Was Junia A Female Apostle? A Reply to J.R. Ensey

This blog post is a response to a recent blog article[1] by J.R. Ensey. Ensey is former President of Texas Bible College and a well published Oneness Pentecostal theologian and author. Typically, I do not find myself disagreeing with Ensey but on this subject we take differing views. Nobody agrees all the time on everything so this is no surprise. However, a good Biblical discussion can only help clarify the respective positions. Another reply to Ensey’s article by Jason Weatherly can also be found here[2].

Is Junia a Female Name?

“The best available mss of Romans have Junia, a feminine name. Several later mss substitute “Junias,” a masculine name. Some early Christian scribes evidently altered the spelling from Junia to “Junias” in order to make the individual a male apostle.”[3]

To this point Paul has greeted several people in the church and among them are women and married couples. For example, in verse 13 Paul refers to Prisca and Aquila who are a married couple: woman and man. Even if we did not know that Junia was a female name, we would still suspect that Andronicus and Junia were husband and wife given this indication. This is not decisive in itself but part of the accumulative case.

We can say with a degree of certainty that Junia is female name. There is no word for “man” or “male” in the Greek text to indicate otherwise. This is not really needed to understand who Junia might be. As we progress we will see that the context may contain indicators to help us see this more clearly. In the fourth century John Chrysostom refers to Junia as a female apostle. Another fourth century witness, Epiphanius, does use the noun in the masculine form but this is not convincing especially since he also refers to Prisca as a male as well.

Michael Burer and Daniel Wallace note, “The majority of patristic commentators regard this as a feminine name.”(4) The evidence, then, is actually against Junia being a male. Those in doubt should be those who would suggest she is not female. That seems to be the more tenuous position at this point. J.D.G. Dunn notes:

"But the simple fact is that the masculine form has been found nowhere else, and the name is more naturally taken as Ἰουνίαν = Junia … as was taken for granted by the patristic commentators, and indeed up to the Middle Ages. The assumption that it must be male is a striking indictment of male presumption regarding the character and structure of earliest Christianity…The most natural way to read the two names within the phrase is as husband and wife."(5)

Andronicus and Junia are referred to, by Paul, as though they were package deal and gives no hint of separate designations. Therefore, our hint may not be wrong. Paul and this couple seem to have had a long standing association with each other, since both were “fellow prisoners”, and both were “in Christ” before him. Romans 16 in particular has almost as many women mentioned as men: Phoebe, Priscilla, Mary, Tryphena and Tryphosa, Persis, Rufus's mother, Julia, Nereus's sister. And 9 of the 26 people greeted by Paul in Romans 16 were women. The probability for Junia being a female is significantly high.

Was Junia an Apostle?

If one assumes that only males are apostles then this text has been decided, however if apostles are not only males then this text presents no problems. An apostle isn’t just a part of the original twelve. Texts such as Galatians 1:17; Acts 14:4; 14; 2 Corinthians 8:23; 1 Thessalonians 2:6; Romans 1:1; Philippians 2:25 offer a wider sense. Roberston Nicoll cautions that “Paul’s use of the word Apostle is not such as to make it easy to believe that he thought of a large class of persons who might be so designated, a class so large that two otherwise unknown persons like Andronicus and Junias might be conspicuous in it.”[6]

Romans 16:7 also indicates that Andronicus and Junia were “outstanding” (NASB) or “prominent” among the apostles. The Greek word for “outstanding” here or “prominent” (KJV) is episemos which occurs twice[7] in the Greek New Testament and nine times[8] in the Greek Old Testament (LXX). In Romans 16:7 this adjective is used in a plural form. This word can refer to bearing a mark or being notable. The following lexical sources indicate:

EDNT:

“excellent, distinguished; infamous…Rom 16:7: distinguished among the apostles (ἐν τοῖς ἀποστόλοις)”[9]

BAGD:

“splendid, prominent, …outstanding ἐ. ἐν τοῖς ἀποστόλοις outstanding among the apostles Ro 16:7.”[10]

Wallace and Burer suggest that this word, instead of here meaning prominent, suggest it is possible to translate Andronicus and Junia as esteemed by the apostles. Therefore, although Junia is female she may not necessarily be an apostle. Burer and Wallace’s study seem to hinge primarily upon pseudipigraphal works (Psalms of Solomon). However, more convincing that pseudipigrhaphal works is the apocryphal 3 Maccabes 6:1 which indicates the sense of “prominent among” as well. In addition, typically one who is esteemed by another is the one who is outstanding. Or, stands out above the others as in 3 Maccabes 6:1 which reads, “Then a certain Eleazar, famous among the priests of the country…”[11] Eleazar was, quite literally, an outstanding priest.

