make it any less a part of the body. 17 If the whole body were an eye, where would be the sense of hearing? If the whole body were an ear, where would be the sense of smell? 18 But as it is, God arranged the members in the body, each one of them, as he chose. 19 If all were a single member, where would the body be? 20 As it is, there are many parts, yet one body.)

So the original meaning is a reflection upon these examples in the previous verse, which was a very big deal back then before the cultural paradigm shift would later occur in Christianity.

(13 For in one Spirit we were all baptized into one bodyJews or Greeks, slaves or freeand all were made to drink of one Spirit.)

However, there are two extremes and I submit that both Protestants and Catholics err. The Orthodox allow married priests, but a bishop must be celibate.

Now there is nothing unique about the value of the family in every culture on God's planet earth. It is not unique to Christianity. It is common via general revelation to all. It doesn't make us better Christians to be married or single, the way I see it. And even good things like the family and money can become idols.

To remain celibate, Paul argues, is to be able to serve the Lord better. I don't think most Protestants believe this. I talk to many of them. They act as though the single youth minister is more dangerous than the married one, for instance. This is not true in my experience. I just found out that a then married youth minister divorced his wife for a young adult that was in his youth ministry. You have married pastors getting busted with child p0rn on their computers and phones.
You have married pastors, elders, and deacons having affairs inside of the church.

Possibly it is so because the more intercourse you get, the flesh cries out for more? Even married regenerate men may m-bate more than some celibate regenerate men. But the stereotype is false. Marriage is said to be apart of our sanctification (1 Corinthians 7).

But...
1 Corinthians 7:8

(8 To the unmarried and the widows I say that (J)it is good for them to remain single, as I am. 9 But if they cannot exercise self-control, they should marry. For it is better to marry than to burn with passion.)

But the married folks assumed that all singles do burn as they did and thus had sex with their future wife. They felt responsibly guilty and got married. Then they all told everyone and their children that they all waited until marriage.

1 Corinthians 7:28-29

(28 But if you do marry, you have not sinned, and if a betrothed woman marries, she has not sinned. Yet those who marry will have worldly troubles, and I would spare you that. 29 This is what I mean, brothers: the appointed time has grown very short. From now on, let those who have wives live as though they had none,)

More trouble sayeth Pauleth...

But this is what we often do. We put singles into a singles department over there with their Sunday school. That way they can get married and be like us in our image.

No single pastors or elders, or deacons?

We would have to basically get rid of most of the authors of the entire Bible. The Apostle Paul wrote close to 2/3 of the New Testament. Then you have the Gospel authors...then you have most of the prophets...then you most of the priestly editors writing the history in the books of history in the Torah.

So basically instead of letting the older women teach the younger women and the same with old men teaching younger men in Sunday school, we have spliced and divided the kingdom of God falsely.

Most of the authors that God breathed through were single. But they wouldn't be allowed to teach us or be truly with us on Sunday morning. Selah.
 
I would highly recommend the book Holy Sexuality and the Gospel by Christopher Yuan. While he is on whole addressing a specific issue of homosexuality from a pastoral perspective, I actually think one of the strengths of the book is that he carefully, pastorally establishes the identity of Christians on the basis of their unity to Christ and the Gospel narrative, and does a great job of exploring singleness as a "lost" emphasis in the church today and an area of practical need to address in the face of current identity crisis in our culture. He does a really good job in approaching the issue and really laying out how we can encourage singles in the church, and how single people serve the church. After all, everyone is single at some point in their life, and for some a majority of it, and much of the church is single overall (to include children, single and widowed adults). I do believe that we have overcorrected in the church, as it were, to make singleness a burdensome thing when it ought not to be, and in fact could be one of the ways in which the church hinders her own hands and feet. So many churches need help "behind the scenes" as it were to function and grow and be nurtured, but it is often that "young and single" group that is most primed to give, but is often most isolated from the church. Yuan approaches how we might encourage others in the state of singleness, and pastorally challenges us to think of how our emphasis (or lack thereof) of singleness can impact how we can practically minister to people who experience homosexual attraction. Again, I think it is a worthwhile read for its gospel-centered approach and pastoral and practical tone even outside of that issue, especially for this conversation.
 
