Do We Also Have Bible-Based Doctrines That Are Wrong? Is There a Case for Women as Pastors?

[BrotherTony]

11 minutes ago, Dr. Robert S. Morley said:

If apostles have the authority to teach congregations, which they do, and if Junia is an apostle, which the KJV says she is, then using an obscure passage like 1 Timothy 2:11-15 to restrict women from teaching with authority has no weight. Consequently, females can be pastors and teach with authority.

I was not correcting you about the meaning of obscure. I was explaining the context in which I used the word. I love you, brother.

And, as I have stated, I don't require your explanation. I love you as well, brother. I believe you are misguided and are attempting to misguide others intentionally or not. 

[Pastor Matt]

19 minutes ago, Dr. Robert S. Morley said:

If apostles have the authority to teach congregations, which they do, and if Junia is an apostle, which the KJV says she is, then using an obscure passage like 1 Timothy 2:11-15 to restrict women from teaching with authority has no weight. Consequently, females can be pastors and teach with authority.

It's still not the same  

[TheGloryLand]

1 hour ago, Dr. Robert S. Morley said:

 You don't recall me previously commenting on experience and appreciation of the KJV, and my son's exclusive use of it. As you know, outside of this site, I use other versions.

Your nose went down just a little bit.

[DaveW]

Without wanting to argue with this guy - there is no point arguing with a man such as this - I will point out a few things:

After my initial post in this thread, where I stated that Bible truth is truth, He refused to acknowledge that the Bible has absolute truths but instead manoeuvred around the point to state that all sorts of groups believe what they follow is Bible truth. In doing so, he promotes the point of view that the Bible has no absolute truths, but only perceived truths. This aligns with his presented "bible studies", which are all about perception and "interpretation".

 

Then after my second post he first states only his opinion (and the opinions of others) that Junia is a female name. He is relying on the convention in Greek that male names end in a consonant and female names end in a vowel. But this is the ONLY evidence that can be presented and it is not a 100% certainty. As displayed by for instance.... Aquila.... who is married to Priscilla.

Act 18:2
(2)  And found a certain Jew named Aquila, born in Pontus, lately come from Italy, with his wife Priscilla; (because that Claudius had commanded all Jews to depart from Rome:) and came unto them.
Apparently, because of the surrounding language Aquila is a man ("His wife"), but if we insist that the regular convention be 100% consistent then this couple would fit right into today's societal redefinitons. (He will probably use this in his next book as a proof of alternative lifestyles being promoted in the Bible).

Further, he discards the word "kinsmen" as being generic and non-gendered, because it suits his argument, however the Bible uses two words, and these are clearly used according to whether only men are referred to or more generically, a group of people which could include women.

Luk 2:44
(44)  But they, supposing him to have been in the company, went a day's journey; and they sought him among their kinsfolk and acquaintance.
Luk 21:16
(16)  And ye shall be betrayed both by parents, and brethren, and kinsfolks, and friends; and some of you shall they cause to be put to death.
The only use of "kinsman/men being in dispute being this one referring to Junia, which is only in dispute because people WANT Junia to be a female name, WITH NO EVIDENCE of such.

He also admits that husband and wife are inherently masculine and inherently feminine but the sidesteps that entirely to force the verse to be irrelevant with a side argument which is not relevant to the discussion.

In doing so, he makes the Word of God to none effect with humanistic reasonings, again emphasising the point that he has no regard to what the Word of God actually says.

This man has constantly and consistently ignored what the Bible actually says in order to redefine, re-understand, reinterpret, and simply outright ignore what the Word of God actually says.

He does this in every thread he has posted or participated in (as far as I can see), and he has come onto an Independent Baptist forum to make merchandise of the Lord (he promoted his books aggressively until he was told he was not allowed to do so here), and to try to sway anyone who comes looking for Bible truth away from Bible truth. Bible truth which he believes is entirely relative to who is reading it, as I pointed out in my first statements on this post.

Finally, anyone who disagrees with him he proclaims to be dishonest, mean spirited, and not acting according to the directions of the Lord, or in a manner aligning with a "Good Christian character".

To that I say only:

Tit 3:9-11
(9)  But avoid foolish questions, and genealogies, and contentions, and strivings about the law; for they are unprofitable and vain.
(10)  A man that is an heretick after the first and second admonition reject;
(11)  Knowing that he that is such is subverted, and sinneth, being condemned of himself.
 

and:

Rom 16:17-18
(17)  Now I beseech you, brethren, mark them which cause divisions and offences contrary to the doctrine which ye have learned; and avoid them.
(18)  For they that are such serve not our Lord Jesus Christ, but their own belly; and by good words and fair speeches deceive the hearts of the simple.
 

