Women deacons

[Crabtownboy]

However the word is used elsewhere and is clearly NOT used as a term for the office of deacon. You can't change Romans 16 - nor can you change 1 Timothy 3. - which you still haven't addressed.

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).

 

[annsni]

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.

This is untrue because even when referring to males, it is translated as "minister" or "servant".

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 - but the word "diakonos" is not even in verse 11.

 

[annsni]

Wow. Just wow. I would suggest you do some reading on this issue, so you're more informed about opposing viewpoints. If you still disagree, that's fine, but please don't make flippant claims like this. I would suggest starting with the work of Grenz, Stackhouse, Wright and Fee.

Just because someone disagrees with your interpretation doesn't mean that person is calling "God a liar"!

This is an outrageous and damning accusation that has no business in Christian dialogue.

Strongly and passionately disagree, make a case for your position, or dismiss yourself from the conversation, but don't do this.

It is characteristic of someone who must get the last word and sully the character of the person they cannot convince. It says nothing about the merits of either one of your positions and only poisons the discussion.

When God has clearly written qualifications in His Word and we say that God will contradict that and call others who do not have those qualifications to the ministry, then we call God a liar. I'm sorry it's harsh but that's the way I see it. It is like saying that God created people to be gay and is pleased when they embrace that lifestyle. It is either a lie or we cannot trust our Scriptures.

 

[12strings]

If you still disagree, that's fine, but please don't make flippant claims like this.

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?

 

[annsni]

I also found this on the "masculine" and "feminine" of diakonos:

"She is referred to as a ‘deacon’ (in the Greek, there is no distinction between the masculine and feminine forms) of the church in Cenchreae. Despite Phil. 1:1, it is unlikely that this term designates any official position, as in modern ecclesiastical organizations; it may be paraphrased as ‘co-worker in the missionary enterprise

Achtemeier, Paul J., Harper’s Bible Dictionary, San Francisco: Harper and Row, 1985.

 

[annsni]

Alvin J. Schmidt (b. 1932) chronicles:
Phoebe...was a diakonos, not “deaconess” as male theologians have mistranslated this work in many Bible versions. (The feminine form of diakonos) did not appear in literature until about 300 years after St. Paul addresses Phoebe in the Epistle to the Romans. The Apostolic Constitutions [a Syriac document of about A.D. 375] is the first known Christian writing to use the feminine form of diakonos). The word diakonos appears many times in the New Testament. In the King James Version (KJV) it is most often translated as “minister” when it speaks about a man holding this office. Three times the KJV translates the word as “deacon.” Only in one place does it use the word servant, and that occurs in Romans 16:1, where Phoebe in mentioned...Evidently, beginning with the KJV, English translators were overwhelmed by sexist values because the Miles Coverdale [1488-1569] edition, about seventy years earlier (1535), still translated diakonos in Romans 16:1 as “minister.” Closer to our time, the Revised Standard Version renders diakonos as “deaconess.” while the New International Version, like the KJV, has “servant.” (Schmidt, Veiled and Silenced: How Culture Shaped Sexist Theology, 180)

 

[jaigner]

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.

 

[Crabtownboy]

Alvin J. Schmidt (b. 1932) chronicles:
Phoebe...was a diakonos,
/QUOTE]

[size-"3"]Diakonos can definitely mean deacon or deaconess.

Definition

1. one who executes the commands of another, esp. of a master, a servant, attendant, minister
1. the servant of a king
2. a deacon, one who, by virtue of the office assigned to him by the church, cares for the poor and has charge of and distributes the money collected for their use
3. a waiter, one who serves food and drink

So, it is open to interpretation and many males simply cannot stand the idea of a woman being equal. Seems some women do not like the idea either.

Do your not find it a bit strange that this word is used 31 times in the New Testament and that many English translators call her a servant. A deacon and a deaconess is a servant. So go ahead and call Phoebe what she was, a deacon. This does not mean she had authority over men. That, IMHO, is a corruption of the office of deacon that had happened in far too many Baptist churches. Instead of the deacons being servants they become political boards and that, again IMHO, is not scriptural.

The source you quoted is fine, it is his interpretation ... one that I believe is incorrect.

Blessings.[/size]

 

[12strings]

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?

 

[Baptist4life]

When God has clearly written qualifications in His Word and we say that God will contradict that and call others who do not have those qualifications to the ministry, then we call God a liar. I'm sorry it's harsh but that's the way I see it. It is like saying that God created people to be gay and is pleased when they embrace that lifestyle. It is either a lie or we cannot trust our Scriptures.

:thumbs::thumbs: Amen!

 

[annsni]

Alvin J. Schmidt (b. 1932) chronicles:
Phoebe...was a diakonos,

[size-"3"]Diakonos can definitely mean deacon or deaconess.

Not in the first 300 year of the early church according to my link.

Definition

1. one who executes the commands of another, esp. of a master, a servant, attendant, minister
1. the servant of a king
2. a deacon, one who, by virtue of the office assigned to him by the church, cares for the poor and has charge of and distributes the money collected for their use
3. a waiter, one who serves food and drink

Interesting that it uses the pronoun "him"

So, it is open to interpretation and many males simply cannot stand the idea of a woman being equal. Seems some women do not like the idea either.

It has nothing to do with being equal. It has to do with role.

Do your not find it a bit strange that this word is used 31 times in the New Testament and that many English translators call her a servant. A deacon and a deaconess is a servant. So go ahead and call Phoebe what she was, a deacon. This does not mean she had authority over men. That, IMHO, is a corruption of the office of deacon that had happened in far too many Baptist churches. Instead of the deacons being servants they become political boards and that, again IMHO, is not scriptural.

The source you quoted is fine, it is his interpretation ... one that I believe is incorrect.

Blessings.[/size]

When we see that a deacon in 1 Timothy 3 is male, we cannot say that Phoebe is a deacon. Yes, she was a servant and may have even had some of the similar jobs to the office of a deacon but since the office is for a male according to Paul in 1 Timothy, she cannot have been in the official church office of deacon.

 

[Thomas Helwys]

Well, having read the posts since my last one, I am now sorry I started the thread. It has devolved into something less than "brotherly".

This will be my last post in this thread.

 

[michael-acts17:11]

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.

 

[michael-acts17:11]

Oops, unnecessary correction deleted.

 

[michael-acts17:11]

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.

 

[HeirofSalvation]

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.

 

[michael-acts17:11]

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.

 

[Bronconagurski]

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.

 

[michael-acts17:11]

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)

 

[HeirofSalvation]

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.

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):

"use the office"

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"??