1 Timothy qualifications

[davehenry]

When 1 Timothy 3:1-7 gives the qualifications for a bishop,would when it says to be blameless mean to get ones house in order?
eg.Being an ensample to the flock as Gias was in 3 John.
Blameless-Webster's 1828-Without fault.innocent,guiltless,not meriting censure.
We aren't sinless after all but again if one in such a position can be blamed for continual sin then it always comes to godley sorrow,repentance so that blame can be removed?
I have an idea what it means but i can't find the right words to explain it just.
When it says that one must be the husband of one wife,is that saying marriage is a must?it does say in verse 4-5,One that ruleth his own house,having his children in subjection with all gravity;For if a man know not how to rule his own house,how shall he take care of the church of God?
The church is the body of Christ of course,not a building.Acts 8:3,1 Corinthians 3:9,1 Peter 2:5,Colossians 2:5.
How can one have his children,and obviously wife as it says house in subjection if one isn't married,or if say a couple want to get married would it not be best if the man be married,or go over the roles of a husband and wife biblically?
There are things i desperately need to unlearn which were taught by the precept and commandments of men in buildings,esp the last one.

[creationliberty]

You're taking that in a far stricter sense than was intended for those verses. If "blameless" meant without fault, then that would contradict Scripture. In the general sense, for a Christian to be "blameless" means that they are not found guilty (with evidence) of general crimes, like those of adultery, theft, extortion, lying, or any other such thing. (Not to say someone would never lie about an elder, but that there is evidence of the crime.)

For example, since I'm in the middle of a series on Jehovah's Witnesses, when a JW elder molests and rapes a young girl, and the Watchtower protects him and allows him to remain an elder, that is violation of the Word of God. (Because they are not a Christ, so they don't care about the actual rules.)

This is not to say that a man will not have an evil past, but if he is known by the community to have been doing something that is sin, actively after he has been born again, then he is not to be put in a position of leadership. Yet, church buildings do it all the time.

For example, I can't remember which mega-preacher it was, but the guy had been caught having homosexual relations with a young man, and it was all over the news. He came onto a program with his wife, apologized (which was garbage from what I could tell), she wrote a book about her perspective and made millions in sales, and then he remained in his leadership position.

That's what it means to be blameless; there is no evidence to put blame on the elder because he has done good, and not evil, to his neighbors.

[davehenry]

Webster's 1828 can't always be the place to go as i've checked meanings of some words,which,not often,but the meaning has if used would contradict scripture.It does say in Matthew 18:16-17 when talking about church discipline,But if he will not hear thee,then take with thee one or two more,that in the mouth of two or three witnesses every word may be established.And if he shall neglect to hear them,tell it unto the church:but if he neglect to hear the church,let him be unto thee as an heathen man and a publican.
1 Timothy 5:19-20
Against an elder receive not an asccusation,but before two or three witnessess.Them that sin rebuke before all,that others also may fear.
So in layman's terms it should be in a body of believers @ least down to when in the elder's position,if an accusation is put forth against an elder with two or three witnesses to confirm then disqualification happens,as of course an elder is as accountable as everybody else,or even moreso should i say.1 Peter 5:5 is used as a weapon in buildings,The first part is always used-Likewise,ye younger,submit yourselves unto the elder,but the rest is removed and the elder gets to not do what he is supposed to as a shepherd to the flock and altho alot of the time it's easy to spot one who loves to lord over the sheep there are extreemly subtle ones who are maybe only spotted by a couple of people and the other sheep out of fear of the "pastor" would gang up esp in Baptist buildings.

[anvilhauler]

Paul was a bishop in that he had oversight over many of the churches but nowhere do we read anything about him having a wife and children. 

[Christopher_Belflower]

Chris, was it Eddie Long you were referring to?

[creationliberty]

Webster's 1828 can't always be the place to go as i've checked meanings of some words,which,not often,but the meaning has if used would contradict scripture.

I didn't go to Webster's on that. I don't know why I was being accused of that.

And Samson said concerning them, Now shall I be more blameless than the Philistines, though I do them a displeasure.
-Jdg 15:3

Long story short (which you can read in chapters 14-15), Sampson's father-in-law gave Sampson's wife to another man; in turn, Sampson burned down the Philistines' crops. Each had done a crime to the other that was known to the public, but Sampson said he would be more "blameless" than they, because the crime his father-in-law had done was more dire than burning a field.

Thus, you can see where "blameless" means to not be viewed in the public eye as a deviant or criminal by doing such unlawful activity.

[davehenry]

It was me who quoted Webster's in my first post Chris not you to put the defanition of"blameless" in my very 1st post,I'm sorry if you thought i was accusing you of that.I should've seperated the post more when writing it.

[creationliberty]

Whoops. I'm sorry; I thought you were saying that I did. I didn't even remember you said that in the first post. That was my fault.

[davehenry]

It's alright Chris,no problem.