It is indeed Biblical to mark out men such as this man, who has posted foolish questions designed to sway people from the simplicity in Christ, and who has by his actions before he was stopped, shown that his purpose was to swell his own belly by the merchandising of his own thoughts as he promoted his own writings, the whole while twisting and ignoring the Word of God, claiming that it is not the Word of God as it is written.

 

My advice to anyone reading OLB at this time, is that where you see this man's name on a post, you need to be aware that this man does not value the Word of God as the Word of God, he has no desire to reveal the truth of the Word of God, but only his own perceptions and interpretations of the Word of God, and the god that he follows is simply not the God of the Bible.

And finally, none of this is an unfounded personal attack, as the facts that I state are clearly seen in his own posts and answers to other people's posts. I am not angry, other than to be offended at the blatant misuse, mirepresentation, and wresting of the Word of God, and disguised evil intent to draw people away from biblical truth. I am not attacking the man, but what the man has said and presented on this forum. It does however indicate the character of such a man and as such he will no doubt cry "ad hominin" to it.

 

[Napsterdad]

14 hours ago, Dr. Robert S. Morley said:

CBMW hold the opposite view to mine. They hold the complementarian view as opposed to the egalitarian view, which I hold. I showed you their material to indicate that what I am saying is broadly agreed upon with regard to the use of the word "among."

You can use the term "among" as you have described, however, in this context, according to both sides of the debate, that cannot be what the text means. Here are extracts from both:

CBMW, & CBE International

What I am saying has also been broadly agreed upon, not only by those on this forum, but by many commentators such as Barnes, Clarke, Coke, Gill, Henry, the JFB, The Bible Knowledge Commentary, etc. There are also those that say the word "apostle" used in Romans 16:7 may not mean the actual named apostles, but actually refers to the literal definition of the word "apostle", which is a messenger, one that is sent.

13 hours ago, Dr. Robert S. Morley said:

If apostles have the authority to teach congregations, which they do, and if Junia is an apostle, which the KJV says she is,

You have cited two sources that agree with your point of view. I have cited seven (there are more) that specifically agree or lean toward my point of view. As such your comment above that "the KJV says she is" an apostle is not a proven point as you insist that it is. 

Then there are also those (as DaveW points out) that say Junia could possibly be "Junias (for Junianus), which is a man's name.

Your hand-picked sources only prove you are right in your own eyes. 

[Pastor Scott Markle]

12 hours ago, DaveW said:

My advice to anyone reading OLB at this time, is that where you see this man's name on a post, you need to be aware that this man does not value the Word of God as the Word of God, he has no desire to reveal the truth of the Word of God, but only his own perceptions and interpretations of the Word of God, and the god that he follows is simply not the God of the Bible.

And finally, none of this is an unfounded personal attack, as the facts that I state are clearly seen in his own posts and answers to other people's posts. I am not angry, other than to be offended at the blatant misuse, misrepresentation, and wresting of the Word of God, and disguised evil intent to draw people away from biblical truth. I am not attacking the man, but what the man has said and presented on this forum. It does however indicate the character of such a man and as such he will no doubt cry "ad hominin" to it.

I wish to publicly add my voice - Amen, and AMEN!  I agree with Brother Dave fully in his above posting.

[TheGloryLand]

1 minute ago, Pastor Scott Markle said:

I wish to publicly add my voice - Amen, and AMEN!  I agree with Brother Dave fully in his above posting.

Thanks, I am a simple man with very little education, and I can clearly see where this man Dr. is coming from, and I even pointed out in my posts him as a liberal trying to please both sides. The liberal side of view and the conservative side of view. Some things I say may sound funny to some, but this is how I find out where a person stands. I visit his website or ministry. I believe the ministry belongs to his wife and he is there helping her out with all the female topics and books they have for sell. It looks like they don’t really evangelize or support missionaries, or lead people to Christ, solely to teach. This is not a bad thing, but if you want to reach the lost souls for Christ, this is not the way. If not careful, the ministry can become a business opportunity. I’m not saying he is doing this right now, but he needs to decide whom this day, who will he serve.

[Pastor Scott Markle]

Some information concerning the Greek name "Iounian" (Junia) in Romans 16:7.  It is true that an "an" declension at the end of a Greek word commonly conveys that the Greek word is feminine.  However, such is NOT universally the case in the Greek language.  There are some Greek words that carry what appears to be a feminine declension (containing the "a" element), but are NOT feminine words.  To illustrate -- In Romans 16:8 the apostle Paul mentions "Amplian" (Amplias).  Herein we notice that the name "Amplian" does indeed carry the "an" declension at the end of the word.  However, in the Greek the descriptive phrase "my beloved in the Lord" clearly carries the masculine Greek declension, clearly revealing that "Amplian" is masculine, even though the Greek ending to his name is "an."  Actually, the so-called Greek grammar convention that Dr. Morley has employed in his above argumentation is that which is obscure, NOT the clear teaching of 1 Timothy 2:9-15 (which is found within a broader context wherein the apostle Paul is providing instruction on how we ought to behave ourselves "in the house of God, which is the church of the living God").

Edited June 8, 2023 by Pastor Scott Markle

[Joe Chandler]

Women as Pastors

The qualifications for a bishop, elder, and deacon.

Here are the qualifications of a bishop and a deacon. Read the whole passage in your bible, because I have omitted the parts not pertaining to being a man as a condition of candidacy. I shoot with a rifle not a shotgun. The shotgun approach is used, not for context, but for introducing confusion by those who wish to prove that women can be pastors. That is the truth of it.

1 Timothy 3:1-16 This is a true saying, If a man desire the office of a bishop, he desireth a good work. 2 A bishop then must be blameless, the husband of one wife, … 4 One that ruleth well his own house, having his children in subjection with all gravity; 5 (For if a man know not how to rule his own house, how shall he take care of the church of God?)  8 Likewise must the deacons be … 11 Even so must their wives be grave, … 12 Let the deacons be the husbands of one wife, ruling their children and their own houses well.

Titus 1:5-12 For this cause left I thee in Crete, that thou shouldest set in order the things that are wanting, and ordain elders in every city, as I had appointed thee: 6 If any be blameless, the husband of one wife, …

Women in the church.

1 Corinthians 14:34-35 Let your women keep silence in the churches: for it is not permitted unto them to speak; but they are commanded to be under obedience, as also saith the law. 35 And if they will learn any thing, let them ask their husbands at home: for it is a shame for women to speak in the church.

1 Timothy 2:12-14 But I suffer not a woman to teach, nor to usurp authority over the man, but to be in silence. 13 For Adam was first formed, then Eve. 14 And Adam was not deceived, but the woman being deceived was in the transgression.

Isaiah puts shame on women ruling.

Isaiah 3:12 As for my people, children are their oppressors, and women rule over them. O my people, they which lead thee cause thee to err, and destroy the way of thy paths.

The passages above are clear and plain. Read it. Stay on topic. The office of Apostle is not the same as the office of pastors. The idea that Junia was an apostle, is disputed by Wesley, John Trapp, Matthew Poole, Ellicott, Coke, Adam Clark, Albert Barnes, and John Calvin. Some of their comments are listed below.

Romans 16:7 … who are of note among the apostles; were well known by, and in great account with the twelve apostles, though not of their number; they might be converted by them, and be followers of them in Judea… John Gill

Who are of note among the apostles; i.e. they were well known to the apostles, and were in good esteem with them: not only the twelve, together with Paul and Barnabas, but other teachers are sometimes called apostles, or messengers; see 2Co 8:23; Php 2:25. Some have thought these two, Andronicus and Junia, were of the number of the seventy disciples, who are mentioned Lu 10:1. Others, that they were of the one hundred and twenty, who are mentioned in Ac 1:15; or of those that were converted by the first preaching of Peter, and the rest, Ac 2:41; 4:4. By what follows, it appeareth they were of considerable standing in Christianity. … Matthew Poole

Ver. 7. Andronicus and Junia— Or, Junias. Diodati thinks that by apostles in this verse are meant the evangelists; and that the meaning is, that these persons were noted messengers of the churches; but it is more probable that they were some early converts, who had been known and much esteemed by the apostles before the dispersion occasioned by the death of Stephen: and if so, St. Paul perhaps might once have been active in persecuting them, and have learned their names at first with an hostile intent of hunting them down to destruction. See Craddock's Apostol. Hist. Diodati, and Doddridge. … Coke … Adam Clarke

Who are of note. The word translated of note, (epishmoi) denotes, properly, those who are marked, designated, or distinguished in any way; used either in a good or bad sense. Comp. Mt 27:16. Here it is used in a good sense.

