The Un-Silenced Women of Paul’s Ministry

Despite Paul’s seeming admonishment to the Corinthian Assembly that women should remain silent in their assembly, we find strewn throughout the book of Acts and Paul’s epistles that there were several un-silenced women leaders working in Paul’s ministry.

Today, I wish to examine just who those un-silenced women were and what role they played in the first-century Body of Messiah and in Paul’s ministry to the Gentile nations.

Is YHVH Anti-Woman?

As Torah Observant Disciples of Yeshua Messiah, one of the questions that naturally comes to mind is: didn’t YHVH curse and subjugate women because of Eve being deceived by the serpent? And much of this thinking emerges from a misunderstanding of Torah and applicable verses of Genesis 3.

The Cursing of Women By YHVH in Genesis 3

Truth be told, in punishment, Abba multiplied the pain and groaning women experience during pregnancy and childbirth (3:16). Yet church leaders throughout the centuries have been quick to teach that the Creator heaped upon women a second curse which is considered by many today as women being subject to men.

A careful read of Genesis 3:16b, regardless which English translation you may be privy to, reveals that the woman’s desire (ie., “teshuqah,” urge or yearning in the AV and submission in the LXX) would be to their husband and her husband will rule (ie., “mashal,”) over or dominate her. This is in no way, in my understanding of this key verse, a curse. To the contrary. Father is actually prophesying here that women throughout the centuries would naturally gravitate to their husbands yet in return their husbands in more cases than not, would rule over them. And certainly men have taken full advantage of women as a result of this prophetic insight that was given by the Almighty.

The Creator Wrongly Accused

So it seems that YHVH has over the course of millennia been accused by many as being misogynistic, anti-women and outright cruel towards women. Thus, it is for this reason that certain men of faith feel they are justified in their poor treatment of women.

But is Yah anti-woman?

YHVH is NOT Anti-Woman

I think this line of reasoning is patently false. And I would classify it to be a lie from the pit of Hades. For we clearly saw in Part 7 of this series that YHVH took care to protect and uplift women: both through the administration and practice of Torah and through His raising up powerful women of Faith that helped lead the nation of Israel through a lot of stuff over the centuries.

Rabbinic Twisting of Scripture

The tragedy to be recognized in this, however, is that Rabbinic Judaism in many respects twisted Torah. Through their many man-made laws and traditions, women in both faiths have been terribly marginalized and subjugated over the years.

The So-Called Woman Caught in the Act of Adultery

We saw this brilliantly demonstrated in the story of the couple caught in the very act of adultery (Joh. 8:1-6). (Interesting, most bible headlines entitle this passage as the Woman Caught in Adultery.)

The rabbinically influenced crowd sought to render capital punishment upon the woman for her role in the transgression of this Torah commandment. Thankfully, Master Yeshua intervened and brought to light that the male offender was not being held accountable for his role in the violation (Joh. 8:7-11).

Torah is quite explicit in how adultery should be addressed: both parties—the man and the woman—were to be executed (Lev. 20:10; Deu. 22:22-24).

Master saw right through the agenda of the Pharisees here (which essentially was a lame attempt to trip our Master up on technicalities of Torah). But Master also, in seeing how the crowd was twisting the situation by focusing exclusively on the woman, shifted the focus of the situation to that of the rendering of mercy and forgiveness of sin, despite the violation warranting a death penalty. Halleluyah.
_______________________________________________________________________

The Unsilenced Women of Paul’s Assemblies

In beginning our survey, if you will, we find in the book of Acts that women not only financed Paul’s ministry from time to time, but also hosted fellowships in their own homes. Hosting a fellowship, especially in the early days of the Faith Movement, meant one taking on significant responsibilities beyond the obvious. It stands to reason that these women were the chief teachers or instructors of their groups, even of men.

John Mark’s mother, Mary of Jerusalem (Act. 12:12). Although not associated with the Apostle Paul, this Mary, was John Mark’s (the inner circle disciple turned apostle’s), mother was one of the female pioneers of the True Faith once delivered. This Mary bravely hosted the Faith’s core leaders in her home. She was no doubt a woman of means and powerful in her conviction and loyalty to the Work of the Gospel. For it was her home that Peter ran to after his deliverance from prison:

“Realizing what had happened (ie., his miraculous deliverance from prison by an angel), he (ie., Peter) went to the house of Miryam the mother of Yochanan (ie., John, surnamed Mark), where many people had gathered to pray” (Act. 12:12; CJB).

