End Time Army of Women Preachers Psalms 68:11

[TK Burk]

Originally Posted by good samaritan

I never realized that Paul could have been married prior to his conversion. Wouldn't that mean he would be abandoning his responsibility to his wife. Unless there are some details such as: if the unbelieving wanted to depart and he let them depart. I think that it is easier to simply explain that Paul was unwed. If conversion allows us to leave our partner in marriage, that doesn't sound right.

The issue of Paul being married is that it aligns him to what was required to be a Pharisee and a member of the Sanhedrin. Paul does not mention his wife, however, neither does Peter, but we know Peter was married (see Mat 8:14).

Concerning Paul "abandoning his responsibility to his wife," we would have to know where she was or what happened to her to know if that were true. But because of his faithfulness to follow Christ, I am sure Paul did not abandon her. She probably did not travel with Paul while he was out persecuting the Church as Saul, therefore she was left at home. Being married to a pious Pharisee, she was no doubt a devote Jew herself. Maybe she abandoned him when he converted to being a believer in Jesus? Maybe she died sometime after they were married? We do not know, but we do know that Paul was to have a wife if he were to be a respected Pharisee.

[Sister Alvear]

Brother Burk, Why would Paul have seemed to indicate he was not married in 1 Cor. 7:1-7? Yet he also said in 1 Corinthians 9:5, "Don't we have the right to take a believing wife along with us, as do the other apostles and the Lord's brothers and Cephas?" (Peter)

[Scott Pitta]

The NT does not say anything about the marital status of Paul. Neither do I.

[Scott Pitta]

My Greek professor was also an academic dean. Generations of Pentecostal preachers read Greek due to sitting in her classes.

Ministers were under her authority as dean. She taught Greek as well as ed psych and other classes.

Yes, women teachers are vital to the church.

How about that for a testimony ??

[mfblume]

Originally Posted by Scott Pitta

My Greek professor was also an academic dean. Generations of Pentecostal preachers read Greek due to sitting in her classes.

Ministers were under her authority as dean. She taught Greek as well as ed psych and other classes.

Yes, women teachers are vital to the church.

How about that for a testimony ??

Learning Greek is not learning spiritual lessons about truth.

[Sister Alvear]

Sister Mary Williams was also a great Bible teacher. She wrote literature for the UPC for many years and taught at Tulsa Bible college. She also wrote books on the life of Paul and the life of Jesus to name a couple.

[Sister Alvear]

I love Sister Williams so much. Growing up I can remember she would tell me, Let's learn one verse in every chapter of Romans...I would study hoping to win our little game....she probably knew all the verses and chapters she challenged me to learn! But her little game worked!

You would probably have to be my age or older to remember the William's. They were true people.

[mfblume]

We have one who said he did not know what Paul meant in comparing women to Eve who was a basis for women not teaching. Any other opinions from those who feel women should teach ? I'm not here to condemn. Just asking how you all deal with Paul's words.

[Steve Epley]

Originally Posted by Sister Alvear

Sister Mary Williams was also a great Bible teacher. She wrote literature for the UPC for many years and taught at Tulsa Bible college. She also wrote books on the life of Paul and the life of Jesus to name a couple.

Mother Mary Williams was a legend. Wish I had those books I read them years ago but never owned them. She was brilliant.

[Evang.Benincasa]

Originally Posted by good samaritan

I never realized that Paul could have been married prior to his conversion. Wouldn't that mean he would be abandoning his responsibility to his wife. Unless there are some details such as: if the unbelieving wanted to depart and he let them depart. I think that it is easier to simply explain that Paul was unwed. If conversion allows us to leave our partner in marriage, that doesn't sound right.

Philippians 3:5

Circumcised the eighth day, of the stock of Israel, of the tribe of Benjamin, an Hebrew of the Hebrews; as touching the law, a Pharisee; Concerning zeal, persecuting the church; touching the righteousness which is in the law, blameless.


The Apostle Paul would have more than likely have been married as was the custom of his sect and culture, Paul was a Pharisee, a Hebrew of "Hebrews." A Hebrew of Hebrews is no light claim, and Paul makes sure to allow everyone to know that he was the head of the class. Also when we see him before Agrippa in Acts 26:9-10 make mention of him casting a vote against the new sects of Christians. This strongly indicates that Paul even as young as he was (maybe due to his brilliance in scripture) part of the council of the Sanhedrin.