Among the apostles. This does not mean that they were apostles, as has been sometimes supposed. For,

(1.) there is no account of their having been appointed 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." Comp. Ro 1:1; 1Co 1:1; 2Co 1:1; Col 1:1.

(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 honoured with the friendship of the other apostles.

(4.) The design of the office of apostles was to bear witness to the life, death, resurrection, doctrines, and miracles of Christ. Comp. Mt 10; Ac 1:21; 22:15. As there is no evidence that they had been witnesses of these things, or appointed to it, it is improbable that they were set apart to the apostolic office,

(5.) The word apostles is used sometimes to designate messengers of churches; or those who were sent from one church to another on some important business; and if this expression meant that they were apostles, it could only be in some such sense as having obtained deserved credit and eminence in that business. See Php 2:25; 2Co 8:23. Albert Barnes.

[Napsterdad]

It appeared to me that those denominations that began accepting women as pastors, were then more apt to begin accepting LGBTQ+ people; not only as members, but as leaders and pastors as well. I thought surely this would be a difficult thing to gather data on, but it appears that not only was I right, the data is right there at our fingertips.

Breaking Barriers: Women pastors may be paving way for gay, lesbian leaders.

Something to think about before you let someone try to lead you away from what most here have said the scripture clearly states. Women should not be pastors. There's no telling what it could lead to.

Edited June 8, 2023 by Napsterdad

[BrotherTony]

31 minutes ago, Napsterdad said:

It appeared to me that those denominations that began accepting women as pastors, were then more apt to begin accepting LGBTQ+ people; not only as members, but as leaders and pastors as well. I thought surely this would be a difficult thing to gather data on, but it appears that not only was I right, the data is right there at our fingertips.

Breaking Barriers: Women pastors may be pacing way for gay, lesbian leaders.

Something to think about before you let someone try to lead you away from what most here have said the scripture clearly states. Women should not be pastors. There's no telling what it could lead to.

Thanks for posting that Link. I was going to study this more over the weekend, especially since TGL had posted his belief that this was possibly the case. He didn't post any specific details to back up his assertions. It's interesting that this link is from a Presbyterian site, especially in light of many of the Presbyterian brothers and sisters saying that this wasn't so. My niece and her husband are Presbyterians in Augusta, Georgia, and they too say that their church itself doesn't promote this ideology. I'll have to contact the leadership there and find out for sure. 

[Dr. Robert S. Morley]

18 hours ago, DaveW said:

Without wanting to argue with this guy - there is no point arguing with a man such as this - I will point out a few things:

After my initial post in this thread, where I stated that Bible truth is truth, He refused to acknowledge that the Bible has absolute truths but instead manoeuvred around the point to state that all sorts of groups believe what they follow is Bible truth. In doing so, he promotes the point of view that the Bible has no absolute truths, but only perceived truths. This aligns with his presented "bible studies", which are all about perception and "interpretation".

Hi Dave,

Thank you for your concern for the body of Christ and God’s word. Let me respond to your thoughts. Saying “all sorts of groups believe what they follow is Bible truth” does not mean that I “promote[ ] the point of view that the Bible has no absolute truths, but only perceived truths.” The statement of faith of most evangelical churches or denominations state that they believe the Bible is God’s inerrant word and yet they interpret the Bible differently on topics such as this and many others.

18 hours ago, DaveW said:

Then after my second post he first states only his opinion (and the opinions of others) that Junia is a female name. He is relying on the convention in Greek that male names end in a consonant and female names end in a vowel. But this is the ONLY evidence that can be presented and it is not a 100% certainty. As displayed by for instance.... Aquila.... who is married to Priscilla.

Junia is a female name. Junias is the male version. The KJV chose Junia. You can choose Junias if you prefer.

18 hours ago, DaveW said:

Act 18:2
(2)  And found a certain Jew named Aquila, born in Pontus, lately come from Italy, with his wife Priscilla; (because that Claudius had commanded all Jews to depart from Rome:) and came unto them.
Apparently, because of the surrounding language Aquila is a man ("His wife"), but if we insist that the regular convention be 100% consistent then this couple would fit right into today's societal redefinitons. (He will probably use this in his next book as a proof of alternative lifestyles being promoted in the Bible).

