But they may not have been native to Rome. In fact, it seems unlikely that they were native to Rome considering that Paul says they were Christ-followers before he was. This means they must have become Christians very early in the Christian movement. Some scholars have even hypothesized that they were disciples of Jesus from before his death and resurrection, and later moved to Rome. This is possible, but there is no way to know.
Either way, they were Jewish believers. And they were believers who had already suffered for their faith, having been in prison at some time in the past. What about their designation as apostles? What does Paul mean by the word? In the New Testament the word is used to identify particular believers who are given special callings to go out and proclaim the gospel.
Some writers use the term to refer only to the twelve disciples of Jesus designated as his closest followers. Paul, however, uses the term a bit more broadly. For Paul an apostle is someone who has been given a particular calling by God to preach the good news where it has never been preached before, and he also seems to associate the idea of apostleship with those who had witnessed an appearance of the risen Jesus see 1 Corinthians and Since Paul calls Andronicus and Junia apostles, this probably means that they were Jewish believers in Galilee or Judea who were part of the Christian movement from its earliest beginnings.
Their designation as apostles may also indicate that they were the ones who first brought the Christian gospel to Rome. This is speculative, but I believe it is speculation with some merit. Romans is the only place in the New Testament in which a woman is called an apostle. This makes it a pretty big deal. Such a big deal that it is hard for some people to believe. In fact, some later interpreters found it so impossible to believe that Paul would call a woman an apostle that they concluded that this must not actually be what Paul wrote, and they changed the text accordingly.
Greek works differently. In Greek, words change their form to show their function in the sentence usually by have different endings. Even Greek names will change their endings depending on how they function in the sentence. However, it is possible that the word could be masculine in form if it is accented differently. Unfortunately, the earliest manuscripts of the New Testament were written without accent marks.
This means later interpreters have to decide how words should be accented. In this case however, accenting determines if Junia was a man or a woman. Accented one way, the name would be the feminine Junia. Accented differently, the name would be Junias, a masculine form. However, it is not simply a toss-up, or a situation where each person can just decide which they prefer.
There is a whole lot of really good evidence that the word was originally the feminine name Junia. Why did they do this? Perhaps it is because the ESV is unapologetically complementarian. Indeed, these UBS editions assign this reading the level of absolute certainty in a footnote.
A minority of manuscripts support an alternative female name, Julia. Because it has Julia at Rom , it represents the earliest testimony in support of a female name.
The third-century Coptic, some manuscripts of the fourth-century Latin Vulgate, and certain fifth-century Latin manuscripts provide additional early support for a female name by reading Julia. A prominent real-life example is a woman named Junia, the half-sister of Brutus, the legendary Roman general. Further, the ancient translations and the earliest manuscripts with accents support rendering Iounian as Junia. John Chrysostom AD — , bishop of Constantinople, wrote a series of homilies that have been preserved.
In commenting on Rom , Chrysostom praised Junia as an outstanding apostle:. Greet Andronicus and Junia. But to be outstanding among the apostles—just think what a wonderful song of praise that is! They were 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. Chrysostom not only praised Junia as a female apostle but also praised the service of other Christian women.
A woman again is honored and proclaimed victorious! Again, are we men put to shame. Or rather, we are not put to shame only, but have even an honor conferred upon us.
For an honor we have, in that there are such women among us, but we are put to shame, in that we men are left so far behind by them. For the women of those days were more spirited than lions.
Origen of Alexandria AD — , a theologian and biblical commentator, understood the name to be feminine Junia or Julia. He believes Origen apparently read a feminine name, citing the work of Brooten and Lampe. In addition to Origen and Chrysostom, other Greek fathers and commentators unanimously understood Junia to be a female apostle, including Theodoret of Cyrrhus ca. Reformation-era Bible translations tended to read Iounian as female. Both the nasb and cev footnote an alternative translation of Junia or Julia.
The amp text reads Junias; however, two footnotes strongly suggest it should read Junia. On what basis did the later s translations suddenly change the gender of Iounian? Westcott and F. Hort and in by Samuel P. Darby also used Tregelles, as did the RV.
To be clear, the editions of the Greek NT used as a textual basis for these translations do not support a male reading; therefore, one must question the motives of these English translators.
Given the issue of suffrage, which was controversial during this same era, some form of bias against women played a part in how these Bibles came to read Junias rather than Junia. On a worldwide basis, the right of women to vote was a long, contentious battle that took many decades to resolve.
In the United Kingdom, women were barred from voting by the Reform Act of , and it was not until that women had the same voting rights as men. In the United States, women finally earned the right to vote in after nearly years of advocacy, during which time the ASV was published. Horace Bushnell, an influential American theologian and minister, wrote a rambling book in in which he argued that women were not created or called to govern.
Nor should they have the right to vote. Such long held prejudice against women from within the church, in society in general, and efforts to prevent women from voting may have contributed to the bias reflected in how those Bible translations changed the gender of Iounian from female to male without textual support!
Support for the male name Junias supposedly comes from later manuscripts dated from the thirteenth and fourteenth centuries.
Therefore, Iounian must have been a male! But manuscripts from this late date do not provide any justification to support a male reading.
Contrary to the impressive list of ancient support for a female name, there is no support for a male reading in the latest Greek NTs. Their search was limited, inconclusive, and inaccurate. It does not prove that Junia was not a common name in ancient writings, and it is in opposition to the actual physical evidence mentioned earlier. Belleville performed the same database search and found seven names, not three.
Cervin also states that Junias is not found on any inscription, public monument, graffito, or in any literary document. The Devil seeks to vomit out this disorder through women. We wish to apply masculine reasoning and destroy the folly of these Women. The majority of the translators of this small number of Bibles have aligned themselves with a complementarian view of Scripture. They reject Junia as being an apostle and are to varying degrees affiliated with conservative groups that oppose women in ministry leadership positions.
One example is the EHV, a publication of the Wartburg Project and thus of the Wisconsin Evangelical Lutheran Synod, which has a doctrinal statement that, among other restrictions, denies women the right to participate in any gathering which would involve authority over a man. Noted Greek scholar A. But it can mean simply that they were famous in the circle of the apostles in the technical sense. He also states that Rom is unclear but makes no attempt to explain why.
Craig Keener expresses serious doubt about any such interpretation, saying:. It is also unnatural to read the text as merely claiming that they had a high reputation with the apostles. In fact, everything outside of Romans teaches that only men could be apostles. And that burden simply has not been met.
Alister McGrath and J. If there had been a new pattern of leadership that God wanted to establish with regard to gender roles, Jesus would have established it. A Re-examination of Rom Burer and Wallace argue that J.
All contributed content represents the views of the contributor and does not necessarily represent the views of KnowingScripture. Bible Books. The Twelve. Intro to the Bible. Canon of Scripture. Doctrine of Scripture. Giants and Nephilim. Men and Women. Marriage and Family. Covenant Theology. The Lord's Supper. Civil Government.
0コメント