So, if of the Sanhedrin, he had to be at the time of he election to the council. It looks as if some here are forgetting it was Paul in 1 Corinthians 7:15, speaking of abandonment of an unbelieving spouse, so when Paul admonishes widows and virgins to stay as he is 1 Corinthians 7:8 it is just assumption that the Apostle was NEVER married.

Yet, if he was a Hebrew, of Hebrews and part of the council of voting with lots in the Sanhedrin, than he had to be married. What we can ascertain from the scriptures is only that he was not married during the time of his writings, and that his wife abandoned him due to his conversion to what she would of thought was a heretical cult based on idolatry (as Paul himself once believed) and since Christians in the eyes of the early Judeans were worthy of death (as Paul once also believed) then his wife would of been of the same persuasion.

Her leaving Paul as in 1 Corinthians 7:15, would of been easily granted by any beth din. Paul would of been dead to her. Or she could of passed away by the time of Paul's writings and Paul a widow. Yet, I hold to the previous explanation of his single staus. Yet, for all those who say Paul was NEVER married we have no verse saying that Paul was NEVER married, just a reference in 1 Corinthians 7:8, which DOESN'T say the Apostle was never married. Whether you are of the view that he was part of the vote within the Sanhedrin, or a Hebrew of Hebrews, it is highly likely Paul was married like any good religious Judean of his time. To say he was never married has even less evidence, all we can say for absolute certainty the Apostle Paul wasn't married during the writings of his epistles.

Ellicott's Commentary for English Readers

(10) Many of the saints did I shut up in prison.—The use of the term as applied to the believers in Christ (see Note on Acts 9:13) is remarkable as an example of courage. In the presence of Agrippa, St. Paul does not shrink from speaking of them as the “holy ones” of God’s people Israel—what the Chasidim, or “devout ones” (the “Assideans” of 1 Maccabees 7:13; 2 Maccabees 14:6) had been in an earlier generation.
When they were put to death.—The history of the Acts records only one instance. Were there other martyrdoms besides that of Stephen, of which we know nothing? or does the Apostle speak in general terms of that single act? On the whole, the former seems the more probable alternative. He was breathing an atmosphere of “slaughter” (Acts 9:1). On this view, the language of Hebrews 12:4, “ye have not yet resisted unto blood,” must be referred to the sufferings of a later time, or. more probably, of a different region. In 1st Thessalonians 2:15, James 5:10, we have, perhaps, traces of widely extended sufferings.

I gave my voice against them.—Better, gave my vote. The words show that St. Paul, though a “young man” (see Note on Acts 7:58), must have been a member either of the Sanhedrin itself or of some tribunal with delegated authority.


Bengel's Gnomen

Acts 26:10. Τῶν ἁγίων, of the saints) So he terms the Christians, in a manner appropriate to the beginning of his speech, using a term transferred to them from the Jews.—ἐγὼ, I) Emphasis.—τὴν) The article signifies that Paul could not have done this without the power (the authority); and that the chief priests gave a general power (authority) to all who wished to persecute.—κατήνεγκα ψῆφον) A rare phrase. Paul added his vote, since he thought what was done altogether right.

Pulpit Commentary

Verse 10. - And this for which thing, A.V.; I both shut up for did I shut up, A.V. (with a change of order); prisons for prison, A.V.; vote for voice, A.V. I... shut up. The ἐγώ is emphatic. The verb κατακλείω, peculiar to St. Luke (see Luke 3:20) is much used by medical writers. Were put to death; ἀναιρουμένων, a word frequent in St. Luke's writings, and much used in medical works, as well as ἀναίρεσις (Acts 8:1). The phrase καταφέρειν ψῆφον is unusual; φέρειν ψῆφον is the more common phrase, both in Josephus and in classical writers. I gave my vote, etc. Not, as Meyer and others take it, "I assented to it, at the moment of their being killed," equivalent to συνευδοκῶν of Acts 22:20; but rather," when the Christians were being punished with death, I was one of those who in the Sanhedrim voted for their death."