Mark

Cheryl,

I understand totally where you are coming from. But unfortunately there are just as many other commentaries to quote in opposition to your view.

Bible exposition commentary
“From the beginning of its ministry, the church had a concern for believing widows (Acts 6:1; 9:39). Of course, the nation of Israel had sought to care for widows; and God had given special legislation to protect them (Deut. 10:18; 24:17; Isa. 1:17). God’s special care for the widows is a recurring theme in Scripture (Deut. 14:29; Ps. 94:6; Mal. 3:5). It was only right that the local church show compassion to these women who were in need. “

“At least sixty years old (v. 9a). A woman of this age was not likely to get remarried in that day, though sixty is not considered that “old” today. Perhaps the verb “taken into the number” gives us a clue. It literally means “to be enrolled and put on the list.” The word was used for the enrollment of soldiers. The early church had an official list of the names of qualified widows, and we get the impression that these “enlisted” women ministered to the congregation in various ways. (Remember Dorcas and her widow friends, Acts 9:36–43?) Paul probably would have told us if they had been officially ordained as deaconesses.

Bible knowledge commentary
” Next Paul offered instruction on how Timothy must deal with the widows in the congregation. Throughout the Old and New Testaments widows, along with aliens and orphans, are viewed as special objects of God’s mercy. As such they are to be taken under the wing of the congregation (cf. Deut. 10:18; 14:29; 24:17-21; Acts 6:1-7; James 1:27). As early as Acts 6 the church had established a charitable outreach to widows. Now about 30 years later the ministry to widows, of whom there were no doubt many, showed signs of being a major burden to the congregation. Paul was therefore eager in this passage to identify those who did not truly need help in order to leave enough for those who did.”

“5:9-10. The “proper recognition” of verse 3 is here made specific. Widows may be put on the list if they meet three primary qualifications. What exactly this list involved is not known. It may have been an official order for service in the congregation; more likely it was merely a roll of those widows who were to receive assistance from the congregation”
A Commentary, Critical and Explanatory on the Old and New Testaments.

“1. an elder—in age; probably not an elder in the ministry; these latter are not mentioned till 1Ti 5:17, “the elders that rule.” Compare Ac 2:17, “your old men,” literally, “elders.” Contrasted with “the younger men.” As Timothy was admonished so to conduct himself as to give no man reason to despise his youth (1Ti 4:12); so here he is told to bear in mind his youth, and to behave with the modesty which becomes a young man in relation to his elders.

The IVP bible background commentary
“Here Paul may refer to widows in general, but he probably refers to an order of widows who served the church, as in second-century Christianity. (Commentators disagree on this point.)

Note the commentators disagree at this point.

Now my opinion again. We cannot be sure what the ‘enrollment’ was. It could be women elders but then we must conclude that then only women (who are widows) over 60 shall ever become women elders otherwise we disobey the bible. If it involves caring for the widows in need, then we have problems with harshness of not allowing a younger widow who was truly in need. Either view has complications. On top of this we have the semantic renge of ‘prebyteros’.

Kay,

You say that widow women elders may be a possibility here. Perhaps but unlikely. Even those who see this passage as women serving the church would not relate this to the office of eldership. This is too long of a bow from the text. The fact the passage is dealing with ‘older’ widows and younger ones, gives all the indication that ‘presbyteros’ should be translated older men/women.

Now relating again to deaconesses. Like i have said before i am unsure whether i believe this is refering to wives or deaconesses. Regardless it does not impact on the office of eldership who are responsible for the overseeing of the church. The deacon does not have this responsibility. You are right to say that there is no ‘gunaikos’ in either mention of ‘elders’ so therefore you rebut your own argument. 1 Tim 3:11 could be either deaconess or wives, but it definitely does not relate to elders? Do you agree?

Anyhow i see we are going around in circles again. Speak soon