The Bible shows that Aquila is a man, and the husband of Priscilla, his wife.

18 hours ago, DaveW said:

Further, he discards the word "kinsmen" as being generic and non-gendered, because it suits his argument, however the Bible uses two words, and these are clearly used according to whether only men are referred to or more generically, a group of people which could include women.

Luk 2:44
(44)  But they, supposing him to have been in the company, went a day's journey; and they sought him among their kinsfolk and acquaintance.
Luk 21:16
(16)  And ye shall be betrayed both by parents, and brethren, and kinsfolks, and friends; and some of you shall they cause to be put to death.
The only use of "kinsman/men being in dispute being this one referring to Junia, which is only in dispute because people WANT Junia to be a female name, WITH NO EVIDENCE of such.

I gave the Strong’s definition of a kinsman. Strong's Greek 4773: Akin to, related; subst: fellow countryman, kinsman. From sun and genos; a relative; by extension, a fellow countryman.

Your argument is against the KJV interpretation of Junia, and multiple other translations.

Bible Translations Historically Render Iounian as Female

Bible commentators prior to the thirteenth century unanimously favor the female name, Junia. Moving forward, an overwhelming majority of Bible translations from the late 1300s through the mid-1800s translate Iounian as a woman, not as a man. These Bibles include: Wycliffe (1382, 13902), Göttingen Gutenberg Bible³ (1454), Erasmus Greek-Latin NT (1519), Tyndale (1525), Coverdale (1535), Matthew (1537), Great Bible (1539–41), Taverner (1539), Geneva NT (1557), Bishops (1568), Spanish “Bear” Bible (1569), Rheims (1582), Geneva Bible (1583–99), Hutter Polyglot (1599), Reina-Valera⁴ (1602, 1858, 1909), King James Version (1611), Giovanni Diodati (1649), Wycliffe NT (1731), Webster (1833), Murdock NT (1852), and Julia Smith (1876).

Early twentieth-century translations that understand Junia to be a woman include: Weymouth (1903), Montgomery NT (1924), Riveduta (1927), Lamsa Bible (1933), and Bible in Basic English (1949). Later twentieth-century Bibles that also present Junia as a woman include:⁵ CJB, GNT, GW, HCSB, ISV, KJ21, NCV, NIRV, NIVUK, NLT, NKJV, NRSV, NRSVA, NRSVACE, NRSVCE, REB, TMB, WE. Since 2000, there have been at least thirty new translations or revisions that translate Iounian as Junia. These include: aent, brg, ceb, CSB, EHV, EOB, erv, esv, EMTV, exb, Jmnt, jub, mev, Mounce, nabre, net, NMB, nheb, niv, NTE, nog, NR06, oeb, ojb, osb, leb, tniv, TPT, tlv, web. (Junia, a Female Apostle: An Examination of the Historical Record).

18 hours ago, DaveW said:

He also admits that husband and wife are inherently masculine and inherently feminine but the sidesteps that entirely to force the verse to be irrelevant with a side argument which is not relevant to the discussion.

?

18 hours ago, DaveW said:

he has come onto an Independent Baptist forum to make merchandise of the Lord (he promoted his books aggressively until he was told he was not allowed to do so here), and to try to sway anyone who comes looking for Bible truth away from Bible truth. Bible truth which he believes is entirely relative to who is reading it, as I pointed out in my first statements on this post.

I try to always reference people’s work, including my own. The work from our books, which are intentionally sold at the low price end, is simultaneously promoted as freely available in blog posts and websites so that anybody can access it.

18 hours ago, DaveW said:

Finally, anyone who disagrees with him he proclaims to be dishonest, mean spirited, and not acting according to the directions of the Lord, or in a manner aligning with a "Good Christian character".

To that I say only:

Tit 3:9-11
(9)  But avoid foolish questions, and genealogies, and contentions, and strivings about the law; for they are unprofitable and vain.
(10)  A man that is an heretick after the first and second admonition reject;
(11)  Knowing that he that is such is subverted, and sinneth, being condemned of himself.
 

and:

Rom 16:17-18
(17)  Now I beseech you, brethren, mark them which cause divisions and offences contrary to the doctrine which ye have learned; and avoid them.
(18)  For they that are such serve not our Lord Jesus Christ, but their own belly; and by good words and fair speeches deceive the hearts of the simple.