I truly doubt she sat off in a corner and only attended to the needs of the men who had taken prayerful refuge in her home. Yet, it would be foolish, given the limited information that Luke provides about her, to definitively say that she necessarily headed this group.

Nevertheless, given that Luke makes it a point to highlight that the group met in Miryam’s home suggests some elements of leadership that, in the minds of knowledgeable bible researchers, (and I fully endorse their line of thinking) contradicts any idea or practice that would relegate her to being just a server in the group. For the ancient writers of the books of the Bible were not known to waste precious parchment space mentioning individuals who were ancillary or secondary to the cause.

Obviously the group considered John Mark’s mother a member of this tight circle. It would further stand to reason that she would have been one of the disciples of Y’shua during His earthly ministry. As it relates to this particular story, she was more than one of Master’s female disciples. Miryam was obviously viewed as a matriarch figure for this tight-knit group: a leader; admonisher; counselor; exhorter; and provider. She no doubt held influence in the group, even among the inner-circle disciples turned apostles as evidenced in their dependence of her to host their fellowship during that dark hour in the movement’s history.

Lydia of the Women of Philippi (Act. 16:14,15)

It is believed by some bible experts that during Paul’s day there was no Jewish synagogue in Philippi. The reason given by these same scholars for there being no synagogue is that the Jewish population of Philippi was so small that there were not enough men (ie., heads of households) to establish a synagogue in that city (Jewish tradition requires a quorum of 10-men to establish a synagogue presence in any given city). For Jewish tradition required “a quorum of ten-Jewish men” in order to establish a synagogue (Eddie L. Hyatt; Paul, Women and Church).

Why is this important to know? Well, Paul was moved in a vision to evangelize Macedonia (Act. 16:10). And we find throughout the New Testament record that it was very common for Paul to evangelize a city beginning with that city’s synagogue. So, it fell to Paul upon his arrival in that city, to find out where the local Jews hung out and worshiped.

Therefore, Paul, along with his spiritual side-kick at the time, the Prophet Silas, aka Silvanus, arrive in the city of Philippi (and most scholars place his visit sometime during his second missionary journey between 49 and 51 C.E.), and learns there is no Jewish synagogue in the city. But he also learns that a small group of women met on the banks of a river in that city on a regular basis to pray (Act. 16:13). It seems reasonable, given the context of Luke’s account, that at the very least, this small group of women was likely made up of Jews or maybe proselytes (ie., Gentile converts to Judaism) and or God-fearers (ie., Gentiles who kept just a small number of Jewish laws and parts of Torah, but had not fully converted to Judaism).

According to Acts 16:13, it is on one fateful Shabbat that Paul and Silas make contact with this, what Stern in his CJB refers to as a “minyan”—a Jewish quorum women in this case required for traditional Jewish public worship, group of praying women by this river in Philippi.

As the story goes, Luke introduces us to a woman of obvious means whose name was Lydia. She was a Thyatiran business woman who Luke described as a merchandiser of purple, most likely purple garments (Act. 16:14). Initially, Luke describes her as a “god-fearer” (Stern; CJB). The brief context of this story strongly suggests that Lydia took part in this assembly/gathering of Philippian women (Act. 16:12, 13).

Paul and his evangelistic team elected to share the Gospel with this group of women by the riverside. Upon hearing the Gospel message from Paul, Lydia was convicted and she ultimately became a disciple of Yahoshua Messiah.

It appears that she was the head of her household for Luke records that she and her family were mikvehed (ie., baptized) (Act. 16:14). Luke then records that she hosted Paul and his team in her home on more than one occasion (Act. 16:15, 40). This of course is not definitively indicative that Lydia was any type of leader in the Body or Assemblies of Yah. But in a sense, it most certainly does indicate she was a leader. She was obviously a prominent citizen of the city of Philippi who the citizens of that city most likely respected. The fact that Paul found refuge and a place of operation out of her home clearly shows that she was a leader in the Faith. Furthermore, it is thought by certain Christian scholars, and I most certainly agree with their position, that Lydia was one of the founders of the Philippian Assembly of Messianic believers. Clearly, Paul had no issue with her assuming such a leadership position in the work he had begun in that Macedonian city.

It would seem, also given the context of this Lukan passage, Paul established what we know today as the 1st-century Messianic Assembly of disciples in Philippi, and it most likely operated out of Lydia’s home. Granted, this is one of those cases where I, like others in arriving at such a conclusion, employ the risky practice of “eisegesis.” If you recall, eisegesis essentially is when one reads INTO a passage of scripture, as opposed to simply reading what is plainly written (ie., “exegesis”). However, my justification in making such a claim is simply taking all the elements of this passage of Acts 16 involving Lydia and the ladies by the Philippi river in the absence of a formal synagogue, with the obvious knowledge that ultimately an assembly developed in that Macedonian city (ergo, as evidenced by Paul writing the Book of Philippians).

