The present Eastern Orthodox discipline does not go back to apostolic times but represents a relaxtion of more rigorous mandatory continence within marriage or celibacy that does go back to apostolic practice and teaching.
The assumption that bishops and priests should not be married in order to devote themselves sacrificially to the service of Christ rests on Mt. 19, 1 Cor 7 and the passage in the epistle to Timothy in which St. Paul says a bishop should be the husband of one wife (that is, should not remarry after being widowed, which was a counter-cultural requirement in Graeco-Roman culture but demonstrated self-control and a desire to devote oneself to God, as was also true of women who chose not to remarried after becoming widows and were thereafter supported by the Church on the official "rolls" because their prayers and service to the poor etc. was made possible by their choice not to remarry).
The first legislation requiring celibacy appeared as late as the fourth century (300s), but this is the first legislation that has survived. Until this time (ca. 314) the Church was persecuted, councils had difficulty meeting, and their legislation has been lost. Moreover the legislation of the early 300s describes clerical sexual abstinence, or continence, as a long-established practice, not something first being mandated at this point.
Even married priests were expected, according to this legislation, to abstain from marital relations with their wives. The woman thus exercised a veto power over her husband's ordination. The early legislation admonishes priests who promised continence but were not practicing it, to keep their pledge.
In other words, abstinence from sexual relations for both married and unmarried priests was well established practice long before the first surviving legislation in the early 300s. For an evaluation of every shred of surviving evidence back to apostolic times, see Christian Cochini S.J., Apostolic Origins of Priestly Celibacy [San Francisco: Ignatius Press, 1990] as well as the more recent work by Stefan Heid [1997]).
The same rules about mandatory sexual abstinence for priests were shared by both East and West until the East modified it slightly in the 690s. Even that modification was restricted in scope: priests were still required, in the East to abstain from marital relations on the days on which they “handled sacred things.”
The claim that one of the fathers of the Council of Nicea, a monk-bishop named Paphnutius, favored married and sexually active priests is based on a pious legend, according to the detective work of Cochini and others. For centuries this has been taken as giving great antiquity to the Eastern position. In fact, the modified policy at the Synod of Trullo (not an ecumenical council) in the 690s was an innovation, which is why the bishop of Rome rejected it.
There have been many studies about the historical origins of the law of clerical celibacy, and it is sufficient to open any of the big dictionaries of religious sciences to perceive the essential outlines. It never would have occurred to me to take my own turn at such a well-documented topic had I not been led to it through fortuitous circumstances. Quite a long time ago, as I was compiling some documentation about the priesthood in the early African Church, my attention was drawn to a canonical decree promulgated in the year 390 by a council held in Carthage. It stipulated that married clerics had to observe continence with their wives, on the basis of a tradition originating with the apostles. My curiosity was soon replaced by a passion for the truth after I had read other late-fourth-century documents in which there was the same claim of apostolicity. This claim, tested by means of historical facts and questions encountered in the course of the same inquiry, progressively appeared to me as being a coherent principle of explanation. Moreover, my research was stimulated by some reflections aroused in my mind by the history of the history. The thesis of a compulsory clerical celibacy rooted in the very origins of the Church had been defended throughout the centuries by more than one serious theologian on grounds that frequently seemed to me to maintain their entire validity.I will point out that the fourth century references to clerical celibacy date to the same period as the formation of the canon of Scripture.
What is particularly galling, apart from the lack of historical support by those arguing for a late medieval origin for priestly celibacy, is their insistence that that we cannot take seriously and honestly the arguments of those who support this discipline. No, all justifications, they argue, must be a smokescreen that hide purely worldly considerations.
That the Apostle regulated clerical marriage in the Scriptures is an indicator that it was approved. If he had meant to say "Bishops / Priests should never marry" why did he not just come out and say this? Those texts are the source of the East's view on these things, the very formational documents of the Faith which say clearly that marriage is an acceptable option for all men. That is about an ancient and apostolic as one can get.
Again I respect the Roman Church's authority to order its life but it has taken one of the options for clergy, celibacy, and made it the ONLY option for clergy. That simply does not wash with the Scriptural witness on this matter and there is no way to play linguistic gymnastics to make it seem that MANDATORY celibacy is the rule for all clergy everywhere based on the teachings of the Apostles or the Gospels. Each of the passages you cited speaks of the regulation of marriage but not its prohibition and while there are many passages speaking of God's approval of marriage and its blessedness there is not one that speaks of Priests in the Old or New Testament being absolutely forbidden from being married. I understand that this is an argument from silence, of a sort, but it is a very pregnat silence.
The truth is that the Scriptural witness is simple and clear. There are two paths that any Christian may choose. One is the path of celibacy, something that is required of all Christians not in a heterosexual marriage. Celibacy is valued for its allowing of a total dedication to the things of God and service to human need. There is also the holy estate of matrimony where one man and one woman are sacramentally joined together and in this context human sexuality is expressed for the joy of the couple and the preservation of human life. Each is an equal option, none is mandatory for all people in all circumstances, and there is liberty to choose the single or married life as God gives direction and grace.