That’s fine. But until we change our ecclesiology, it ain’t happening.
the anointing flows from the top as the Psalm declares.

King Herod had probably two or three main wives with eight other wives, for instance.

Paul’s point in his letter to Timothy was for elders and deacons to not be polygamists.
not sure if Timothy ever married. Does anyone know?
 
Why I think single elders/pastors may be needed to bring balance and this isn’t the only reason.

Few married pastors can preach the independent indicative commands that the Apostle lays out there in Ephesians chapter 5. It’s just not romantic at all for a husband or married pastor to say that to his wife. They meet at couples dinners and is inclined to become (even with knowledge of it) of who can be the most loving romantic husband as leader of the home. That’s one side of the coin. I get it.

But God uses single Paul because it’s apart of the balance, for the lack of a better word.
That text in Ephesians 5 and the other in Colossians 3 are just glossed over.
Or...
They will say that if you love your wife as Christ loved the church, then she will submit to you. They make it thus a conditional clause. It isn’t written that way in Ephesians 5.

I’ll spin it around. If wives submit to their husbands, then they will love their wives as Christ loved the church....

But no one ever does that last one.

Not to mention that this is akin to loving your enemies, in the sense that only in the mind of the Spirit can anyone.
For no one by nature or even in perfection love their wife as Christ loved the church.

Now those with more natural staying power In a marriage (paying for the light bills and such) aren’t as bothered as much by the apparent economic effects of no fault divorce hitting mostly lower income level families both in the church and outside of her.

Being against the prosperity gospel isn’t enough.

And wealthy men, mostly outside the church, aren’t worried about 25% of their net income being taken out by child support. They simply can just find a younger possible upgrade in their eyes....

These are the men that the majority of our elders are working around in the PCA and OPC. It’s contagious.
 
I'll have to confess that I cannot discern the question or subject of the original post, either.

One thing I'll add, though, is what Paul was talking about in 1 Cor. 7 is directly related to current events of his time, not necessarily a general rule:

1 Corinthians 7:26 I suppose therefore that this is good for the present distress, I say, that it is good for a man so to be. (1 Cor. 7:26 KJV)
 
That’s fine. But until we change our ecclesiology, it ain’t happening.
the anointing flows from the top as the Psalm declares.
What are you driving at? What did "cemetery" teach you?

It was a brief stint at a seminary branch of Westminster. I was trying to show that I recognize both sides of the coin.

I’m driving at that God loves us enough to [not] leave us where we are at, including me.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
These are the men that the majority of our elders are working around in the PCA and OPC. It’s contagious.
[Moderation]

Josh, you are new. But your language is either sloppy or reckless. It looks like you are accusing the majority of elders in these churches as actually or desiring to divorce their wives for younger ones.

I'm going to close the thread and give you time to think about your presentation.
 
“I'll have to confess that I cannot discern the question or subject of the original post, either.

One thing I'll add, though, is what Paul was talking about in 1 Cor. 7 is directly related to current events of his time, not necessarily a general rule:

1 Corinthians 7:26 I suppose therefore that this is good for the present distress, I say, that it is good for a man so to be. (1 Cor. 7:26 KJV)”


Possibly as in this current age...this time...these last days..

Those may be applied to the new age of Jesus’ reign. It’s an already not yet reign. Age and day or times...could be synonymous.

Also, from Romans chapter 8:

“For I consider the sufferings OF THIS PRESENT TIME not worthy to be compared to the glory that shall be revealed in us.”

How should we interpret this?
 
Last edited:
"These are the men that the majority of our elders are working around in the PCA and OPC. It’s contagious."

I retract this statement above. I did not intend to shed a negative light upon our chosen by God elders. I write too quickly at times. I love our denomination. I have received the correction as from the Lord. That is why I ask for all of you to consider forgiving me. I’ll not make the same mistake again.
 
Last edited:
Every church library needs to buy this book.


It’s less than $11 right now and addresses the exegesis of the Ephesians 5 marriage commands, for instance. It’s a pretty big book for $11 with a lot of insight.

I may not hold to everything Gudem does. But I still read (single) Augustine, even though he isn’t completely Presbyterian either. Grudem and Augustine are both dp guys. Enough said.
 