In his book Paul, Women and Church, Dr. Hyatt comments extensively on Lydia and the Macedonian female Faith leaders.

Dr. Eddie L. Hyatt (author of “Paul, Women and Church), and to greater and lesser degrees, Donna Howell (author “The Handmaiden Conspiracy”) and John Temple Bristow (author “What Paul Really Said About Women”) corroborate this thinking.

Thus, I would go so far as to suggest, along with Eddie L. Hyatt, that over time, the Philippian assembly grew in number and these matriarchs in one form or another, led by Lydia, headed the assembly there since there were no identified men starting out. If this indeed is the case, and I firmly believe it to be, it would go without saying, Paul had no problem with leaving women to grow and maintain the assembly he helped establish there.

Paul’s Expresses Confidence in the Women Leaders of Greece

Luke makes a bold statement detailing female leadership within the Macedonian Assemblies:

“Now when they had passed through Amphipolis and Apollonia (cities of Macedonia), they came to Thessalonica where was a synagogue of the Jews. And Paul, as his manner was, went in unto them and three sabbath days reasoned with them out of the scriptures, opening and alleging that Christ (ie., Messiah) must needs have suffered and risen again from the dead; and that this Jesus (ie., Y’shua) whom I preach unto you, is Christ (ie., Messiah). And some of them believed and consorted (ie., to be attached to or joined) with Paul and Silas; and of the devout Greeks a great multitude, and of the chief (ie., protos-first or prominent; leading; important; influential) women not a few” (Act 17:1-4; KJV).

Macedonian Women Assembly Leaders, Like Their Male Counterparts, Were Human

Seems Macedonia would produce some of the finest female leaders of the True Faith once delivered. As wonderful and powerful as these women may have been, at the end of the day, they, like men their male counterparts, were only human. We find recorded in Paul’s letter to the Philippian Assembly, that Paul was compelled to address a conflict that was ongoing between two of that assembly’s female leaders. Paul writes:

“I beseech (ie., I exhort; urge; beg; entreat; appeal) Euodias and beseech Synthyche, that they be of the same mind in the Lord” (Phi. 4:2; KJV).

In other words, Paul singles out these two women who were obviously engaged in some ongoing spat (or disagreement) with one another over God knows what. Paul, acting in the capacity of a spiritual father, he appeals to Euodias and Synthyche to “resolve their differences and to come together in agreement of mind and soul.”

I have to agree with Dr. Eddie Hyatt yet again, that these women were likely leaders in their Macedonian assembly and their spat was tearing the assembly apart at its spiritual seams. Paul then appeals to the assembly brethren (presumably men and women) to help these women resolve their seeming divisive conflict.

For me, the things that brings this very brief mention of Euodias and Synthyche into focus, especially as they relate to our present topic, is: (1) Paul uses precious parchment space to mention their conflict; appealing to the assembly members to intercede and help them resolve their conflict; and (2) that these very women laboured with him in the gospel.

If we take these verses of chapter 4 in proper context with the previous chapters of Paul’s letter to the Philippian Assembly, these women were more likely than not to be numbered among the bishops (ie., episkopos or superintendents; overseers—not an office which could easily be misconstrued by the English word bishop, but specifically descriptive of function; that is, these women no doubt held watch over the affairs of the body there in Philippi) and deacons (ie., diakonos or ministers) (1:1).

The thing that Paul was trying to get across to his Philippian readers—the recipients of this letter—is that none of this is about rank or position in the Body of Messiah. It’s about being servants to Yah and the people of the Body of Messiah. But it does give us sharp clues as to their obvious leadership—influential-positions in the Philippian Assembly.

Look: if these women were simply members of the “silent female assembly” (ie., I Cor. 14:34, 35; 1 Tim. 2:14), their spat would in no way have drawn Paul’s attention for one; nor would their dispute, two, cause Paul concern that it could lead to a potential schism in the Philippian Assembly. So it stands to reason that Euodias and Synthyche held leadership positions in that assembly.

Oh, and of course, the wondering side of me cannot but help surmise whether Euodias and Synthyche were, maybe (just maybe), two of those founding female women who Paul and Silas discovered, gathered on the bank of the Philippian river to pray on Shabbats (Act. 16).

