Mark

Kay,

I’m a bit lost with your points. I have said several times now that my view on 1 Tim 3:11 is undecided. Both meanings have biblical support for them but you seem to think i believe it must be translated ‘deacons wives’, since you asked me why the elders wives have no qualifications. Let me be very clear. I dunno which way to translate ‘gunaikos’ therefore i will not say t has to be one or the other.

Now the reason you rebut your own argument is because you believe women can be elders right? But yet you hold to verse 11 being about ‘deaconesses’, therefore you agree that verse 11 is NOT about eldership. So although you hold to verse 11 promoting female deacons, there is nothing now in 1 Tim 3 to indicate that women are included in the eldership, unless you wish to hold onto the ‘anybody’ and ignore who Paul then qualfies as the ‘anybody’ in the following verses. I just find it interesting that verse 11 has been used on this blog (not sure if it was you though) as proof that women are included in eldership.

Again in relation to chapter 5. Kay, i would encourage you to look at the immediate context of ‘prebyteros’. Paul expands in the very same verses his use of the word. It is completed surrounded by younger men/women, older men/women yet you wish to change the meaning to be about eldership. It doesn’t make sense to me. Do you actually believe this is about the office of eldership or just widows ministry. I would like you to be clear in your opinion on that. Also if you do believe it is about the office of eldership how do reconcile that only a widow over 60 can fulfill this role? Do you apply that sort of teaching?

Can you explain more for me what you mean by this question. Cheryl asked the same thing but i dont understand what you are meaning.
“Does this mean you are willing to contend that the church was instructed to demand celibacy in exchange for food?”

Thanks