Featured Women deacons

The Greek word, diakonos, when translated into English shows the gender bias of English and even to a greater extent of the translators. When referring to a male diakonos the term minister is often used. The same term when referring to a female is never translated as minister. This, in itself, show a bias on the part of many translators.

Interestingly almost all translators translate the word as wife in I Timothy 3:11 except for the Weymouth New Testament. Here the word wife is changed to:

Deaconesses, in the same way, must be sober-minded women, not slanderers, but in every way temperate and trustworthy.

The word diakonos is used 31 times in the NT. Phoebe is simply called a servant (diakonon) which can be rendered differently in different Bibles: "minister" (Darby, YLT), "servant" (ASV, ESV, HCSB, ISV, KJV, NASB, NIV, NKJV), "helper" (NCV), "deacon" (NLT, NRSV), and "deaconess" (RSV).

 

Interesting. So would you say it is a "flippant claim" to say that all complimentarians are ignoring what they know to be the scriptural truth because they are simply afraid of strong women?

...or is it "Just fine" if they disagree?

 

I don't think they are ignoring it, I think they're refusing to consider other interpretations.

 

So would you say that you are yourself doing the same thing...or is only one side guilty of this?

 

:thumbs::thumbs: Amen!

 

Let me throw a little wrench into this discussion. The King James translators added to God's Word when they added "use the office of a" deacon. These verses are not describing an official office in a religious organization. The King James interpreters were interpreting in the context of an established state religion. In the Geneva Bible, the one brought to us by persecuted Christians, the term διακονέω is rightly interpreted as the action verb, minister. There is no word in the Greek for "office" in 1 Timothy 3. Also, deacon is not a translation, it is a transliteration. The correct English word would be minister or servant. Deacon has a more official connotation than it deserves. Every person who serves the church is a Biblical deacon(servant); from the person mowing the yard to the women in the nursery. I will never understand why Baptists want to conform to the world's view of religion; a hierarchical organization marked by formal structure instead of a spiritual organism that is built on relationships.

 

Oops, unnecessary correction deleted.

 

Did I kill the conversation by pointing out a purposeful error in the King James Bible? I would sincerely like to hear why Baptists don't mind this addition & happily base Church doctrine upon it without question.

 

No:

1.) Assuming (unwarrantedly) that this was a "purposeful" "error" might kill conversation. Transliteration may or may not have been the best of ideas, but it does not necessarily imply that there was any intent to obfuscate or confuse or promote a certain bias.

2.) Even if everything you state about the translation issue is true...it does absolutely nothing to weaken the case of those who do not believe the Scriptures teach for a female office or official capacity of "deacon"....In other words...So what? It changes nothing. Playing with the insistence of Phoebe's status as "deacon" is the argument of those who concur with the idea of female "deacons"...The over-all context of all of those passages is the argument of those who do not.

 

There is absolutely nothing in the Greek to justify adding the words "use the office" into the text. It is the same as if you gave me a note to translate into Spanish & give to someone else that reads "I will pay you $50 to work for me today" & I change it to "I will pay you $50 per day to work as my employee". That can be nothing less than a purposeful addition to your message. The idea that there is an official church office of "deacon" is based on an addition to the text combined with a transliteration. This is a poor foundation for church doctrine.

It destroys the entire argument. The very idea of an office of a deacon is a fallacy. I'm sorry if that does not fit with your theology, but it is the truth. The only Scriptural evidence you have was added to God's Word. The text is speaking of ministering, not using an office. That is a ridiculous addition to the text.

Fact: There are no words "use the office of a" in the Greek text.
Fact: The KJV translators added wording that was not in the Greek & changed the meaning & sense of the text.

 

Did they make a mistake when they gave the qualifications for a deacon? I think not. No way the liberals can get around that one scripturally. It's the fact that there are qualifications that make it an office, not the transliteration. Just like the bishop has qualifications and is called an office by more than just the KJV. It's common sense, sheesh. Nowhere in the bible does it call communion and baptism ordinances, but that does not mean they are not. It's the qualifications that make the difference.

 

Let's see if I understand your position. Scripture outlines the qualifications for serving in the Church & you think that justifies adding to God's Word. Interesting. Oh, and about the "liberals" remark, there's nothing liberal about rightly interpreting Scripture. Liberals have no problem justifying additions or deletions from Scripture in order to justify their beliefs. Do you always throw out the liberals attack when someone disagrees with you? Doing so only cheapens your position. BTW, do liberals reject modern versions for the Geneva Bible? Hmmmm.....

Here's the accurate translation:
And let them first be proved: then let them minister, if they be found blameless. (1 Timothy 3:10)

 

Fact:.....change "use the office of" to...."I am Mickey Mouse"...or "Michael Eisner is the anti-Christ" and it won't change the context one iota...

Fact:....the people who "use the office of" or who "are Mickey Mouse" or who "hate misogynistic jerks who despise the equality of women" OR>>>> who "think Michael Eisner is the anti-Christ"... are still described as being:

1.) Males or men with "one WIFE"
2.) those who "rule their house well"

In fact.... in two verses...Paul describes them in terms of a married man with a wife two times in as many verses...I'll quote them for you:
3:11 Even so [must their] wives [be] grave, not slanderers, sober, faithful in all things.
3:12 Let the deacons be the husbands of one wife, ruling their children and their own houses well.

Now... if you think that the entire argument boils down to your obsession over the immaterial verbiage (I quote you):

even matters...than, you need to learn to read arguments as presented in English....it doesn't matter how that is phrased.

You are officially engaged in what is called a "red-herring"....trying to make people chase an argument which is not even germaine to the topic at all.

1.) You know NOTHING of what the KJV translators knew about how to appropriately translate that verse
2.) your hang-up about the ancillary phrase "use the office of" doesn't even effect the argument either way.....

So I re-itterate..."So what"??