Greek scholar Mark Goodacre from Duke disagrees[12] and even suggests that Mary Magdalene is the first apostle. Goodacre also cites Eldon J. Epp[13] who argues that Junia is a female and apostle. He also suggests that “the apostles” is being used as a descriptor about the status of Andronicus and Junia. He further notes,

“It makes sense and is perfectly Pauline. In the NET translation, on the other hand, "the apostles" is used in a less obviously Pauline sense. Now he is appealing to the authority of an external group labelled as "the apostles". He does not say that Andronicus and Junia are esteemed by "us apostles" (cf. 1 Cor. 4.9) or by "all the apostles, including me", as we might have expected if this were the sense of the passage. He continually refers to himself in Romans 16, and three times in this verse, 16.7, "my relatives", "my fellow prisoners", "in Christ before me", yet on the NET translation, he appears to give authority to a group called "the apostles" that does not obviously include him.”[14]

Episemos is used to describe the ones to whom Paul refers. J.R. Ensey in a recent blog article[15] suggests that we cannot really know if Junia was a female or even if she was an Apostle. The latter is probably more debated than the former but this does not keep us from being able to make good conclusions. Ensey notes:

“In the broader context of the New Testament record, it is highly unlikely that Paul would be naming Junia[s] as an apostle. Even if this reference were to a woman, she would be the lone and solitary example of a female apostle.”

Paul never suggests that ministry is limited to a particular gender. In fact, the first preacher of the Gospel was planned by God to be a female.[16] Yet, here Ensey assumes, that Paul would never name a female as an apostle but since the Old Testament God has had plans to use females in his plan for believers. Ensey assumes his view and does not prove it. Unless one has an a priori assumption that an Apostle refers exclusively to males or only the original twelve the text can be read to suggest that Junia is a female and an Apostle. Perhaps, we will see further posts from Ensey concerning this.

Notice the below renderings of the final clause in Romans 16:7. The latter rendering, the NLT, seems to leave room for either interpretation.

“of note among the apostles” KJV

“outstanding among the Apostles” NASB

“of note among the apostles” NKJV

“prominent among the apostles” NRSV

“well taken among the apostles” Bishops, Tyndale

“which are ancient apostles” Coverdale

“outstanding among the apostles” Pickering

“prominent among the apostles” ISV

“highly respected among the Apostles” NLT

The UBS Handbook on the Book of Romans suggests that this last clause should refer to those counted as “as apostles and were well known”.[17] J.D.G. Dunn further notes,

"The full phrase almost certainly means “prominent among the apostles,”…The straightforward description “the apostles”, and the following clause, together strongly suggest that Andronicus and Junia belonged to the large group (larger than the twelve) of those appointed apostles by the risen Christ in 1 Cor 15:7 …That is, they belonged most probably to the closed group of apostles appointed directly by the risen Christ in a limited period following his resurrection and would include Andronicus and Junia within the select group of “premier” apostles (Eph 2:20), along with Barnabas (Gal 2:9; 1 Cor 9:5–6) and probably Silvanus (1 Thess 2:6–7). …We may firmly conclude, however, that one of the foundation apostles of Christianity was a woman and wife."(18)

Ensey also cites Albert Barnes. Barnes in his commentary suggests they were not apostles. He offers the following points against this interpretation of Romans 16:7. A reply will separate each point.

(1) There is no account of their having been appointed as such.

This is simply not sufficient. Outside of Paul’s reference in chapter 16 we do not even know the account of Andronicus and Junia being imprisoned as Paul. He simply recounts the historical experience as here. Are we to assume that Andronicus and Junia were not fellow-prisoners? No evidence is needed apart from Paul describing them as such.

(2) The expression is not one which would have been used if they “had” been. It would have been “who were distinguished apostles”; compare Romans 1:1; I Corinthians 1:1; II Corinthians 1:1; Philippians 1:1.

This is not decisive, but interesting. Differing constructions can be offered for almost any reading we choose. Likewise, if Andronicus and Junia were not apostles then we could expect something like 2 Corinthians 8:18: “We have sent along with him the brother whose fame in the things of the gospel has spread through all the churches;” However, this is not what we have in Romans 16:7.