“I'll have to confess that I cannot discern the question or subject of the original post, either.

One thing I'll add, though, is what Paul was talking about in 1 Cor. 7 is directly related to current events of his time, not necessarily a general rule:

1 Corinthians 7:26 I suppose therefore that this is good for the present distress, I say, that it is good for a man so to be. (1 Cor. 7:26 KJV)”


Possibly as in this current age...this time...these last days..

Those may be applied to the new age of Jesus’ reign. It’s an already not yet reign. Age and day or times...could be synonymous.

Also, from Romans chapter 8:

“For I consider the sufferings OF THIS PRESENT TIME not worthy to be compared to the glory that shall be revealed in us.”

How should we interpret this?
Fair enough.
"These are the men that the majority of our elders are working around in the PCA and OPC. It’s contagious."

I retract this statement above. I did not intend to shed a negative light upon our chosen by God elders. I write too quickly at times. I love our denomination. I have received the correction as from the Lord. That is why I ask for all of you to consider forgiving me. I’ll not make the same mistake again.
Ok.
Every church library needs to buy this book.


It’s less than $11 right now and addresses the exegesis of the Ephesians 5 marriage commands, for instance. It’s a pretty big book for $11 with a lot of insight.

I may not hold to everything Gudem does. But I still read (single) Augustine, even though he isn’t completely Presbyterian either. Grudem and Augustine are both dp guys. Enough said.
The board by and large doesn't disagree, his EFS views not withstanding.

I don't mean to be rude but, I think we are all still wondering what is the point of this thread and the others? To quickly jot down whatever is on your mind?
 
"These are the men that the majority of our elders are working around in the PCA and OPC. It’s contagious."

I retract this statement above. I did not intend to shed a negative light upon our chosen by God elders. I write too quickly at times. I love our denomination. I have received the correction as from the Lord. That is why I ask for all of you to consider forgiving me. I’ll not make the same mistake again.

Josh, thank you for the retraction and clarification.

Now, for this thread to continue, I am asking you to come up with one topic sentence or question related to what you have posted.

This is how discussions can work here: define your topic and stay with it.
 
Here’s a question.

May a presbytery allow for an exception for a single minister to become a teaching elder/pastor?
 
Here’s a question.

May a presbytery allow for an exception for a single minister to become a teaching elder/pastor?
I don't know of a presbytery in the world that would require a man to be married before he can be ordained.
 
@Petra, let me make the matter clear: while I have known of a few ministers here and there who believe that men have to be married and/or have children to be qualified, as far as I know, no Presbyterian church has ever written such a principle into its constitution.

In the event that this rare and unusual conviction became adopted by enough men in a single presbytery to lead them to deny a man ordination on the basis of his single condition, the decision would probably be overturned by a higher court.
 
Maybe every married man below the upper middle class would appreciate a single male pastor?
 
No single pastors or elders, or deacons?
I'm in the small minority that think that the clear instructions of the scriptures should be taken literally, and that complex exegesis is only needed where things are less clear.

I'm also in the group that thinks that singles classes can be beneficial. On the other hand, I never fit well into the age-and-stage model, as my age and stage didn't match up very well.
 
while I have known of a few ministers here and there who believe that men have to be married and/or have children to be qualified, as far as I know, no Presbyterian church has ever written such a principle into its constitution.
Most of us would probably agree that the homosexual pastors in the PCA should NOT be married.
 
Women tend to compete with their friends. If there friends get a certain gift lavished upon them, they are more inclined to want it for themselves.

These are issues that have become a conflict of interest for married men to discuss, especially with the boss.
 
TylerRay said:
while I have known of a few ministers here and there who believe that men have to be married and/or have children to be qualified, as far as I know, no Presbyterian church has ever written such a principle into its constitution.
“Most of us would probably agree that the homosexual pastors in the PCA should NOT be married.”

I believe they should be defrocked. They should sit with the rest of us and listen.
 
They should definitely be under church discipline. I don’t care what Eve is whispering.
 
Anyway, it’s a strengths and weaknesses thing.
My dad has a small herd of cattle. I’ve noticed the heifers working together to put down another cow. It’s interesting.
Then you have to e heifer sniffers....
 
Last edited:
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top