Mark

Hi Kay,

I am so glad you have responded, and equally glad that you agree that context is important. However you are making a serious error by assuming that ‘presbyterio’ always should translate ‘elder’. Although the office of eldership is based on this word, Paul also uses it to describe simply older men and women, as is the case in 1 Tim 5 and Titus. In the Old Covenant the elders were ‘older’ men, so it is not surprising that the same greek word is used when both talking about the official work of an elder/overseer and both older men/women. The context of both Tim and Titus reveal that what is being discussed is older men/women not the elders. To get this wrong makes one misunderstand the passage. Therefore the NIV correctly translates the difference between ‘older men/women’ and ‘elders’. Also consider the base of the word ‘presbus’ means ‘elderly’. Therefore you are not exegetically interpreting the passage correctly. You have not taken into account the semantic range of the word in the greek.

You again make the fundamental mistake when you say things like this…

In Titus 2:3 Paul instructs Titus, the pastor of Crete: “Likewise, tell the older women to be reverent in behavior, not to be slanderers or slaves to drink; they are to teach what is good.” The Greek word used for these older women is ‘presbutidas’.
These elders are instructed “to teach what is good.”

This is most definitely not about the office of eldership. You need to stop looking for egalitarian proof texts that are clearly not there. All you are doing is distorting the meaning of the passage. Paul is expounding good biblical qualities and living for the older men/women of the church. This is not about the office of eldership outlined in 1 Tim 2. It is not about elders in the spiritual governing sense.

By the way i never said this

But you insist that after the Resurrection she would be in sin for doing this?

What i did say is that this should not be compared to preaching in the 21st century. Let me be clear that i see that Jesus cared deeply for women and used them in his ministry. I hold to that, i just don’t agree with the way some egals use this out of context and equate it to the spiritual leadership of the church.

Now about Pheobe the ‘deaconess’. What must be made clear with this argument or debate is that there is no definitive answer. The only two places to suggest women are included in this office are in 1 Tim 3 and Romans 16. And both these texts are obviously debated since women/wives could contextually fit 1 Tim aswell as ‘servant’ fitting in Romans 16. To say this is definitive proof is very misleading to suggest. Let me explain, contextually in 1 Tim 3 to insert ‘gunaikas’ where Paul does is unusual, since the verse immediately afterward describes once again the idea of ‘husband of one wife’. The more natural reading would seem to suggest his intention is the ‘wives’ of the deacons talked about as the NIV translates. However it could also mean as you suggest, namely that women are included in the office of deacons. In Romans we have the same delimma. It could rightly mean that Pheobe is a deacon. But it could also equally mean that Paul is simply describing her as a servant. Paul uses ‘diakoness’ in a nontechnical sense (i.e not referring to the office of deacon but intends to mean servant) in the end of 1 Cor also (1 Cor 16:15). Also Paul uses it in this nontechnical sense in Eph 3:7 when talking about himself. Again in Col 1:25 and 1 Tim 4:6 aswell as many other NT instances where the intended meaning is servant/minister. So the obvious question is which is Pauls intended meaning in Romans 16. Short answer, we can’t be certain because both meanings could equally fit.

What i didn’t like Kay, is that you didn’t make this clear. As people who are more interested in the bible and not our own theologies or ideologies, i believe it is inappropriate to mislead in the way you have. You may accept that it means ‘deaconess’ but you should not say it has to mean this when it may not, and there is good biblically evidence contrary. WE must therefore put ALL the evidence forward to be fair to the bible and to have good biblical discussion.

Now personally i am still undecided and praying that God will help me to know the truth. Evidence to support your view Kay may perhaps be the early church father Pliny, who made mention of them in his letter to Trajan (110AD). But this is something i haven’t looked at in great detail and am undecided on the issue. I just wanted to make clear the actual issue grammatically behing deaconesses and put all the evidence on the table, so to speak.