As brothers and sisters in Christ, different interpretations of the Bible should be discussed in love. In the end, we can agree to disagree. “Let us therefore, as many as be perfect, be thus minded: and if in any thing ye be otherwise minded, God shall reveal even this unto you” (Php. 3:15).

On this topic, I teach what others brothers and sisters see in God’s word. There are multiple, but here are a few. Regardless of what you think of me and my ministry, these people and organizations have endeavored to serve God through wholehearted obedience to His word.

F.F. Bruce, Biblical Scholar and professor of Biblical Criticism and Exegesis - Women in the Church: a Biblical Survey

Loren Cunningham, Founder of Youth With A Mission – Why Not Women: A Biblical Study of Women in Missions, Ministry, and Leadership

Gordon Fee, author of How to Read the Bible for all its Worth - contributing editor to Discovering Biblical Equality (2004)

Salvation Army - Egalitarianism: What is it and what does it mean for you?

According to CBE International, “these groups are known to give women access to leadership positions. They include:

·         American Baptist

·         The Anglican Communion

·         Assemblies of God

·         Church of the Brethren

·         Church of the Foursquare

·         Church of the Nazarene

·         Cooperative Baptist Fellowship

·         Christian Reformed Church

·         Disciples of Christ

·         ECO: A Covenant Order of Evangelical Presbyterians

·         Episcopal Church in the USA

·         Evangelical Covenant

·         Evangelical Lutheran Churches of America (ELCA)

·         Free Methodists

·         Friends

·         Grace Communion International

·         Mennonite Church of the USA

·         The Presbyterian Church USA (PCUSA)

·         The Evangelical Presbyterian Church (EPC)

·         Reformed Church in America

·         Salvation Army

·         United Methodists

·         Vineyard Fellowship

·         Wesleyan

This study conducted by Gordon-Conwell Theological Seminary also provides helpful information on various denominations’ stances” (Egalitarian Directory).

[TheGloryLand]

Outstanding Dr. I like your kindness and smooth reproach to this topic. The Bible talks about believers selling out. I believe this is happening, especially as we approach the end of times, many religious Christian organizations are going to sell out, and as I mentioned in one of my posts. True believers Christians, pastors, and evangelists are in the minority. Dr. you are in the minority in this forum. 

Those that sold out you mentioned 

According to CBE International, “these groups are known to give women access to leadership positions. They include:

·         American Baptist

·         The Anglican Communion

·         Assemblies of God

·         Church of the Brethren

·         Church of the Foursquare

·         Church of the Nazarene

·         Cooperative Baptist Fellowship

·         Christian Reformed Church

·         Disciples of Christ

·         ECO: A Covenant Order of Evangelical Presbyterians

·         Episcopal Church in the USA

·         Evangelical Covenant

·         Evangelical Lutheran Churches of America (ELCA)

·         Free Methodists

·         Friends

·         Grace Communion International

·         Mennonite Church of the USA

·         The Presbyterian Church USA (PCUSA)

·         The Evangelical Presbyterian Church (EPC)

·         Reformed Church in America

·         Salvation Army

·         United Methodists

·         Vineyard Fellowship

·         Wesleyan

This study conducted by Gordon-Conwell Theological Seminary also provides helpful information on various denominations’ stances” (Egalitarian Directory).

 

These will be saying in the end times, Lord, didn’t we do this Lord, didn’t we do that? Have mercy on us, and the Lord will say, depart from me, for I never knew you.

Edited June 8, 2023 by TheGloryLand

[Dr. Robert S. Morley]

19 hours ago, Napsterdad said:

What I am saying has also been broadly agreed upon, not only by those on this forum, but by many commentators such as Barnes, Clarke, Coke, Gill, Henry, the JFB, The Bible Knowledge Commentary, etc. There are also those that say the word "apostle" used in Romans 16:7 may not mean the actual named apostles, but actually refers to the literal definition of the word "apostle", which is a messenger, one that is sent.

You have cited two sources that agree with your point of view. I have cited seven (there are more) that specifically agree or lean toward my point of view. As such your comment above that "the KJV says she is" an apostle is not a proven point as you insist that it is. 

CBMW, & CBE International

The reason that I gave CBMW and CBE International as sources is that these two entities have made this topic their focus, and they hold opposing views. They have already processed source texts, translations, language development, the church fathers, and the thoughts of commentators. That is not to discount what others have to say or to assume they have taken everything into account.