(3) It by no means implies that they were apostles. All that the expression fairly implies is, that they were known to the other apostles; that they were regarded by them as worthy of their affection and confidence; that they had been known by them, as Paul immediately adds, before he was himself converted. They had been converted “before” he was, and were distinguished in Jerusalem among the early Christians, and honored with the friendship of the other apostles.”

This is to assume what he has yet to prove. As noted, episemos can refer to one who is outstanding among the apostles. But, an apostle nonetheless. Ensey also cites Jamieson-Faussett-Brown Commentary.

J-F-B Commentary states: “…where the connection or some qualifying words show that the literal meaning of ‘one sent’ is the thing intended, understand by the expression used here, ‘persons esteemed by the apostles’ [Beza, Grotius, De Wette, Meyer, Fritzsche, Stuart, Philippi, Hodge]. And of course, if “Junia” is to be taken for a woman, this latter must be the meaning.”

Ironically, the JFB commentators actually believe the feminine Junia is “more probable” at Romans 16:7. One cannot merely presume that the operative phrase “the apostles” cannot include one who is a female. This has yet to be proven. It well may be the case, I personally do not believe that it is, but that has not been proven. Therefore, interpretation is a primary factor no matter how we slice it. Ensey also notes:

"An interesting observation is that the Greek preposition “en” (en) can be translated in numerous ways. In Romans alone, the term is translated 156 times as “to” and only 9 times as “among.” It was a choice made solely by the translators. Tyndale, Cranmer, and the Geneva Bible translators rendered the term “well taken among the apostles.” Romans 15:9 may shed some light on the matter: “And that the Gentiles might glorify God for his mercy: as it is written, For this cause I will confess to thee among the Gentiles, and sing unto thy name.” The use of “among” here did not mean that the one glorifying God, confessing Him, and singing unto His name (Christ) among the Gentiles was one of them. He was born a Jew and died a Jew, but He did these things among the Gentiles."

Words have various meanings depending upon their contexts. Perhaps, alternate readings are possible, as Burer and Wallace have demonstrated, but that does not mean it is being used in such a way here. In Luke 22:26 this same preposition is used in the dative and rendered “greatest among you” (ESV). Therefore, translating “en” as “among” seems to be a perfectly valid way of translating it in Romans 16:7 where it is also used in the dative. In summary Ensey notes:

"It is entirely possible to find those in academia who may feel pressure to say absolutely that Junia was a woman and an apostle, giving a nod to political correctness. Since the language chosen for the KJV seems to leave a small loophole in some minds, it has become the culturally popular position to take. However, looking at the whole of Scripture, and the preponderance of scholarly analysis, the conclusion most apparent is that these two individuals were faithful saints of God—perhaps ministers, although not stated—and were early converts well known to the apostles, having a reputation for faithful, outstanding service in the body of Christ. Beyond that, speculation takes over."

In his November blog contribution J.R. Ensey suggested that short pants on men has never been a part of the Apostolic Christian’s wardrobe. In the July blog post he states, “No one can deny that the vast majority of colleges and seminaries have been consigned to irreversible liberalism.” There is no question that believers are to be modest and we should spend our education dollars wisely. Neither of these follow to Ensey’s conclusions about short pants and neither does it imply we shouldn’t seek higher education. Even implying such a thing is dangerous to the development of the Christian mind. Using Ensey’s logic could he garner anyone in “academia” that would agree with him on his views of short pants or seminary? This type of logic can quickly come full circle.

NOTES:

[1] JRENSEY Blog: http://jrenseyblog.wordpress.com/2012/12/
[2] The Weatherly Report: http://theweatherlyreport.blogspot.com/2012/12/a-response-to-was-junia-romans-167.html
[3] Edwards, James. "Romans 16:7." Ed. Walter J. Harrelson. The New Interpreter's Study Bible: New Revised Standard Version with the Apocrypha. Nashville: Abingdon, 2003. 2033
[4] Daniel Wallace and Michael Burer, "Was Junia Really an Apostle?: A Re-examination of Romans 16.7", Journal for Biblical Manhood and Womanhood 6/2 (Fall 2001), http://www.michaelsheiser.com/TheNakedBible/Was%20Junia%20Really%20an%20Apostle%20A%20Re%20examination%20of%20Rom%2016%207.pdf
[5] James D. G. Dunn, Romans 9–16, Word Biblical Commentary (Dallas: Word, Incorporated, 1998). 894.
[6] Nicoll, W. Robertson. "Romans 16:7." The Expositor's Greek Testament. New York: Dodd, Mead,
[7] Matthew 27:16; Romans 16:7
[8] Genesis 30:42; Esther 5:4; 1 Maccabes 11:37; 14:48; 2 Maccabes 15:36; 3 Maccabes 6:1; Psalm of Solomon 2:6; 17:30
[9] Horst Robert Balz and Gerhard Schneider, Exegetical Dictionary of the New Testament (Grand Rapids, Mich.: Eerdmans, 1990-). 33
[10] William Arndt, F. Wilbur Gingrich, Frederick W. Danker and Walter Bauer, A Greek-English Lexicon of the New Testament and Other Early Christian Literature : A Translation and Adaption of the Fourth Revised and Augmented Edition of Walter Bauer's Griechisch-Deutsches Worterbuch Zu Den Schrift En Des Neuen Testaments Und Der Ubrigen Urchristlichen Literatur (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1979). 298.

[11] The Holy Bible: New Revised Standard Version (Nashville: Thomas Nelson Publishers, 1989). 3 Mac 6:1.
[12] Goodacre, Mark. Associate Professor of New Testament Dept. of Religion, Duke University. http://podacre.blogspot.com/2009/09/nt-pod-12-junia-first-woman-apostle.html
[13] Eldon Jay Epp, Junia: The First Woman Apostle (Minneapolis: Fortress Press, 2005)
[14] Goodacre, Mark. Associate Professor of New Testament Dept. of Religion, Duke University http://ntweblog.blogspot.com/2009/09/andronicus-and-junia-prominent-among.html
[15] Ensey, J.R. http://jrenseyblog.wordpress.com/2012/12/
[16] Ps 68:11 The Lord gives the word; the women who announce the news are a great host:; Matt 28:5, 10 But the angel said to the women, “Do not be afraid, for I know that you seek Jesus who was crucified. 10 Then Jesus said to them, “Do not be afraid; go and tell my brothers to go to Galilee, and there they will see me.”; Mark 16:11 But when they heard that he was alive and had been seen by her, they would not believe it. Luke 24:10, 11 Now it was Mary Magdalene and Joanna and Mary the mother of James and the other women with them who told these things to the apostles, 11 but these words seemed to them an idle tale, and they did not believe them.
[17] Barclay Moon Newman and Eugene Albert Nida, A Handbook on Paul’s Letter to the Romans, UBS Handbook Series (New York: United Bible Societies, 1973). 292.
[18] James D. G. Dunn, Romans 9–16, Word Biblical Commentary (Dallas: Word, Incorporated, 1998). 894-95.

Women In Ministry: A Synopsis Of The Biblical View

In our developing religious culture, few issues have surpassed the controversy than that of a woman’s role in the church. Often, discussions concerning this issue end up being ad hominous brawls. Some, from a variety of theological interpretations, believe that Scripture denies any teaching or position of authority, held by a female, to be exercised over a male; this view is called complementarianism. Others believe, from the biblical text, that a position of liberty and equality regarding women is apropos in church leadership; this is called the egalitarian view. This paper will clearly take the view of the latter—egalitarianism with some modifications.

It is not the purpose of this paper to explore all the nuances of both views, nor exhaustively plumb the depths of each passage that could be brought into discussion in dialectic discourse. Due to space limitations, we shall explore one or two texts for biblical justification of the complementarian view. Typically, 1 Timothy 2:11-12 is the proof text employed for this view. The Apostle Paul states:

“Let the woman learn in silence with all subjection. But I suffer not a woman to teach, nor to usurp authority over the man, but to be in silence.” (1 Timothy 2:11-12 KJV)

First, many complementarians expect something of history that is almost impossible. In Paul’s day only Jewish males were required to study and learn the Torah. There was no such mandate placed upon Jewish females however. So, as it relates to 1 Timothy 2, we can see Paul modifying the Old Testament Law to, indeed, grant liberties to women because Paul did not want Christian women to be ignorant of the Scriptures and encouraged them to learn, e.g. 1 Timothy. 2:11. Paul says that while they learned it was to be done “in silence” and with “full submission” (HCSB) or “subjection” (KJV). Essentially, women are admonished, by Paul, to respect and learn from those God had placed in leadership positions of church polity. Therefore, we should understand, historically, women’s roles were and are very underdeveloped. The woman’s right to vote enjoys only a few years of existence in the USA. Consequently, it is difficult to look for evidence of women, in any form of leadership, in a culture where women were nothing but slaves and tools for reproduction. Paul, seemingly, was changing this historical feature.

