was the apostle paul ever married ....?

Discussion in 'Other Christian Denominations' started by soninme, Sep 30, 2007.

  1. soninme

    soninme
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Sep 20, 2007
    Messages:
    107
    Likes Received:
    0
    I have looked into this many times to see whether paul was married or not , and all i can come up with is this .

    The Bible never says whether Paul was married or not. Some think that he was at one time based on what he 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?" If Paul was married at one time, his wife likely passed away considering he never mentions her in any of his writings. Paul declared that he had the gift of celibacy in 1 Corinthians 7:1-7
    Some believe that the Apostle Paul was married because history tells us that a member of the Sanhedrin was required to be married. However, Paul never stated that he was a member of the Sanhedrin. He definitely seemed to be on the path, "I was advancing in Judaism beyond many Jews of my own age and was extremely zealous for the traditions of my fathers" (Galatians 1:14). However, Paul might not have advanced that far before He converted to Christ. So, was the Apostle Paul married? It is possible that he was at one time, but again, the Bible does not specifically say. Any ideas on this guys .................?

    --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Do not be anxious about anything, but in everything, by prayer and petition, with thanksgiving, present your requests to God."

    Philippians 4:6:godisgood:
     
  2. Pete

    Pete
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Aug 31, 2002
    Messages:
    4,345
    Likes Received:
    0
    Was just about to mention 1 Cor 7:7-8, then re-read original post and saw it there....oops :) We are just not told about Paul, whether he was then wasn't, or just never was....should pick an easy one like Peter ;) :)
     
  3. steaver

    steaver
    Expand Collapse
    Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Aug 25, 2004
    Messages:
    9,005
    Likes Received:
    82
    It makes for interesting chit-chat i suppose, but it has no doctrinal implications for debate. Just doesn't matter to me I guess.

    God Bless! :thumbs:
     
  4. TCGreek

    TCGreek
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Sep 12, 2006
    Messages:
    7,373
    Likes Received:
    0
    When all is said and done, we are still left with conjectures. :thumbs:
     
  5. Link

    Link
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    May 30, 2004
    Messages:
    695
    Likes Received:
    0
    Those who argue for Paul take the verse that says that Paul 'gave his voice against' believers when he persecuted the church, or something along those lines. They say he voted for their execution, imprisonment, or whatever. They argue that he had to be married to be a judge.

    Remember, though, the the tradition recorded that judges had to be married was recorded by Maimoinedes 300 years after the fact. That's the one I've read in a few sources. Of course, there could be something specific in the Talmud about it as well, for all that's worth. Talmudic commentors could disagree.

    I would like to talk to an expert on this. If Paul were a young rabinnical student or 'graduate', and he had authority from the chief priests to bring Jewish Christians to trial, perhaps he served as a witness to their activities. Perhaps he gave his voice against them because he witnessed their participation in church meetings when he busted in while they were eating the Lord's Supper or talking about Christ.

    Others argue that to be recognized as a rabbi, one had to be married. Paul is not clear on whether he completed rabbincal training and whether Gamaliel had laid his hands on him. One might argue that in order to have enough clout to recieve letters from the chief priests, he would have had to have been recognized as a rabbi. I doubt that argument holds much water.

    Since Christ was called Rabbi, I suspect the popular definition in the first century could have been a bit looser than some of the formal rules we read about as well. Plus, there were plenty of preachers who had not undergone rabinnical training. In the midst of all this, Paul, if he were a zealous Pharisee, and Roman citizen, who was well connected, perhaps he could have gotten letters without getting married and being recognized as a rabbi.
     
  6. Pastor_Bob

    Pastor_Bob
    Expand Collapse
    Administrator
    Administrator

    Joined:
    Jul 15, 2002
    Messages:
    3,461
    Likes Received:
    45
    1Co 7:7 For I would that all men were even as I myself. But every man hath his proper gift of God, one after this manner, and another after that.
    8 I say therefore to the unmarried and widows, It is good for them if they abide even as I. (KJV)

    It is clear that Paul was unmarried, at least when he wrote this letter. He is telling the unmarried and widows that, if they have his level of self-control, it is good for them to remain unmarried, even as he.
     
  7. LeBuick

    LeBuick
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Jun 8, 2006
    Messages:
    11,537
    Likes Received:
    0
    Or a widow...

    What if he was divorced, would that fit the catagory of unmaried?
     

Share This Page

Loading...