Priscilla

Priscilla and Aquila was the consummate spiritual “power-couple” of the first-century Body of Messiah, with Priscilla taking a lead in the Work of the Gospel.

Then there’s the better known case of Priscilla who we are first introduced to in the book of Acts. Luke records the fortuitous meeting that occurred between the Apostle Paul and the Messianic Jewish couple Priscilla and Aquila in Corinth. This meeting would have occurred sometime between 49 and 54 C.E.

The couple, originally of Rome, along with the entire Jewish population, had been exiled from Rome by Emperor Claudius sometime around 49 C.E. (ref. Roman historian Suetonius). According to Luke, the couple settled in Corinth, a south-central city in Greece.

Paul having newly arrived in Corinth becomes close friends with Aquila and Priscilla and he ends up taking residence with them. The couple and Paul shared a mutual vocation: that of tentmaking (reference Part 1 and 2 of this series where I address Paul’s civil occupation), which talents they applied there in Corinth in order to bring in some much needed income (Act. 18:1-3).

We find recorded in 1 Corinthians 16:19 (believed written from Ephesus c. 57 C.E.), presumably from Paul’s own pen, acknowledgment of Priscilla and Aquila who were noted leaders of the fellowship they hosted out of their home in Ephesus. We receive a secondary witness from Paul’s letter to the Assembly of Messianic Disciples in Rome (believed written from Corinth c. 58 C.E.), that Priscilla and Aquila led and hosted a fellowship in their home, this time, in Rome (Rom. 15:3-5). I agree with Jamieson, Fausset and Brown’s Commentary that the couple had by the time Paul penned his letter to the Roman Messianic Assembly, been repatriated back to Rome after Claudius’ successor, reversed the Jewish ban against the Jews in Rome, establishing a new fellowship in their home there.

So let’s think about this here real quick. Priscilla and Aquila establish over the course of a few years, successful, and no doubt well-known fellowships, in three major Messianic hubs: one in Corinth; the second in Ephesus; and the third in Rome. The third one in Rome stands more chances than not in being a repeat of a home fellowship that the couple led prior to the couple’s exile from Rome in the late 40’s.

Thus, we have here in Priscilla and Aquila what I guess you could call a spiritual “power-couple”; to borrow a pop-culture title given to the most wealthy and successful couples in the entertainment business here in America.

Apart from notoriety in and among the assemblies of Messiah, Priscilla and Aquila were a well versed couple (ie., firmly grounded and extremely knowledgeable of the Gospel and the Faith).

Some have gone so far as to suggest that they could be considered ministers of the Gospel, given both their extensive knowledge and experience base. Granted, no such title is bestowed upon either one by either Luke or Paul in their writings. But in terms of their leadership positions; that is, their founding and leading of at least three to four significant fellowships out of their homes, as we might understand the work and vocation of a “minister” of the Gospel in and among the Body and Assemblies of Messiah today, it would be an apt title to bestow upon both of them. I would go even further and state that it would be the very least title that should be bestowed upon them.

This couple held enough gravitas (ie., dignity; wherewithal) that they corrected the dynamic minister of the Gospel, Apollos’ understanding of the Faith (Act. 18:24-26). If one simply reads verse 24 of the 18th chapter of Acts, we find that Luke describes Apollos as a very learned Jew out of Alexandria who happened to be an eloquent speaker and expositor of the Scriptures (ie., the tanakh). Turns out that Apollos was a former disciple of Yochanan the Immerser (aka, famously John the Baptist), who was well versed in the ministry of Yahoshua.

Apollos had become a popular orator in Ephesus’ synagogue about the time that Priscilla and Aquila had left Corinth and resettled in Ephesus (Act. 18:26). It would seem Apollos’ understanding of the Gospel was lacking in one or more places and it fell to our power-couple here to “take him aside and expound to him the Way of YHVH more perfectly” (Rood).

So I ask you: who does something like that; pulls a well-established expositor of Scripture (ie., the Old Testament) who was actually a disciple of John the Immerser, off to the side and schools him in that which he was supposed to be an expert in, unless they themselves (both the man and his wife) were mighty expositors possessing extreme knowledge of the Gospel in their own right? This couple obviously possessed knowledge and understanding of the Faith to such levels that they were able to steer the understanding of such a very learned person like Apollos.

And let us not over look the fact that Luke places the name Priscilla before the name Aquila (Act. 18:18, 26), which is unheard of in ancient literature. A handful of New Testament experts have offered a reason for this.

