Brother (or sister?), I am seeing some problems with the logic of your arguments. For one thing, I am not a KJV-onlyist other translations say "if I have the gift of prophecy." And we can get this sense out of the KJV. Had Paul given his body to be burned at this time? He was still alive when he wrote the letter and tradition says he was beheaded. He is making a hypothetical argument here.
Why not look at chapter 9 where Paul asks who pastors a flock and does not drink of the milk of the flock.
But equating the pastor role with the elder role has an aspect of church tradition to it, too. Whose to say someone cannot have the pastor and teacher gift without being ordained as an elder or overseer? One is a gift and the other is an ordained role. Those with gifts could fall into sin or just not be in a life situation which would allow them to be ordained. Couldn't a teenager have a spiritual gift, even the gifts of pastoring and teaching, and using the gifts to teach and disciple his fellow teens? But if he doesn't have any experience ruling his house well because he hasn't lived long enough, he wouldn't be qualified. If a man with gifts of pastor and teacher fell into the sin of being a drunkard, he would not be qualified. There are lifestyle qualifications, not just gift qualifications. I would not say a woman could not have the pastor and teacher gifts, but gifts alone are not the only qualification for the bishop role. Maybe an older woman could use the gift of pastoring and teaching if she were to gather the younger women and teach them to be good wives, etc. The gift can be used in discipling people.
Churches need to be careful not to replace Biblical qualifications for the ministry role of elder/'priest'/bishop with manmade qualifications. In some of the Reformed and Lutheran traditions, there is a tendency to emphasize earning certain degrees as a qualification. Degrees are more important now in Baptist, Pentecostal, Holiness, etc. traditions than they used to be, but the traditional emphasis was on gifts and calling in those denominations. The Bible lays out certain qualifications, and having an MDiv or being able to preach well should not be a replacement for Biblical qualifcations. Personally, I think there is a problem with adding extrabiblical qualifications, but certain it is wrong to ignore Biblical qualifications and appoint those who meet traditional, man-made standards.
Something else to consider is that the idea that Paul's instructions might have kept adult sons living in their fathers houses and slaves from being overseers if they were not in the head of household position. From a practical point of view, even, if you were under the thumb of a head of household who opposed the faith who had power of life and death over you from a legal point of view, that could inhibit your ability to minister. Women also submitted to a head of household. In marriage, the wife is supposed to submit to the husband, children to parents, (slaves to masters in Biblical times when there was slavery.) If the wife is the bishop, now she has oversight over him. It runs against the order of the home.
I am not dead set against life-long celibate local bishops necessarily, btw. But I don't see the strongest case in scripture for it. The description of the bishop is certainly very male. The word 'elder' is used to translated a rather male word. Few women have beards.
This is the logical error of affirming the consequent. The example in a logic textbook was:
If someone commits suicide he is dead. George Washington is dead. Therefore he committed suicide.
But George Washington is dead because of a fever or because of the blood-letting given as the treatment.
Your argument is parallel to this:
A bishop is a teacher. Paul is a teacher. Therefore He is a teacher.
Bishops are teachers but not all teachers are bishops. Just like people who commit suicide die, but not all people who die committed suicide.
:
