 |
Actscelerate.com
Open Any Time -- Day or Night
|
| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Message |
Author |
 Bonnie... |
Aaron Scott |
| bonnie knox wrote: | | Aaron you say no women in leadership except the exceptions. So what about the exceptions, were they in leadership or not? |
There are no NT examples of women in the highest level of leadership. And as for the OT, Deborah is about the only one (and Jezebel, but I digress). |
Hon. Dr. in Acts-celeratology
Posts: 6042
7/28/17 5:36 pm
|
|
|
|  |
 |
|
|
| Bonnie...no |
Aaron Scott |
| bonnie knox wrote: | | Quote: | | Notice, that I did NOT say that no one claimed that Junia was an apostle for all those centuries, but rather "not with any effect." That is, it does not appear that the minds of the larger church were changed. |
For a thousand years, the church saw Junia as a female and an apostle. The fact that they later tried to change her identity to a male seems to indicate some people were having an issue with a female being an apostle. |
No...SOME might have viewed Junia as a woman. We do not know that this was the fully accepted view. If so, then a change in translation would have been met with some claims of error, wouldn't it?
This smacks of Gnosticism, in a way. Some great truth--like Mary Magdalene being Jesus' wife--is covered up by a male-centric church that cares more about male authority than God's authority. I don't mean to say you believe such a way, but conspiracy theories never seem to serve the church well. |
Hon. Dr. in Acts-celeratology
Posts: 6042
7/28/17 5:41 pm
|
|
|
| |
|
| |
Link |
| bonnie knox wrote: | | Quote: | | What we do NOT see is women in leadership in the NT |
This is simply not true.
Phoebe, Syntyche, and Euodias are leaders in the NT. |
'Leader' and 'leadership' are loose terms. There are a lot of ways women can be leaders. Even the most conservative Baptist, for example, might acknowledge that a woman can lead other women or lead children without having any theological qualms about it.
Phoebe was a servant. Baptists churches have deacon boards that make decisions for the church. A lot of A/G's follow the same model, calling the boardmembers who hire pastors 'deacons.'
The Bible doesn't give us a lot of detail on what deacons actually did. Since the word for 'serve' used in relation to the Seven appointed to feed the widows in Acts is so closely related to the noun translated 'deacon', some people believe the seven were deacons. Their job was to feed widows.
So this was a position of service, not 'leadership' per se. I wouldn't say deacons didn't lead in some capacity, just like anyone can. A father, mother, etc. can lead. One deacon might lead another deacon. In human interactions, one could lead and another could follow. Some people are leaders.
But there is also the idea of the official leader, the one entrusted with authority. In the Bible, one of the roles associated with this position was the bishop or overseer. Paul calls the elders of the Ephesian church 'bishops' or 'overseers' (depending on how you translate it) in Acts 20:28.
Phoebe is called a servant of the church, not an overseer of the church. Paul said, Euodias, and Syntyche 'laboured with me in the gospel'. That's little text to try to squeeze a lot out of in regard to women's 'leadership' roles in the church.
_________________
Link |
Acts-perienced Poster
Posts: 11849
7/29/17 2:35 am
|
|
|
| |
|
| |
bonnie knox |
Phoebe was commended by Paul as someone who had been a "prostatis" to him. He entrusted her to take the letter he had written from Corinth to Rome, maybe an 800 mile journey. He asks the believers at Rome to assist her in whatever business she needs their assistance with. I've read that there would have been an expectation that she would read and explain the letter; I don't know, but it sounds reasonable. It certainly sounds like Paul had complete confidence in her.
As NT Wright said (after referencing Mary Magdalene, a woman, as being the first commissioned to tell the news of the resurrected Christ) in the clip I posted above, "apostolic ministry grows out of the testimony that Jesus is alive...." He concludes that women in ministry is therefore not problematic for Biblical Christians.
I think we get to the root of one issue when we examine the topic this way. Too many people think that decision-making in the church is a matter of bossing around people. Only men, presumably, should be bossing anyone around, therefore women may not be in any decision-making capacity that would affect men. The authority in the church is from God, not man. It seems that people who would exclude women from certain ministries somehow feel that a decision made on a human level can somehow be more authoritative than a direct word of prophecy from God.
For all the objections to ambiguity, no one has specific tasks that are required in the church body that are forbidden to women in scripture. |
[Insert Acts Pun Here]
Posts: 14803
7/29/17 11:32 am
|
|
|
| |
|
| |
bonnie knox |
| Link wrote: | | Aaron Scott wrote: | | Then--and oddly enough at a time in history when diversity is more important than just about anything else--Junia is held up to be a woman...and not just a woman, but an apostle? |
I see your point. Since I don't have an agenda or worldview that makes it very important that women in the first century be apostles or bishops of the church, I am not inclined to argue in favor of such a doctrine based on an ambiguity, espcially if there is other scripture that leads in the opposite direction. |
Actually, an honest look will show that what Aaron has stated is not what has happened. The history is that Junia was recognized as a woman apostle for centuries. It appears that the English versions of the Bible also had Junia as a woman until the late 1800's. The ambiguity seems to stem from those whose worldview precludes female bishops such as William Sanday:
"Junia is of course a common Roman name and in that case the two would probably be husband and wife; Junias on the other hand is less usual as a man’s name. . . . If, as is probable, Andronicus and Junias are included among the apostles . . . , then it is more probable that the name is masculine."
Let's be honest about where the ambiguity is coming from. Is there any evidence that the Greek is ambiguous about whether Junia was an apostle? Is there any evidence that Junia was a man? I've yet to see any credible evidence. |
[Insert Acts Pun Here]
Posts: 14803
7/29/17 12:44 pm
|
|
|
| |
|
| Bonnie, the problem with that is... |
Aaron Scott |
| bonnie knox wrote: | | Link wrote: | | Aaron Scott wrote: | | Then--and oddly enough at a time in history when diversity is more important than just about anything else--Junia is held up to be a woman...and not just a woman, but an apostle? |
I see your point. Since I don't have an agenda or worldview that makes it very important that women in the first century be apostles or bishops of the church, I am not inclined to argue in favor of such a doctrine based on an ambiguity, espcially if there is other scripture that leads in the opposite direction. |
Actually, an honest look will show that what Aaron has stated is not what has happened. The history is that Junia was recognized as a woman apostle for centuries. It appears that the English versions of the Bible also had Junia as a woman until the late 1800's. The ambiguity seems to stem from those whose worldview precludes female bishops such as William Sanday:
"Junia is of course a common Roman name and in that case the two would probably be husband and wife; Junias on the other hand is less usual as a man’s name. . . . If, as is probable, Andronicus and Junias are included among the apostles . . . , then it is more probable that the name is masculine."
Let's be honest about where the ambiguity is coming from. Is there any evidence that the Greek is ambiguous about whether Junia was an apostle? Is there any evidence that Junia was a man? I've yet to see any credible evidence. |
If someone today claimed that, say, Bill Clinton had actually been a woman, it would never carry significant weight (even though there are likely people who would accept it and pass it along). Why? Because we have all known Bill Clinton as a man, and we would resist this rewrite of history.
Now, consider that if Junia had indeed been considered by one and all to be a woman AND an apostle, but then, relatively recently, there was a major rewrite and Junia was presented neither a woman, nor an apostle, the folks who have always heard that Junia was a woman and an apostle are going to have something to say. And IF it were true that Junia was always considered a woman before then, you can be sure that there were likely some very powerful and able forces that held to that version of events, and could have made strong public arguments to correct the error that you believe took place.
Moreover, while I have little concern whether Junia was a man or a woman, I do pay attention if Junia is considered both a woman and an apostle--as should we all. It would indeed seem--even if not conclusively--that women ought to be in the highest ranks of the church.
And yet, not only are there issues with considering Junia a woman...but there is the issue of whether "she" was an actual apostle...or simply held in regard by the apostles. Further, there is the matter of EVEN IF JUNIA WERE BOTH FEMALE AND AN APOSTLE, THERE IS STILL NO EVIDENCE AT ALL THAT THE CHURCH HAD ANY BUT MEN IN UPPER AUTHORITY.
I don't know what to tell you. I know that we can all be guilty of confirmation bias. That is, you read and accept all the books and articles that tend to confirm your view that women were apostles and thus in authority...and others will do that same in the other direction.
What we do not have is any conclusive proof of the matter of Junia being a woman, and apostle, or in upper leadership of the church. |
Hon. Dr. in Acts-celeratology
Posts: 6042
7/29/17 3:13 pm
|
|
|
| |
|
| |
bonnie knox |
Aaron, have you considered why it took a Protestant Reformation in the 1500's to say that the priesthood is made up of all believers and not just certain men who are supposed to represent us to God and God to us? Do you wonder how church tradition could have erred for so long on the issue of indulgences? Do you wonder why there was such an uproar in the Roman Catholic Church over translating the Bible into a language the laity could read? Are you sure you want to hold church tradition in priority over scriptural interpretation or to say that something could not have been in error for very long?
I say examine ALL the evidence we currently have available about Junia. See where it leads. I challenge you to look at ALL the evidence available.
What I'm seeing from those who say it's ambiguous is claims without evidence. |
[Insert Acts Pun Here]
Posts: 14803
7/29/17 8:06 pm
|
|
|
| |
|
| |
Tom Sterbens |
| bonnie knox wrote: | Aaron,.....
I say examine ALL the evidence we currently have available about Junia. See where it leads. I challenge you to look at ALL the evidence available.
|
Not gonna happen.
Next. |
Golf Cart Mafia Capo Famiglia
Posts: 4508
7/29/17 8:26 pm
|
|
|
| |
|
| |
bonnie knox |
Spoken like a prophet.
Maybe Apostle Tom could show up and say, "Yea, I say unto thee thou are but a woman who dost spit into the wind."
| Tom Sterbens wrote: | | bonnie knox wrote: | Aaron,.....
I say examine ALL the evidence we currently have available about Junia. See where it leads. I challenge you to look at ALL the evidence available.
|
Not gonna happen.
Next. |
|
[Insert Acts Pun Here]
Posts: 14803
7/29/17 8:47 pm
|
|
|
| |
|
| Tom, Bonnie... |
Aaron Scott |
| Tom Sterbens wrote: | | bonnie knox wrote: | Aaron,.....
I say examine ALL the evidence we currently have available about Junia. See where it leads. I challenge you to look at ALL the evidence available.
|
Not gonna happen.
Next. |
Even you two have not reviewed ALL evidence. Only enough to convince you that your beliefs about women in leadership are supported. Why must I review what you haven't?
I've read plenty about it. I find that most of the time people are just looking for confirmation of what the believe, not for any thing to change their minds (perhaps that applies to me too).
I am satisfied that there is no solid scriptural statement about women as apostles or in church leadership. Doesn't mean women were not in such positions, but it does mean there's no good evidence for it. As such, I feel quite comfortable holding as I do, especially when I see that people who hold the other view have often given up what IS clear in the scriptures in order to hold their position. |
Hon. Dr. in Acts-celeratology
Posts: 6042
7/30/17 1:27 pm
|
|
|
| |
|
| |
bonnie knox |
Aaron, never mind ALL the evidence, just find any credible evidence that says Junia was not a female apostle.
What I'm saying is that the people making the claim that she was a man or not an apostle don't have any credible evidence. Just like above, Link was claiming that Origen called her a man, but in actuality, Origen called her a woman. |
[Insert Acts Pun Here]
Posts: 14803
7/30/17 1:31 pm
|
|
|
| |
|
| |
bonnie knox |
| Quote: | | especially when I see that people who hold the other view have often given up what IS clear in the scriptures in order to hold their position |
That's your interpretation, but if someone interprets it differently you claim they are not scriptural.
You also dismiss examples like Deborah. |
[Insert Acts Pun Here]
Posts: 14803
7/30/17 1:33 pm
|
|
|
| |
|
| Re: Tom, Bonnie... |
Tom Sterbens |
| Aaron Scott wrote: | | Tom Sterbens wrote: | | bonnie knox wrote: | Aaron,.....
I say examine ALL the evidence we currently have available about Junia. See where it leads. I challenge you to look at ALL the evidence available.
|
Not gonna happen.
Next. |
I find that most of the time people are just looking for confirmation of what the believe, not for any thing to change their minds (perhaps that applies to me too). |
Not true...
I am in the process currently of changing my mind a couple of significant points of theology...and about 10 years ago changed my mind on another central point of theology. In fact, one of them has been heavily influenced by ten years of online conversations with you!  |
Golf Cart Mafia Capo Famiglia
Posts: 4508
7/30/17 1:49 pm
|
|
|
| |
|
| |
bonnie knox |
| The other thing is that regardless of whether or not Junia was a female apostle, I don't see a prohibition on female apostles in scripture, so it wouldn't be fair to say that my view keeps me from being willing to take wherever the evidence leads. I'm just not finding any, and so far you've not produced any evidence that says she was not a female apostle. |
[Insert Acts Pun Here]
Posts: 14803
7/30/17 2:08 pm
|
|
|
| |
|
| Bonnie and Tom... |
Aaron Scott |
| bonnie knox wrote: | | The other thing is that regardless of whether or not Junia was a female apostle, I don't see a prohibition on female apostles in scripture, so it wouldn't be fair to say that my view keeps me from being willing to take wherever the evidence leads. I'm just not finding any, and so far you've not produced any evidence that says she was not a female apostle. |
I don't see a prohibition either! As I pointed out earlier, I don't see anything that prohibits it...except that vast examples in scripture. As for Deborah, consider that I did mention that women in leadership are the exception, not the rule.
Here is the thing that makes it a bit awkward for me to just give my OK (as if that is needed!): While we don't see any clear prohibition in the NT of women in leadership, one would think that if the early church did indeed have women in leadership, there would be some record of it, some obvious hint of it. But instead all we see are men in leadership.
It doesn't mean there weren't women in leadership...only that we have no evidence of such.
Further, the whole husband being the head of the wife thing lets us know that there is some sort of ordering of things. It doesn't mean one is better than the other (after all, the Father is the head of Christ, yet the Father is not BETTER than Christ). It simply means that is the...ORDER that God placed us in.
