Epistles · The elder qualification
Text 08 / 08 · Jesus and Paul
A one-woman man
King James Bible1611Title page
Illustrative artifact · does not contain this passage
The King James and RSV say “the husband of one wife.” The NIV says “faithful to his wife.” The NRSV says “married only once.” That difference matters, so we will start by asking why careful translators reach three different conclusions.
δεῖ οὖν τὸν ἐπίσκοπον ἀνεπίλημπτον εἶναι, μιᾶς γυναικὸς ἄνδρα…
transliteration
dei oun ton episkopon anepilēmpton einai, mias gynaikos andra…
An overseer, then, must be above reproach, a man of one woman…
1 Timothy 3:2, rendered literally; the page below is about that third phrase.
The Greek phrase has three words and no verb. In literal order it is “of one woman, a man,” often smoothed into a one-woman man. Paul may be counting wives, excluding remarriage, or describing a man known for sexual faithfulness. Three chapters later, he uses the same construction in reverse for widows. That parallel does not decide the meaning, but any reading of the elder phrase has to account for it.
A closer look at the important words
Open any term to see its range and where else Scripture uses it.
- a one-woman man · Sometimes read as a phrase of quality, “a one-woman kind of man.” Five readings have been defended, and the grammar alone does not settle which one Paul intended.
- and its mirror · “A one-man woman,” required of enrolled widows in 1 Timothy 5:9. The reversed phrase may describe marital history or faithful character. An anti-remarriage reading also has to account for Paul telling younger widows to marry five verses later.
How translators have handled the wording
c. AD 62 (traditional Pauline dating)
Paul (Greek)
μιᾶς γυναικὸς ἄνδρα
Literally: “of one woman, a man.” No verb and no article. The absence of the article is often read as marking a quality rather than a count, though anarthrous constructions do not carry qualitative force on their own; the reading has to be argued from context.
late 4th–early 5th century
Vulgate Pauline text
unius uxoris virum
“A man of one wife”: the Latin keeps the idiom's openness. The reviser of the Vulgate Pauline letters is uncertain, so this row is not attributed to Jerome.
1611
King James Version
the husband of one wife
The English wording foregrounds a count. The Greek also contains the numeral “one,” but its compact construction can be read as either marital status or a quality of faithfulness.
1952
Revised Standard Version
the husband of one wife
The RSV retains the traditional English form rather than choosing between the major interpretations.
1989
New Revised Standard Version
married only once
The NRSV adopts the once-married reading found among some early Christian writers.
2011
New International Version
faithful to his wife
Another major committee adopts the character reading, option five.
The translation record does not decide the meaning, but it does show the ambiguity. Major English committees have taken the phrase in three different ways.
How did early readers understand the phrase?
Early Christian reception is divided. Athenagoras, Tertullian, and later canons use the language against a second marriage, especially remarriage after widowhood. John Chrysostom, preaching in Greek in the late fourth century, reads the same phrase as prohibiting more than one wife and explicitly mentions that Jews could have two wives at the same time. Reception history therefore preserves both an anti-digamy reading and an explicit concurrent-wife reading. It cannot honestly be used as a unanimous vote for either side.1
Josephus describes polygyny as an ancestral Jewish custom, so the practice was not unknown in Paul’s world. Paul places this compact phrase inside a list about visible character: sober, gentle, hospitable, not greedy, and able to lead a household well. That setting favors a character reading, but a marital-status requirement can also belong in a list of qualifications.
Why you may reach a different conclusion
You may hear a numerical requirement here, and there are good reasons for that:
The numeral “one” is present and stands at the front of this compact phrase. If Paul meant only “faithful,” you may wonder why he used a number at all. An officer standard of visible monogamy would also have commended the gospel to a Roman world that prized it. The reading is ancient, plain to English ears, and pastorally safe.
Why I reach a different conclusion
My reply turns on 1 Timothy 5:9, where the same construction appears with the genders reversed, and on Paul’s advice five verses later that younger widows marry. Those facts make a character reading plausible, but they do not make the numerical reading impossible. There is also a question of scope: this is a qualification for an overseer, so a numerical reading would first establish an office standard. A further argument is needed to make it a universal rule for every man.
What I think this passage establishes
Three Greek words have produced several serious readings and different English translations. I lean toward faithful character because of the widow parallel and the surrounding qualification list, while recognizing that a numerical reading remains grammatically possible. The phrase can contribute to a cumulative monogamous case. It cannot settle the universal question without that larger argument.
Chapter Thirteen: Corinth and What Paul Was Writing Into · coming soon →
1note
The early Christian sources named above are linked below, including Chrysostom’s Homily 10 on 1 Timothy. Josephus’s description of plural marriage as an ancestral Jewish custom has a separate source record in the historical path.
Open the sources
- John Chrysostom · Homily 10 on 1 Timothy ↗ · A Greek-speaking fourth-century reader who takes the phrase as prohibiting more than one wife and names simultaneous Jewish wives explicitly.
- Bible Hub interlinear · 1 Timothy 3 ↗ · The Greek, parsed word by word; set 3:2 beside 5:9 yourself. archived copy
- Blue Letter Bible · Strong's G435 anēr ↗ · Every New Testament occurrence of the noun in question.
- Athenagoras · A Plea for the Christians, chapter 33 ↗ · The passage that calls a second marriage a specious adultery and connects the claim to Matthew 19.
- Tertullian · To His Wife, book 1 ↗ · His argument against remarriage, including his use of the leader and widow qualifications.
- The Apostolic Canons · Canon 17 ↗ · The rule barring someone twice married after baptism from the clergy.
- Josephus · the first-century source record ↗ · The quotation, setting, and limits of the claim about Jewish practice.
An archived copy is included when available, so you can still follow the citation if the original link changes.
The printable packets are temporarily unavailable while their sources and layout are reviewed. When they return, each packet will match the current page. Any material error reported after launch will also be recorded on the corrections page.
This is the last of the eight passages. The history section shows how Christians handled the same question from the first century to the present.