It should be mentioned also that we find recorded in Romans 16:3 that Paul passes greetings on to Priscilla before he greets Aquila. Now, this seeming minor grammatical expression may not appear to be of any significance to most readers and most of us would simply read over this nuance without ever so missing a beat. But, what this nuance tells us is that Priscilla was likely more active in teaching and preaching than her husband Aquila and that Priscilla most likely was more versed or distinguished in the Faith than her husband (reference: Ellicott’s Commentary for English Readers; Maclaren’s Expositions; Bengel’s Gnomen Commentary).

As it relates to Paul’s greeting of Priscilla before her husband Aquila Dr. Eddie Hyatt writes:

“This goes against the proper conventional practice of the ancient world of always mentioning the man first. That Paul would mention Priscilla first is a powerful statement of her status and influence, and of Paul’s estimation of her” (Paul, Women and Church).

So impressed, however, was Paul with Priscilla’s work in the Gospel, that he referred to her as a “fellow worker” for the Messiah Yeshua (CJB). This is one way of translating how Paul viewed her in the English. But in the Greek, “fellow worker” is “synergos,” which means “a companion in work.” (Where we get the word “synergy”.)

Of Priscilla and Aquila Paul writes:

“Greet Priscilla and Aquila, my fellow workers in Yahshua Messiah; who have risked their lives for me. Not only I, but all the called out ones of the Gentiles are greateful to them: The called out ones of “The House of Yahweh there…” (Rom. 16:3-5; Book of Yahweh).

Note in this greeting that Paul placed Priscilla before her husband Aquila. It stands to reason that Paul was breaking with the cultural norm of always placing the woman second when addressing a couple or last when addressing a group composed of men and women. Paul, in placing Priscilla before her husband Aquila, is indicating that she held the position of leader in the Corinthian Assembly.

In referencing the couple in Luke 18:8, Patristic Church Father Chrysostom of the 4th century CE wrote:

“Luke here places the name of the wife Priscilla first and then Aquila…this may be due to the predominant Christian activity of the wife; so also in verse 26, which may have been conformed to this passage. The former consideration is the one of chief importance” (Chrysostom: A Commentary on the Acts of the Apostles: Homily XL on Acts 18.8).

Clearly, Priscilla was an unsilenced woman of the first-century Messianic/Way Movement. There is no way on earth that she could serve in the capacity that the Lukan and Pauline passages intimate unless she was learned; vocal and a powerful orator; convincing; filled with the Holy Spirit; and obedient to the calling that was place on her life by the Father’s precious Holy Spirit.

Phoebe

Phoebe of Cenchrea appears to have been either a minister, deacon or major leader in the first-century Body of Messiah.

We now come to yet another great woman of the first-century Body of Messianic disciples of Messiah. Her name is Phoebe of Cenchrea (Rom. 16:1,2):

“I commend to you Phoebe our sister, who is a deaconess (ie., diakonos; translated servant in the AV’s) of the called out ones in Cenchrea: That you may welcome her in Yahweh in a manner worthy of the saints, and assist her in whatever business she has need of you; for she has been a succourer; an assistant, of many, and of myself also” (Book of Yahweh).

Phoebe: a Servant or Deacon

What does Paul mean when he refers to Phoebe as a deaconess? In biblical Greek the term is rendered “diakonos.” Diakonos essentially means one who renders helpful service; a servant; or a helper, as found in Matthew 20:26. However, when the term is used within, let’s say, a church/assembly or ministry context, it generally denotes an official in of the specified assembly: essentially a deacon (Friberg Lexicon).

The authorized version have chosen to use the title servant to describe her. Now, although one could get away with translating the Greek term diakonos as “servant,” the English term servant when used in the sense of the Body and Assemblies of Messiah, has less of a formal office sense than that of the English term “deacon.” And the other thing to take note of here is that Paul describes himself as a “servant of Messiah and of Yah” twice in the authorized versions of our bibles. In both of those verses, the English term servant is actually “doulos” in biblical Greek. And doulos means exactly that: a servant; a slave; a bondman.

So we have to then question why the English translators chose to render Phoebe a “servant” when the more accurate meaning of diakonos is deacon/deaconess. For if Phoebe was not a deacon/deaconess, but simply a servant of Yahoshua Messiah and of YHVH our Elohim, then the ancient Greek text would have described her as a doulos. Right?

And I would submit to you that maybe the translators of the ancient Greek text sought to sway the understanding of the reader to view Phoebe as simply a servant or disciple, of Yah and of Messiah and not that of a deacon/deaconess.