That alone doesn't prevent women from being in leadership in the church, but it does bolster the fact that we do not find women in "upper management" in the church.
TOM STERBENS...indeed, I have found that some of my positions have modified over the years due to discussion. It may be that this discussion we are having now will have the effect on me at some point in the future. I trust I am not so set in my ways that I would not be willing to change. At the same time, it seems that few are changing the other way--and even with this side seeming to have the stronger case (in my opinion).
Keep debating and discussing...it will have it's effect one way or the other. In fact, it might not be you or I that is convinced...but perhaps someone listening in...and that could matter far more than either of us. |
Hon. Dr. in Acts-celeratology
Posts: 6042
7/30/17 5:36 pm
|
|
|
| |
|
| |
bonnie knox |
| Quote: | | I don't see a prohibition either! As I pointed out earlier, I don't see anything that prohibits it...except that vast examples in scripture. As for Deborah, consider that I did mention that women in leadership are the exception, not the rule. |
This is what I don't understand about your thought process. You call the examples of male leadership in the Bible examples, but you don't see the examples of female leadership as examples. Yes, they are fewer, which would certainly be expected given the culture of Biblical times, but they are there, despite the number of times you keep saying
| Quote: | | It doesn't mean there weren't women in leadership...only that we have no evidence of such. |
But the point of my saying there is no prohibition is that you claim I'm seeing Junia as a female apostle because that is necessary to support my viewpoint. It's not necessary to say she was an apostle to support my view that women can be in leadership. |
[Insert Acts Pun Here]
Posts: 14803
7/31/17 8:07 am
|
|
|
| |
|
| |
Nature Boy Florida |
| Tom Sterbens wrote: | | bonnie knox wrote: | Aaron,.....
I say examine ALL the evidence we currently have available about Junia. See where it leads. I challenge you to look at ALL the evidence available.
|
Not gonna happen.
Next. |
Right on.
_________________
Whether you like it or not, learn to love it, because its the best thing going today! |
Acts-pert Poster
Posts: 16646
7/31/17 8:16 am
|
|
|
| |
|
| Re: Bonnie and Tom... |
Nature Boy Florida |
| Aaron Scott wrote: |
TOM STERBENS...indeed, I have found that some of my positions have modified over the years due to discussion. It may be that this discussion we are having now will have the effect on me at some point in the future. I trust I am not so set in my ways that I would not be willing to change. At the same time, it seems that few are changing the other way--and even with this side seeming to have the stronger case (in my opinion).
Keep debating and discussing...it will have it's effect one way or the other. In fact, it might not be you or I that is convinced...but perhaps someone listening in...and that could matter far more than either of us. |
I will say this:
If you all know what I knew, you would agree with me.
So I understand that you are always needing to correct your previous positions. Keep studying to attain NBF's status.
_________________
Whether you like it or not, learn to love it, because its the best thing going today! |
Acts-pert Poster
Posts: 16646
7/31/17 8:19 am
|
|
|
| |
|
| Daddy said, "Don't believe anything you hear and only half of what you see." |
bonnie knox |
Aaron, I do hope you start to consider the sources of what you've read and heard about Junia.
I'll give you an example. At the 2016 General Assembly, a dear brother from Florida stood at the mic and dismissed Junia as an apostle, claiming that Latin scholars couldn't decide where the accent mark went.
Well, as the saying goes, he knew just enough to be dangerous. One could theoretically change the Greek form of the word Junia to a male name* with an accent mark called a circumflex. The problem with that theory (the problem to those who would have Junia be man), however, is that once the Greek manuscripts began to use the lowercase letters and adding the accent marks, they used the acute accent, which showed Junia to be a woman. (Prior to the manuscripts with lowercase letters (called minuscule manuscripts), the manuscripts had uppercase and no accent marks at all (uncial manuscripts)). To quote the article I previously linked to, "according to Eldon Epp, no Greek minuscule manuscripts used the masculine Iouniān."
*in other words, a name which has an ending which indicates that it is a male name, but not a name that we have any record of actually existing in that time period |
[Insert Acts Pun Here]
Posts: 14803
7/31/17 9:38 am
|
|
|
| |
|
| What have you read? |
bonnie knox |
| Quote: | | I've read plenty about it. I find that most of the time people are just looking for confirmation of what the believe, not for any thing to change their minds (perhaps that applies to me too). |
See, just this dismissive, "Well, you're just reading one side of the issue," isn't going to wash with me.
What kind of credibility do your sources have?
If you have credible evidence that Junia was not a woman apostle, speak up! |
[Insert Acts Pun Here]
Posts: 14803
7/31/17 10:16 am
|
|
|
| |
|
|
|
FAQ
Search
Memberlist
Usergroups
Register
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
