Kristen

Mark,

If you allow that Phoebe “may” have been a deacon, and that 1 Tim 3 “may” refer to women deacons, then it follows that “husband of one wife” “may” be gender inclusive. And if it is, then it is gender inclusive when used of overseers just as it is when used of deacons.
It seems to me that you’ve either got to deny any possibility that Paul considered Phoebe a deacon or that he was talking about women deacons, or you’ve got to admit that Paul does not explicitly gender-restrict overseers by the use of the term “husband of one wife.”
I don’t think there is any basis on which anyone can authoritatively state that Paul intended deacons to be only male, even though he used the term “husband of one wife.” There is clear documentation that the early church did, in fact, utilize female deacons.
What I’m saying is that using the phrase “husband of one wife” as a way to categorically deny that women can be overseers, simply is not a very good argument given the use of the same phrase for deacons.