It’s important to recognize here, however, that contrary to what may be the Messianic/Hebrew Roots or even fundamental/evangelical Christian conventional wisdom, diakonos may apply to either a man or woman. In that we are now talking about a person such as Phoebe fulfilling the office of a deacon, we are forced to consider what her responsibilities would have been in the Assembly of Messiah operating out of Rome. This is critical to our discussion here, for in her fulfilling the office of a deacon (or deaconess for those who want to be precise about this thing), she would be somewhat of a trend-setter or prototype for any woman (or for that matter man) who follows her and who is led to be a deacon; be it back then or today (Louw-Nida Lexicon).

Here’s the deal: When taken in its fullest context and when we factor into the equation verse 2 of the 16th chapter of Romans, Paul admonishes the Roman Assembly of Messianic Believers to (1) receive (ie., welcome) Phoebe in the Lord, worthily (ie., as beometh) of the saints—in other words, in a way that is worthy of God’s people. Seems as though Phoebe was a deacon/deaconess in the Cenchrea Assembly/Fellowship and at the time Paul wrote the letter of Romans, she had resettled in Rome and was in the process of becoming a member of the Roman Assembly/Fellowship. So Paul is admonishing the Roman Assembly members to receive her as one of their own.

According to E. Earle Ellis (1926-2010), an American Bible scholar who served as a Research Professor of Theology Emeritus at Southwestern Baptist Theological Seminary in Fort Worth, Texas, “Diakonos is used frequently in the Pauline letters for those who exercise ministries of teaching and preaching. The title is given to Paul and to a number of his associates who are active on a continuing basis as traveling missionaries or as coworkers in local congregations. In terms of modern function, it best corresponds to the modern designation “minister.”

(2) She should be given whatever she may need to fulfill her calling (presuming that calling remains that of a deacon/deaconess) because she had been of assistance (in the KJV a “succourer”) of many, including Paul himself.

Succourer

What exactly is a succourer you may ask. In biblical Greek the term is “prostatis” and it basically means “a woman who is set over others;” a female guardian, protectress, patroness, caring for the affairs of others and aiding them with her resources (Louw-Nida Lexicon). All the lexicons I have access to agree with this general definition. It stands to reason then, if a woman is given such a position of authority in the assembly, she would have authority over both men and women alike. She could not possibly do her job if she were to follow the conventions of today’s understanding by many as it relates to the “quiet” role of women in the Body of Messiah.

Dr. Hyatt on Phoebe

Dr. Eddie L. Hyatt, in his book Paul, Women and Church, paints a different perspective on the role Phoebe played in the Cenchrea and Roman assemblies. He supports his position with what I believe to be a convincing argument.

Dr. Hyatt contends that in the case of Phoebe, diakonos should be translated as “minister.” He further holds that the term is used some 23-times where it is used to describe certain male leaders of the Faith such as Paul, Barnabas, and Apollos (1 Cor.3:4). My resources identify the Greek title of diakonos in terms of a likely direct inference to a “minister” some 20 times; a general servant some 8 times, and a “deacon” some 3-times in the authorized texts. However, Hyatt suggests that the English translators intentionally translated the “diakonos” title Paul gave to Phoebe to that of servant. He further suggests the translators of the KJV were biased in their description of Phoebe.

Phoebe: a First-Century Minister of the Gospel?

The English title “minister” only dates back to the 1300’s, describing a Medieval Latin “priest.” Likewise, the act of “ministering” dates back to the middle 1300’s. All this according to etymonline.com. Thus, it is unlikely that Paul in using the term “diakonos” to describe either himself or anyone else for that matter is likely not a minister as the term is routinely used in Christian circles today.

I think it’s fair to say that Phoebe was a bona fide leader in the Cenchrea Assembly and she held authority that did not in anyway translate over to her sitting in silence in that congregation, waiting till she got home to ask her husband about what was taught in church that day.

Apphia

The next female leader to consider is Apphia of Colossae (Phl.2).

Little is mentioned about Apphia, other than (1) Paul valued her service so much that he named her in his epistle to Philemon.

(2) Apphia was beloved of Paul.

(3) Christian scholars believe she may have been the wife of Philemon (Stephan Biographical Bible).

Now, Paul serves notice that his letter here was not only written to Philemon, Apphia and Archippus, but to the assembly of believers who gathered in Philemon’s home (Phl. 2). If Apphia was indeed Philemon’s spouse (per NET Bible Commentary and Stephan Biographical Bible), or at the very least as Bible Commentator Matthew Henry refers to her being a “yoke-fellow,” she would have been a type of minister in the assembly. Granted, this is somewhat speculative on my and other’s parts, but the fact that Paul chose to take up valuable parchment space and mention her with just a couple other folks in this epistle, I believe gives reasonable support for this contention.

It goes without saying, that Apphia was unsilenced in the Body of Messiah, and certainly not silenced in the Colossian Assembly of Disciples in Yeshua Messiah.

_____________________________________________________________________

Paul’s Spiritual Mother

Then we have the interesting case of “Paul’s Spiritual Mother.” This mysterious woman (unnamed) seems to have played a significant role in shaping the apostle’s ministerial and evangelistic life.

Paul writes:

“Greet Rufus, chosen in Yahweh and his mother and mine” (Rom. 16.13; Book of Yahweh). Obviously, Paul’s biological mother was either passed/dead, or living out her last days in Tarsus of Celicia. So who is this woman that Paul is calling his mother.

Dr. Eddie Hyatt traces Rufus back to being the likely son of Simon of Cyrene. You remember don’t you? The Cyrenian who was forced to help our master carry his execution stake to calvary (Mar. 15:21). If this is the case, then it stands to reason that Rufus, and his brother Alexander had become respected fellows in the Way Movement.

Well, putting this together, it would seem that Paul had become close to Simon of Cyrene’s family, that included the boys Rufus and Alexander, and of course Simon’s wife who remains unnamed in the passage. At some point in Paul’s ministry, Simon and his wife had become spiritual parents to Paul; so much so that Paul referred to her as his mother.

The Apostle Junia

Junia is believed to have been a prominent female apostle who Eldon Jay Epp discusses in detail in his book entitled “Junia.”

And then we come to the unique leadership case of Junia.

Paul writes in Romans 16:7

”Salute (aspazomai—draw close to one’s self) Andronicus and Junia, my kinsmen (suggenes—related by blood or of the same country), and my fellowprisoners, who are of note (episemos—marked; stamped; coined) among the apostles, who also were in Christ before me” (KJV).

Andronicus was a male, while a multitude of the Patristic Church Fathers certify that Junia was a female. Nevertheless, we found in Latin translations of the Holy Writ where the translators rendered “Junia” in the masculine form as “Junias.”

It seems as though Junia became masculinized from Junia to Junias by Aegidius of Rome (1245-1346 CE) through his commentaries. Martin Luther placed the nail in the coffin, so to speak, on the masculinized Junias in his translation of the Bible.

Is it reasonable to surmise another misogynistic agenda by members of the Church translation team? Could it be as Donna Howell entitled her book, a “Handmaiden’s Conspiracy.” There seems to have been somewhat of a cover-up by the powers that be of the early Catholic Church (ie., the Church Triumphant) to hide the fact that a woman—Junia–was a noted apostle of the 1st century Body of Messiah.

And yes, throughout the centuries a great many bible experts have gone out of their way to put forth a false narrative that Junia could not possibly be an apostle and that the English translation was suggesting apostleship was simply wording and word choice. Because, hey, only men can be apostles. And besides, the bible shows there were only twelve-apostles.

Well, there’s a little problem with this line of thinking. Junia was widely known as a female apostle by Patristic Church Fathers Origen, Jerome, Hatto, John Chrysostom and others.

Church history and tradition for the first 1,000-years emphatically considered Junia (aka Julia) to be the female partner—most likely the wife—of Andronicus.

Thus, “theologians as diverse as Origen, Ambrosiaster, John Chrysostom, Jerome, Theodoret, John Damascene, Peter Abelard, and Peter Lombard assume that the partner of Andronicus is a woman by the name of Junia” (Beverly Roberts Gaventa Helen H. P. Manson; Professor of New Testament Literature and Exegesis Princeton Theological Seminary).

Chrysostom on Junia

Of Junia Patristic Church Father John Chrysostom wrote: “Greet Andronicus and Junia…who are outstanding among the apostles.” To be an apostle is something great. But to be outstanding among the apostles—just think what a wonderful song of praise that is! They are outstanding on the basis of their works and virtuous actions. Indeed, how great the wisdom of this woman must have been that she was even deemed worthy of the title of apostle (In ep. Ad Romanos 31.2; pg. 60.669-670)

Theodoret on Junia

Theodoret, Bishop of Cyrrhus, wrote: “Then to be called “of note” not only among the disciples but also among the teachers, and not just among the teachers but even among the apostles” (Interpretatio in quatuordecim epistolas S. Pauli 82.2 00).

John of Damascus on Junia

Then we have John of Damascus who wrote: “And to be called “apostle” is a great thing…but to be even amongst these of note, just consider what a great encomium (ie., a speech or piece of writing that praises someone or something highly) this is” (Commentary on Paul’s Epistles 95.565).

