Who is Junia?

  • Christian Chat is a moderated online Christian community allowing Christians around the world to fellowship with each other in real time chat via webcam, voice, and text, with the Christian Chat app. You can also start or participate in a Bible-based discussion here in the Christian Chat Forums, where members can also share with each other their own videos, pictures, or favorite Christian music.

    If you are a Christian and need encouragement and fellowship, we're here for you! If you are not a Christian but interested in knowing more about Jesus our Lord, you're also welcome! Want to know what the Bible says, and how you can apply it to your life? Join us!

    To make new Christian friends now around the world, click here to join Christian Chat.

Dino246

Senior Member
Jun 30, 2015
25,602
13,861
113
#21
Jesus never stated women could not serve the kingdom. Because that would be an absurd prohibition to discriminate against them due to their sex when, as we all know, sin entered the world through the failure of the first male to obey God as the man demonstrated himself incapable of leading a woman to obedience by word or example. And further compounded his weakness when he sinned and lied to God as the man tried to blame Eve for his lack of courage and character, when God asked the man what he had done wrong.

By one man sin entered the world. Man. Not woman.

Therein, any feigned argument whereby the male sex is imagined superior for leadership in God's plan is proven false and not credible, and by Adam himself in the first account recorded in Biblical history.
And with God, the serpent, and Eve as witness.

Women served as Disciples with Christ, and as Apostles later on, and were even praised for serving side by side with Paul.
After resurrection Jesus appeared first to a woman. Jesus entrusted to her the blessed responsibility to go forth and inform the Disciples he lives yet again. And to come see.
And Jesus did this at a time, in a culture, where women were to remain quiet and subservient. Jesus balked against man's prejudices and traditions that were prosecuted in the name of the law, but per Jesus was clearly not that what God approved. Otherwise, God, by example, and as The Word that is God made flesh to dwell among us, made clear.
He and his Disciples healed and worked on the Sabbath. Women journeyed as equals with Jesus as fellow Disciples with the men in his company. Jesus taught forgiveness and love of one's enemies, rather than reiterating the rule of eye for an eye.
And much more.

Traditions that therefore teach women cannot be called by God to teach are a sin. One that vacates the example set by God himself when Jesus told the men and women in his company to go forth into the world and spread the Gospels good news.

Some traditions will impugn Paul's character in that effort as well. Claiming his teaching that women should remain quiet in temple, church, is evidence women can't preach.

Paul didn't call people to serve the kingdom.
God does.

If Paul meant to say what those traditions claim of him, he would have violated his own edict when boasting of those women Apostles, today called preachers, pastors,ministers, with whom he served side by side. That's not the case however.
Paul was talking about and to those instances where someone may wish to question for better understanding what was being taught in the moment.
Rather than disrupt the service with questions, Paul said the women, and of course men would be able to also have questions, should wait and inquire when in private at home.

If that teaching by Paul actually did pertain to prohibition of women pastoring on church, the rest of Paul's remarks , "If they (women) want to find out about something, they should ask their husbands at home, because it is disgraceful for a woman to speak in church."

Clearly, that passage in 1 Corinthians 14 has to do with making inquiry while in church. Not a prohibition against women pastoring, teaching, in church.
Otherwise that teaching which precedes it would be in error in 1 Corinthians 11. "But any woman who prays or prophesies... ".
If women are to remain quiet in church, Paul cannot refer to women who pray or prophecy in church.


Phoebe, Junia(Julia), and five other women were praised by Paul for their ministerial services to the church in Paul's letters to the Romans.
That is evidence Paul allowed women to serve side by side with him in ministering the Gospel.

Paul said in his letter to the Galatians 3:28, there is neither Jew nor Greek, slave nor free, male nor female, for you are all one in Christ Jesus.

And then he proved it by having women Apostles and ministers serving in the churches.

God calls whom he will to serve the kingdom.
Those who insist he doesn't call women due to their sex making them unfit, when a man was responsible for sin entering the world, aren't speaking the truth of Paul, or of God, who guided Paul to serve him in ministry.

The Bible shows us this.
What are mens prejudices but the sins God's grace is suppose to cover and forgive.
Hi IceDaisy...
You disagreed with my post, but responded to Diakonos' post and seem to agree with my position rather than his. Care to explain?
 

Icedaisey

Well-known member
Jul 19, 2021
1,398
475
83
#22
Hi IceDaisy...
You disagreed with my post, but responded to Diakonos' post and seem to agree with my position rather than his. Care to explain?
I guess so.

I wasn't responding to anyone but MOC.
 

Diakonos

Well-known member
Jan 19, 2019
1,381
434
83
31
Anacortes, WA
#24
Jesus never stated women could not serve the kingdom.
Neither have I. That is a false generalization of something you think I implied.


