Let’s hope that Christian scholars, especially evangelical ones, are not like the Pharisees who required things additional to the Torah, like that members of the Sanhedrin would be married.
The vast majority of New Testament scholars, currently, and historically, do acknowledge the Apostle Paul was single—according to the New Testament record. I fully concur, and see no evidence contrary...
Almost no scholar of good repute I know of is definitive about Paul’s “thorn in the flesh” and historically also, it’s been as big a guessing game as the authorship of Hebrews.
Scripture never names Paul as a “member of the Sanhedrin” either, rather as a Pharisee...a much larger group, than the 71 leaders in the Sanhedrin. As a brilliant student of Gamaliel, surely he would’ve personally known members of the Sanhedrin, which is why some assume he was a member—or he could have been a candidate for membership (before his conversion), however scripture is actually silent on his membership.
I Cor. 7 clearly indicates Paul is single, and, Paul teaches that for those who can, singleness is to be preferred. For most singleness is not to be preferred and they should get married.
Again, my own reading of scripture, and the vast consensus of all Christian students of the Bible historically, reflected in scholarship, and denominational requirements, is that both single and married can be called of God to be worthy ministers of the Gospel. God has called people to be both single and married—each state has its own advantages and disadvantages—one is not morally superior to another.
What organized Church group/denomination REQUIRES pastors to be married?
We disagree on analysis. Your first sentence (above) is confusing, though. "Christian scholars" were late on the scene, and had nothing to do with Pharisees, nor Sanhedrin. "Christian scholars" can't even agree on dispensational stuff... and many don't even know the saving grace of Jesus' cross. My father is an Episcopalian priest and doesn't believe in the virgin birth.
I'd debate that the "vast majority" is not my favorite source... and you are welcome to join them. I Cor 7 is NOT definitive on Paul's married state.
I am not a scholar, but I know enough to know that it is ambiguous at best! Sorry, but your assessment reeks of "I know more than you do", phrased to sound "scholarly" by using "others" as your source of surety! Quote scripture for source and maybe we can discuss it, but I doubt either of us can "win" the argument.
In Acts 26, Paul states that he "cast his vote". The only votes were cast by MEMBERS of the Sanhedrin... and they were married. She may have been dead at the time of the Damascus road event, but I would not agree with your "scholars".
Evidently, those churches which Paul had someting to do with...
I Timothy 3: 1 Here is a trustworthy saying: Whoever aspires to be an overseer desires a noble task. 2 Now the overseer is to be above reproach, faithful to his wife, temperate, self-controlled, respectable, hospitable, able to teach, 3 not given to drunkenness, not violent but gentle, not quarrelsome, not a lover of money. 4 He must manage his own family well and see that his children obey him, and he must do so in a manner worthy of full respect.
... and he was a "misogynist" according to your "modern" standards. I'll trust his words for it! But, we are talking about Scripture and everybody knows the scholars ca do anything they w=is!
1 Tinothy 2: 11 A woman[a] should learn in quietness and full submission. 12 I do not permit a woman to teach or to assume authority over a man; she must be quiet. 13 For Adam was formed first, then Eve. 14 And Adam was not the one deceived; it was the woman who was deceived and became a sinner. 15 But women will be saved through childbearing—if they continue in faith, love and holiness with propriety.
everybody knows the scholars can do anything they wish!