Who is the 12th apostle?

===


or a woman ????????????? (Rom 16)

 

Originally posted by TCassidy:

That's 'bout clear as it gets........

 

==


Bob

I guess we just don't read the same stuff

The implication is VERY CLEAR in the Greek clause of Romans 16:7 which reads, "hoitines eisin episemoi en tois apostolois," because the Greek seems to allow for two translations: either "well known BY the apostles" OR "well known among the apostles." And, THERE is the implication.

For the English only reader, the NIV renders "They are outstanding AMONG the apostles." The NEB has, "They are eminent among the apostles." And, THERE is the implication!

For those who use commentaries, as I said, Bruce on Romans (ref above) thinks that Junia (s) WAS an apostle. So does does Cranfield in ICC. So does Kasemann , Romans (Erdmans, 1980). And, so does Harrison in EBC. And, THERE is the implication.

For those who use Greek aides, BAGD and TDNT translate the phrase to mean that these two were apostles. And, THERE is the implication.

Of course, I was being tongue in cheek about Junia (s) being one of the 12. BUT, he or she may have been an apostle.

IF Junia (s) is a she, and IF, Junia (s) is an apostle, then, that needs to be factored into our view of gender qualifications for ecclesiastical offices.

As oft is the case, IMO, there may be clues in the text of Rom 16:7 itself. But make no mistake, the issues are fairly difficult to resolve. If they were not, experts would not be in such disagreement re them.

A lover and a student of Biblical texts , IMO, does best when he/she is aware of the issues ( or "implications" ).

I wish you good studying of the Word we both love,

Bill

 

On Rm. 16:7, I prefer the ancient reading prevailing in the large Consensus of Greek MSS (i.e. the Byzantines) which definitely reads the female name Junia, which later was altered to read as a masculine name preserved primarily in the Egyptian witnesses which introduced the corruption, probably because they didn't like the sound of a woman "apostle."

However, the whole of Rm. 16 seems to suggest an alternative meaning for "apostle" in Rm. 16:7, that which is also found in the following places:

2Co. 8:23: "Whether any do enquire of Titus, he is my partner and fellowhelper concerning you: or our brethren be enquired of, they are the messengers [Gk. apostles] of the churches, and the glory of Christ."

Php. 2:25: "Yet I supposed it necessary to send to you Epaphroditus, my brother, and companion in labour, and fellow soldier, but your messenger [Gk. apostle], and he that ministered to my wants."

In Romans 16 Paul is chiefly mentioning all the fellowlaborers and helpers and "messengers" or "missionaries", i.e., "apostles", of the churches. Andronicus and (his wife) Junia were of note among the missionaries or messengers. Paul even references that they were in Christ before him, indicating the possible similarity of occupation, i.e., missionary to the Gentiles.

Yours, Bluefalcon

 

Well, the 2nd corrector of Vaticanus in the 6/7th century had an accent over the penult (indicating a feminine name), as do nearly all of the Byzantine minuscules. The Byzantines represent MSS from where most of Paul's letters were directed, and where natural speakers of Greek thrived throughout all of early and later Christendom.

In fact no MSS have the circumflex over the ultima (indicating a masculine name). Such is just an editorial decision over those MSS that have no accent at all.

Yours, Bluefalcon

 

Dr. Bob,
They drew straws!

 

Peter and the disciples were told to wait in Jerusalem and pray. They weren't told to select another member.

They chose their 12th, later God chose his.

 

Your post doesn't disprove anything, even if you think it does. Sorry.

 

Originally posted by Gunther:

Although I understand what you're driving at, I must agree with TCassidy on this one. In Acts 1:21-22 Peter outlined the requirements needed for apostleship; in verse 24 they prayed and asked God to show them who He (God) had chosen. In Acts 2:14, we see Peter standing up with the eleven (as was explained by TCassidy earlier) when he preached on Pentecost. In Acts 6:2 we see again reference to the twelve (before the conversion of Saul of Tarsus).

Nowhere in the scripture do we see anything that would refute Matthias being the twelfth Apostle.

 

So you think I deny inerrancy? Nice backhanded insult. I believe scripture also.

Matthias was counted with the 12 because that is who they picked. God never told them to do that. They did not obey what Christ said. Once again, Peter jumped the gun.

Tommy, I also believe the Scripture. I just don't think you have to miss the obvious.

God chose his apostle on the road to Damascus. I wonder why Matthias is never heard from again.

 

Why are all but 4 or 5 never heard from again? Stupid argument from silence.

Yours, Bluefalcon

 

I think "of note among the missionaries" or "among the messengers" is okay for Rm. 16:7. Obviously from 2Co. 8:23 and Php. 2:25 the early church meaning of the word for "apostle" did not always refer to the office of the Twelve. Paul was a "missionary" to the Gentiles, and "apostle" was the best greek word to demonstrate that special ambassadorial calling. Apparently, many others also had that calling, and I think Rm. 16:7 is a good example of "fellowprisoners", like Paul, being mentioned for their exemplary execution of their missionary role.

Yours, Bluefalcon