...I am responding to your entire post here, but I am only quoting this part of the post because it is a good summary of your post.
I have already exhaustively contributed my position to this subject with several Biblical references in this thread (below).

https://christianchat.com/bible-dis...n-not-allowed-to-preach-in-every-case.191134/

If you chose to examine my position on what you have brought up, please read everything I said and the verses I provided before responding. In my experience, many people tend to assume that the people they disagree with are using Scripture out of context, so they only read the other person's input, and miss where they are deriving their position from, Biblically.
That's called "condemnation before examination"...big hermeneutical no-no.

I hope this other thread helps you understand my position and why.
Shalom
 
Aug 20, 2021
1,863
310
83
#25
hermeneutical :just thought i should mention that is the Greek word for translate.found a couple time in the new testament only once without Meta attached 2 it as a prefix.
 

mustaphadrink

Senior Member
Dec 13, 2013
1,987
372
83
#26
Using the example of Junia/Junias as an example of a female apostle is self defeating for the simple reason one does not under any circumstances build a doctrine on one verse of scripture. If there was such a thing as female apostles, there would be more than one verse on the topic.

There are 23 verses in the New Testament that refer to the leadership of the New Testamewnt Church. Every one of them refers to Apostles, Prophets and Elders. Not one of them refers to pastors. Therefore it is wrong to make a pastor a leader of the church.
 

Icedaisey

Well-known member
Jul 19, 2021
1,398
475
83
#27
Neither have I. That is a false generalization of something you think I implied.


...I am responding to your entire post here, but I am only quoting this part of the post because it is a good summary of your post.
I have already exhaustively contributed my position to this subject with several Biblical references in this thread (below).

https://christianchat.com/bible-dis...n-not-allowed-to-preach-in-every-case.191134/

If you chose to examine my position on what you have brought up, please read everything I said and the verses I provided before responding. In my experience, many people tend to assume that the people they disagree with are using Scripture out of context, so they only read the other person's input, and miss where they are deriving their position from, Biblically.
That's called "condemnation before examination"...big hermeneutical no-no.

I hope this other thread helps you understand my position and why.
Shalom
If not mistaken you're also with us at Talk Jesus forum?

I wish I could edit my prior post and omit yours that I quoted as the last post I read before electing to respond solely to the whole of the OP.

My position is Biblically sound. That is what I stand by.
 

Diakonos

Well-known member
Jan 19, 2019
1,381
434
83
31
Anacortes, WA
#28
If not mistaken you're also with us at Talk Jesus forum?
No, I think you have me mistaken for someone else.
My position is Biblically sound. That is what I stand by.
Did you mean to quote/respond to my post?
The majority of your post was unrelated to what I said; I merely explained the purpose of Biblical Eldership and the alternate titles for elders given in the Bible. The motivation for my comment was that Dino seemed to imply that Timothy was not a pastor. (I could have interpreted his comment incorrectly, but to be safe, I gave my input with some Biblical references about eldership in the Bible.
 

Icedaisey

Well-known member
Jul 19, 2021
1,398
475
83
#29
No, which is why I said I wished I could omit your post from my response. That would help to end this confusion.
 

ResidentAlien

Well-known member
Apr 21, 2021
8,430
3,680
113
#30
Early Church tradition does indeed hold she was a female and an apostle...

But of course "male chauvinists" (and the Church is filled with them) think they know better!
Oh. . .well. . .church tradition. That settles it then.
 

presidente

Senior Member
May 29, 2013
9,165
1,795
113
#33
Either an apostle considered by other apostles to be of note,

or

A non-apostle considered among the apostles to be of note.
 
Aug 20, 2021
1,863
310
83
#34
Either an apostle considered by other apostles to be of note,

or

A non-apostle considered among the apostles to be of note.
like a music note,,,like music to the ears?
 
Nov 26, 2012
3,095
1,050
113
#35
I think logic escapes too many posters here. There were the original twelve apostles. They were with Christ, His inner circle. With the deliverance of the Holy Spirit, all who are in Christ become apostles, many even more sensational than the ones who walked with Christ. The word apostle is what should be studied here. Paul suggested women should not have authority over a man in church leadership. He never suggested they were incapable to serve Christ. That’s what an apostle is, one in service to the Lord. A woman is fully capable and welcome to be such an apostle. That being said, if she is a wife and mother her focus should be in tandem with her husband’s ministry. They are one, as in Christ, we are all One, men, women and children, void of nationality and colour.
 

presidente

Senior Member
May 29, 2013
9,165
1,795
113
#36
I think logic escapes too many posters here. There were the original twelve apostles. They were with Christ, His inner circle. With the deliverance of the Holy Spirit, all who are in Christ become apostles, many even more sensational than the ones who walked with Christ. The word apostle is what should be studied here. Paul suggested women should not have authority over a man in church leadership. He never suggested they were incapable to serve Christ. That’s what an apostle is, one in service to the Lord. A woman is fully capable and welcome to be such an apostle. That being said, if she is a wife and mother her focus should be in tandem with her husband’s ministry. They are one, as in Christ, we are all One, men, women and children, void of nationality and colour.
Why would Paul ask the following in I Corinthians 12 if all are apostles,

"All are not apostles, are they?"
 