Btw, these three you cited were not so adamant. This is also what they said:

Barnes – “and ‘if’ this expression meant that they "were" apostles, it could only be in some such sense as having obtained deserved credit and eminence in that business.”

Clarke – “Junia may probably be the name of a woman, the wife of Andronicus." “Whether this intimates that they were noted apostles or only highly reputed by the apostles, is not absolutely clear; but the latter appears to me the most probable.”

Gill – “they might be preachers of the Gospel, and be persons of great fame and renown as such; for which reason they might be called apostles, that being a name sometimes given to ordinary ministers of the word, and to such who were messengers of the churches.”

There are many more. Here are some others:

John Chrysostom (AD 347–407) – “‘Who are of note among the Apostles.’ And indeed to be apostles [1679] at all is a great thing. But to be even amongst these of note, just consider what a great encomium this is! But they were of note owing to their works, to their achievements. Oh! how great is the devotion (philosophia) of this woman, [1680] that she should be even counted worthy of the appellation of apostle! [1681]”

Alford – “Two renderings are given: (1) ‘of note among the Apostles,’ so that they themselves are counted among the Apostles . . . or (2) ‘noted among the Apostles,’ i.e. well known and spoken of by the Apostles. But . . . had this latter been the meaning, we should have expected some expression like . . . (See 2Corinthians 8:18). . . [F]or Paul to speak of any persons as celebrated among the Apostles in sense (2), would imply that he had more frequent intercourse with the other Apostles, than we know that he had; and would besides be improbable on any supposition.”

I know that you can equally give me the views of many commentators who say otherwise. In the end, I hope to make clear that the case for woman speaking with authority to a church is an acceptable outcome of hermeneutics. Should those who believe differently, as many of these people did, be excluded from fellowship for practicing what they believe is biblically sound and evidenced? That’s the current issue being raised by those who have been ousted from the SBC.

19 hours ago, Napsterdad said:

Then there are also those (as DaveW points out) that say Junia could possibly be "Junias (for Junianus), which is a man's name.

The KJV version used here chose Junia.

[Dr. Robert S. Morley]

18 hours ago, TheGloryLand said:

Thanks, I am a simple man with very little education, and I can clearly see where this man Dr. is coming from, and I even pointed out in my posts him as a liberal trying to please both sides. The liberal side of view and the conservative side of view. Some things I say may sound funny to some, but this is how I find out where a person stands. I visit his website or ministry. I believe the ministry belongs to his wife and he is there helping her out with all the female topics and books they have for sell. It looks like they don’t really evangelize or support missionaries, or lead people to Christ, solely to teach. This is not a bad thing, but if you want to reach the lost souls for Christ, this is not the way. If not careful, the ministry can become a business opportunity. I’m not saying he is doing this right now, but he needs to decide whom this day, who will he serve.

Thanks, TGL. Btw, you might not have noticed, but I have several evangelistic posts. Here are three:

The Bible Is Both Good News and Bad News

Are You Saved and Assured of Your Salvation?

Am I Going To Heaven?

If I could have chosen my ministry, I would have been an evangelist because seeing people come to Christ is the most beautiful thing. Ministry is far broader than winning souls, though, and I am happy that I have been assigned and enabled, primarily, for other work.

Ephesians 4:11-16 states, “And he gave some, apostles; and some, prophets; and some, evangelists; and some, pastors and teachers; For the perfecting of the saints, for the work of the ministry, for the edifying of the body of Christ: Till we all come in the unity of the faith, and of the knowledge of the Son of God, unto a perfect man, unto the measure of the stature of the fulness of Christ: That we henceforth be no more children, tossed to and fro, and carried about with every wind of doctrine, by the sleight of men, and cunning craftiness, whereby they lie in wait to deceive; But speaking the truth in love, may grow up into him in all things, which is the head, even Christ: From whom the whole body fitly joined together and compacted by that which every joint supplieth, according to the effectual working in the measure of every part, maketh increase of the body unto the edifying of itself in love.”

Your concern for who I serve is on my conscience too. For example, I am currently teaching someone in Asia who had advertised that they were willing to pay for a Bible instructor. Though it is a small amount, after three sessions, I said that payment wasn't necessary and that I was willing to do it for free. I did not like the idea that I was being paid for what I would have given anyway. Having been a missionary, I know that the Lord has always provided. And, as for our books, they are intentionally sold at the lower end and we typically point out where our material can be found for free.

Edited June 9, 2023 by Dr. Robert S. Morley