Thusly it was held as common understanding that Junia was a woman, up till the 13th century that the male leaders of the Catholic religion put forth that Junia was a male. This was all the more solidified in church teachings with the publication of Martin Luther’s translation of the Bible.

Evidence presented by Eldon J. Epp, in his book entitled, “Junia-The First Woman Apostle,” suggests there existed for centuries a strong bias within the male leadership of the Church-Triumphant that women could not possibly be apostles.

Contrary to Fundamental Christian conventional wisdom, the bible documents that there were more than 12-apostles in the first-century C.E. Body of Messiah. In fact, the Bible identifies Matthias (Act. 1:26); Barnabas (Act. 14:14); James (Gal. 1:19); Silas and Timothy (1 The. 2:6) as apostles. Thus, as Donna Howell stated, “the issue is not whether there may have been more than twelve apostles, the challenge is accepting that one was a woman” (The Handmaiden Conspiracy). By Paul acknowledging Junia’s apostleship, it seems pretty evident that apostleship was, and continues to this very day, to be gender inclusive.

If Paul instructed that women were to be silent in the assemblies of Messiah, explain the existence of a woman apostle who Paul venerated in his letter to the Roman Assembly of Messianic disciples of Yahoshua?

Among this significant listing of women holding leadership roles in the first century assemblies that Paul founded, this passage reigns supreme and crucially pivotal “in determining what leadership roles women assumed in earliest Christianity. (ref. Epp, Junia)”

Reason Why?

One of the reasons I chose to highlight, pick-apart and drill down on this subject of Paul on the leadership Role of Women is to dispel this misinformation and misunderstanding about women in the Body and Assemblies of Messiah that has led so many down a road that is so far away from God; so far away from where He desires us to be in our lives and in our walk with Messiah.

An improper understanding of 1 Corinthians 14 and 1 Timothy 2 has resulted in men feeling they must, in order to please God and to be in strict obedience to His laws, keep women in their proper place in the Body and Assemblies of Messiah. And that place seems to be in silence.

On the flip side, so many women in the Body and Assemblies of Messiah feel that they have a calling in their lives, but are forced to ignore or reject that calling because they have been indoctrinated to see themselves in a way that is diametrically opposite the way the Creator, our Messiah, and even Paul see them.

The second reason for doing these posts on Paul and Women is to help you discover your purpose in Messiah, regardless your station in life; your gender; your education and experience. Everyone who answers the call for Messianic discipleship has a job to do and it’s up to each of us to figure out what that thing or those things are and get to work doing a good work.

Certainly, many of you recognize or feel there is a call on your life. But maybe you are hesitant to answer that call because you feel as though you would be perceived as an imposter; who am I to do whatever; there are so many other more experienced, qualified and knowledgeable brothers and sisters out there, so who am I to say or do anything? And you know what? So what? Their calling is their calling and your calling is your calling. This thing is between you and YHVH. And the very fact that you signed up to be a disciple of Yahoshua Messiah obligates you to do that which you’ve been called to do. Failure to answer the call makes one a freeloader and he or she is no different than the servant that hid his master’s talent, produced nothing with it, and when confronted by his master had nothing to show for it.

Master don’t play that my friends. He demands results. Churchianity would have us think that we are not obligated to do anything for the Kingdom and that our redemption is all about a “free lunch.” Well, I got news for you hyper-grace folks: our salvation is free; bought and paid for by the precious blood of the Lamb. BUT, it is because we love our heavenly Father that we are compelled to work for Him so that He may get the glory. All children who are worth their salt go out of their way to please their earthly fathers and mothers. And when our kids go out of their way to try and please us, our hearts simply melt. Why do we, then, feel because of grace we should simply sit back and do nothing and reap the benefits of eternal life having done nothing to show our appreciation and love for Him; our Heavenly Father?

Think on this: These (and no doubt countless unnamed) courageous women of the first-century Body of Messiah defied the norms of their societies and communities by stepping up and doing the Work of the Gospel. If any would have such reticence, no doubt these women most certainly would. Yet, none of these allowed their gender or station in life to sideline and stymie their purposes and callings in Messiah.

Who are we then, to ignore our calling and purpose?

My prayer for you dear listener and reader is that you not be shackled by the conspiracy to silence the women of the Body of Messiah. But that you, like Phoebe, Priscilla, Junia and all the other courageous women who came alongside Paul to work the fields with the Gospel message, boldly fulfill your calling in Yahoshua Messiah and in the Body of Messiah.