Nov 26, 2012
3,095
1,050
113
#37
Why would Paul ask the following in I Corinthians 12 if all are apostles,

"All are not apostles, are they?"
Thanks for the correction. This goes back to what I suggested about a better understanding of the word “apostle”. It would appear the translation is “person sent”, I suppose more like a missionary. In that regard, like you pointed out, in Paul’s letter, it is a functioning member of the Body of Christ. It is a messenger, not a Church leader, so a female would be an acceptable apostle.
 

Aidan1

Well-known member
Mar 17, 2021
1,680
705
113
#38
At the end of the Book of Romans, Paul greets many individuals by name, including "Andronicus and Junia." Many make the claim that the two were Apostles. This would be rather interesting in that "Junia" is a feminine name, which would mean the only female Apostle mentioned in the New Testament. Church leaders for decades have argued over whether Junia was a man or a woman. They argue over the name and how it should be translated and they argue over how the two individuals are addressed, meaning that their mentioned together. This, many conclude means they are husband and wife. There is one phrase that always seems to come up in debates...."among the Apostles." When Paul greets Andronicus and Junia, scholars suggest that Paul is implying that they are also Apostles. Was Junia a woman, who was also an Apostle? It is not known how many other Apostles there were. In Acts 1:26, we know Matthias replaced Judas. Also, Paul was added to this group of Apostles when Jesus called him on the road to Damascus. Paul tells us that there were more Apostles than just the 12, in 1 Corinthians 15:5-7.

Romans 16:7 "Salute Andronicus and Junia, my kinsmen, and my fellow prisoners, who are of note among the Apostles, who also were in Christ before me." Lets focus on a few things in this passage: 1.) Paul refers to them as his "fellow prisoners", so obviously they were in jail together at some point. 2.) Andronicus and Junia are mentioned together, which strongly implies they were married. 3.) "who are of note among the Apostles". Does this simple mean they were well known by the Apostles? Most literature experts argue the male "Junias" is unlikely because of its rarity in culture. Whether it is the female "Junia" or the male "Junias"(a contraction of Junianus or Hebrew Yehunni), there may be too many uncertainties in Romans 16:7 to assert there was a woman Apostle.

Those who support a female Apostle most always turn to Romans 16:7 and the part that reads, "who are of note among the Apostles", which of course is about Andronicus and Junia. But since "kinsmen" and "fellow prisoners" were terms used for other non-Apostles, Paul is most likely meaning these people were Christians known by the other Apostles and NOT numbered among them.

Definition of Apostle
Apostle means, "one who is sent out." Most Christians and church leaders use the word Apostle in two different ways: 1.) Specific people whom Christ first chose that actually walked with Him before His crucifixion. 2.) Those after Jesus' death, who had not walked with Him. ***Most Church leaders believe that the Apostles were the first 12 Jesus chose who were sent out after His death. So, obviously there would be no Apostles today.

Junia or Junias?
The name given in Romans 16:7, is given as IOYNIAN, a form whose grammatical gender could be either feminine or masculine. Forty to fifty years ago, the translation of the name as female would have been highly refuted. Many claim that by looking back through church history, there is evidence of translations adding an "s" to Junia, making the name be the male gender. Why? If a woman could be an Apostle, how much more could she be a pastor?

5 against Junia being a female Apostle
1.) Jesus first called 12 Apostles, all being men.
2.) The Apostles correspond to the 12 tribes of Israel, which came from the 12 sons of Jacob. Again all men.
3.) Even if Junia is identified as an Apostle, it could mean she was an Apostle in the non-technical sense of "messenger" or "representative", like a missionary--2 Corinthians 8:23
4.) In Acts 1:21-22, it says that only "men" were in consideration for Apostleship.
5.) Not mentioning Romans 16:7, it seems that everything else in scripture teaches that only men could be Apostles.

If we just take Romans 16:7, just focusing on this one passage of scripture, we need only to read "who are of note among the Apostles". It simply means that Andronicus and Junia were well known to the Apostles. So the debate on Junia being a female Apostle would end there because the text just doesn't say that. Nor was Andronicus an Apostle either. Think about this: If Jesus wanted to appoint a woman to be His Apostle, He certainly would have done so, as He was not shy about overturning cultural errors.
She was not a female apostle. " who are Note among the apostles " is no proof that she was a apostle.