Ironically, however, “women played a decisive role in the ministry of Christ and have continued to influence Christianity throughout history.”[1] Acts 18:26 actually demonstrates Aquilla and Priscilla teaching Apollos, yet Luke, the author, (probably the physician of Paul) gives no rebuke. Luke records, “He began to speak boldly in the synagogue, but when Priscilla and Aquila heard him, they took him and explained to him the way of God more accurately.” (Acts 18:26 ESV)

Apollos was not a meager man destitute of biblical knowledge, in fact, Apollos, in verse 24 is called an “eloquent man” (KJV) and one “mighty in the scriptures” (KJV). Being such a learned man would seemingly necessitate a learned teacher or at least a leader among the believers.

Some have argued that this teaching of the scriptures, to Apollos, occurred outside of a public worship service or at home (Goodspeed, Moffatt, NIV, HCSB), yet the issue is not so much location, as it is whether or not females can exercise a leadership role over a male. Others (NKJV, NASB, NET, ESV), however, suggest that they “took him aside” or “took him to themselves” (Godbey) neither of which necessarily means they actually left the synagogue entirely. In this setting, the role of “bible study teacher” is certainly one of leadership and the human role in revealing scriptural truths.

An interesting note is that Priscilla was an important enough figure to be mentioned by name and was mentioned first, before her husband. The KJV has Aquilla mentioned first, a Majority Text tradition, yet this is not the case in all manuscripts especially the older ones. As seen above, the ESV corrects this with Priscilla being mentioned first. Bruce Metzger speaks of certain manuscripts wherein the scribes may have purposely rearranged the names to either exclude Priscilla or place Aquilla first. Metzger concludes that, “The unusual order, the wife before the husband, must be accepted as original, for there was always a tendency among scribes to change the unusual to the usual. In the case of Priscilla and Aquila, however, it was customary in the early church to refer to her before her husband (cf. Ro 16.3; 2 Tm 4.19).[2] Therefore, Acts 18:26 should remain as a potent text that reveals women in ministry.

Paul’s words in 1 Timothy 2:12 do not mean that women should never teach. Paul uses the seemingly unyielding "I suffer not" a woman to teach, yet our knowledge of historical female role development should inform us as to the proper meaning of these words. The way some interpret this Pauline passage has scripture contradicting itself for women are, in fact, encouraged to teach in certain contexts (Titus 2:3). Timothy is to let a woman learn (be discipled) in peace (Greek êsuchia, “silence, restfulness”), without her being disturbed. The sense is not “in silence,” as in most translations, implying she should keep her mouth shut, but “at rest”; compare Acts 22:2 and 2 Thessalonians 3:12, where the word is translated, “settle down” (CJB). On the other hand, 1 Corinthians 14:34–35 does teach against disturbing chatter by females at congregational meetings. As we can tell Paul is making allowance, although careful ones, for the development of women’s role in the church. Paul is telling us that women are able to learn equally with men, this in itself is revolutionary concept in Paul’s day. [3]

Paul also uses the terms "usurp" and the phrase "have authority” (NAB). The BAGD defines “usurp” to mean, “domineer over someone.”[4] Friberg says, “strictly, of one who acts on his own authority; hence have control over, domineer, lord it over.”[5] Essentially, this refers to taking power that has NOT been given.

“To have authority translates a Greek verb that means "to control," "to dominate," "to control in a domineering manner." It is suggested that the Greek word for have authority can mean "interrupt," in which case what verse 12 is saying is that the women should remain completely quiet during the meetings and should not interrupt the men teachers in any way.”[6] “’To control in a domineering manner' is often expressed idiomatically, for example, 'to shout orders at,' 'to act like a chief toward,' or 'to bark at.'”[7] Thus this type of teaching is contextualized to refer to those who try to take carte blanche and run the show. I think we've all seen those around.The Greek word for “quietness” 1 Timothy 2:11 and “silent” in verse 12, does not mean complete silence or no talking. It is used elsewhere (Acts 22:2; 2 Thes. 3:12) to mean “settled down, undisturbed, not unruly.” A different word (sigaō Strong’s Greek # 4623) means “to keep quiet” (Luke 18:39; 1 Corinthians 14:34 HCSB).

