Featured Should women be allowed to baptize?

Unfortunately in English this clears up nothing as there are several ways to interprete this English phrase.

1. They were known by the apostles.
2. They were known as oustanding apostles.

An example, "Abraham Lincoln is one who is outstanding among presidents'.

 

Rom_16:7 Greet Andronicus and Junia, my kinsmen and my fellow prisoners. They are well known to the apostles, and they were in Christ before me. (ESV)

Rom 16:7 Greet my relatives Andronicus and Junias, who were in jail with me. They are highly respected by the apostles and were followers of Christ before I was. (CEV)

Rom 16:7 Salute Andronicus and Junias, my kinsmen and fellow prisoners: who are of note among the apostles, who also were in Christ before me. (DRB)

Rom 16:7 Greet Andronicus and Junias, my kinsmen and my fellow prisoners, who are of note among the apostles, who also were in Christ before me. (MKJV)

Rom 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. (Webster)

 

Then why don't you apply that to everyone equally? Why single me out? Huh, Valley?

 

Notice you left out the NASB, a literal translation. Now I wonder why you would do that.

 

As I said in a post the word, diakonostranslated as "servant" is the same word, diakonos that is translated as "deacon" over 20 times in the New Testament. Remember the translators were men and many allowed their bias against women to show in the translation. The weight of evidence in the translation of this word in so many other places indicates very strongly that Phoebe was a deacon.

 

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Wrenn, It would not be possible to "single you out" had you simply followed her requests in her OP..... As in..... You would never have run your soup-cooler on the topic. You are more than welcome to start a new thread about Spiritual Headship somehow means nothing more than being the headwaters from which rivers flow and blah blah blah....knock yourself out.... she respectfully asked a question that by definition only those who do not believe in ordination of women should respond to

 

I would do that because in my E-Sword I do not have the NASB as it costs money. Secondly the ESV and the MKJV are "literal" translations.


Adding one more :

Rom 16:7 Salute Andronicus and Junia, my kinsmen, and my fellowprisoners, who are of note among the apostles, who also were in Christ before me. (KJV)


But you are welcome to hold to whatever you want. But not even the NASB proves your point. But as you do with scripture you are welcome to select and cherry pick those things that fit your left wing paradigm.

 

Well, then, Sally, why are others not meeting that criterion responding to it?

And stop lying about my definition of headship. Got nothing to fall back on but insults?

There are some nasty-spirited little people in here.

 

O.K. CTB....what Scholarly evidence will you produce to substantiate that the New Testament (as we have recieved it) has been intentionally abused by men in order to give us an inaccurate representation of God's Word.... Do you have any clue as to the far-reaching signifigance you are claiming with this?????? You are now seriously casting dispersion upon the truth of what all English speakers view as a reasonable rendition of God's Word...... Given what you allege here: At no Point....may you reasonably utilize the Bible as translated into English...... to prove or support any point you want to make. Seriously. WOW :BangHead:

 

And you are welcome to lie, misrepresent, and slander, because you have what you deny -- soul liberty.

 

Thanks for proving my point.

 

You are continually throwing out the left-wing charge against anyone who is not as fanatically fundamentalist as you are. The verbs I have used to describe this are accurate.

 

Oh, call me Sally? I am actually not offended... not in the least.... many on this board could hurt my feelings...quite easy to do when one attempts to insult my "manhood" so to speak .... you simply are incapable of it, despite how otherwise (as a former U.S. Marine Corps anti-terrorism expert) sensitive I actually am about that. I am sorry :tear:

I am directly refering to an article YOU posted about the topic you are introducing into this thread about the role of women in the Church.... the author's article actually (are you familiar with it??) You posted it.... tried to equivocate Male headship with that of the headwaters of a river..... I know he was reaching when he did it....

So....Before you get your thong in a wad......Lilly is trying to call out everyone who is trying to make this thread about something it isn't, and, had you simply read and complied with her legit request in her OP....This conversation would not even be possible....Go start yourself yet one more "Women should be preachers" post and leave her alone. She wants the opinions of people who see things as she does....what is so wrong with that??

Your objection is vaguely akin to this....
I know I stole a pack of gum from the store... but Tommy did too...so make sure you punish him also........:tear::tear:

 

Does da widdle girl scare you????:tear::tear:

 

What other conclusion can we come to when a word is translated as deacon over 20 times and then when it involves a woman it is changed to "servant". It is the only time in the New Testament that it is translated as 'servant'.

Translators do have to make choices and their own personal beliefs do influence the word they select.

To be more exact Paul uses the term 34 times ... and as I said only once is it translated by some versons as servant.

The NIV gets it right:

As does Phillips

There are translations that place the word 'servant' in the text, but point to a footnote saying 'deacon' or 'deaconess'.

 

Mistaken paste ... sorry.

 

Beware folks. Methinks LOV & HOS are one and the same. Don't get too caught up with these two, just my humble advise.