The IVP Bible Background Commentary makes a very apropos statement, "Given women’s lack of training in the Scriptures, the heresy spreading in the Ephesian churches through ignorant teachers (1:4–7), and the false teachers’ exploitation of these women’s lack of knowledge to spread their errors (5:13; 2 Tim 3:6), Paul’s prohibition here makes good sense. His short-range solution is that these women should not teach; his long-range solution is “let them learn” (2:11). The situation might be different after the women had been instructed (2:11; cf. Rom 16:1–4, 7; Phil 4:2–3).”

Galatians 3:28 is viewed by many as the “Magna Carta for women in the church,” through its abolishment of the distinction between male and female in Christ.[8] While this proclamation neither institutes nor advocates a new unisex era, it supports the New Testament principle that God is no ‘respecter of persons.’[9] This verse actually serves as a restatement of Joel’s prophecy, fulfilled at Pentecost, that the Holy Spirit would be poured out on all flesh, ignoring gender, age, and class distinctions.[10] Certainly this passage must be considered when establishing guidelines for female participation in ministry. Also, one cannot ignore Paul’s own continual references to females serving in leadership capacities throughout his writings. The mention of women as leaders of the early church is especially prominent in Romans 16, which refers to numerous women whom Paul considered fellow workers in spreading the gospel, as well as naming Phoebe as a deacon (diakonos), and Junia as an apostle. Furthermore, it is noted that there is no instance in Romans 16 in which a man is mentioned by name for a church office that does not also include a female serving in the same capacity.[11]

The core issue related to the interpretive application of this passage deals with its universal or limited application. Given the volatility and debate over women in ministry their positions can and are limited today. I do feel that the office of the pastor is off-limits on the basis that information is shared, to a pastor, which would be highly offensive to the female. Also, Paul says “usurp authority” or that a female is not to take authority not given. This position requires someone to be in authority over the female and that her authority must be given or allowed her contextually. Teaching, is definitely condoned in the New Testament (Acts 18:26, Titus 2:3) as a female office. Thus this office should certainly be allowed, with discretion, of course, according to the pastors position on “women in ministry.”

The bible contains several passages which provide lucid guidelines for those who desire to be involved in church polity, none of which place gender limitations on ministry involvement. Questions of authority and offices are far more complex today than they were in the first century A.D., due to the detailed structure of modern churches, as opposed to the bottom-up, charismatic organization of the early church. The most basic answer to this dilemma must acknowledge that all believers are called to exercise their roles as priests, both male and female.

NOTES:

[1]Hammack, M., L. A Dictionary of Women in Church History. electronic ed. Grand Rapids: Baker Book House, 1997, c1984.
[2]Metzger, B. M., & United Bible Societies. (1994). A textual commentary on the Greek New Testament, second edition; a companion volume to the United Bible Societies' Greek New Testament (4th rev. ed.) (Page 413). London; New York: United Bible Societies.
[3]Stern, D. H. Jewish New Testament Commentary : A Companion Volume to the Jewish New Testament. 1st ed. Clarksville, Md.: Jewish New Testament Publications, 1992. 1 Ti 2:11.
[4]Arndt, W., F. W. Gingrich, F. W. Danker, & W. Bauer. A Greek-English Lexicon of the New Testament and Other Early Christian Literature : A Translation and Adaption of the Fourth Revised and Augmented Edition of Walter Bauer's Griechisch-Deutsches Worterbuch Zu Den Schrift En Des Neuen Testaments Und Der Ubrigen Urchristlichen Literatur. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1996, c1979. Page 121.
[5]Friberg, T., B. Friberg, & N. F. Miller. Analytical Lexicon of the Greek New Testament. Baker's Greek New Testament library. Grand Rapids, Mich.: Baker Books, 2000. Page 81.
[6] UBS Handbook Series. Copyright (c) 1961-1997, by United Bible Societies
[7] Greek-English Lexicon Based on Semantic Domain. Copyright © 1988 United Bible Societies, New York. Used by permission.)
[8]L. Belleville, Women Leaders and the Church (Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Book House, 2000), 15.
[9] See Acts 10:34.
[10]Mickelson, "An Egalitarian View: There is Neither Male nor Female in Christ," 180. See Acts 2:17-18.
[11] Peter Richardson, "From Apostles to Virgins: Romans 16 and the Roles of Women in the Early Church," delivered at the Evangelical Colloquium on Women and the Bible (October 9-11, 1984).