Appreciate this. Stephen B. Clark in his big book on Christian gender roles (written in 1980) lays out a fairly standard conservative reading of gender roles. However, one aspect of the book I found interesting is that he advocates for visible and valued roles for women within the church. And that if there is not some sort of feminine leadership, this would actually be detrimental to the church.
He solves this problem by advocating for a robust role of deaconess that operates under the overall governance of the elders. However you want to categorize it, I wonder if visible and valued roles for women in the church community might alleviate some of the push to allow female elders. In my layman’s opinion, it seems there is a gap here in your standard conservative evangelical church, and that filling this gap does not necessitate allowing women to be elders. It makes sense from a natural design standpoint that if we have church fathers (elders), there should be corresponding mothers of the church who have some sort of weightiness and influence.
Last thing, another example you didn’t mention is Synteche and Euodia. Apparently they were influential enough that their disagreement was affecting the whole body.
Love this. You laid these ideas out so succinctly! Have you read Bauckham’s “Gospel Women”? He agrees and provides fascinating details to bring these women to life.
I’d just point out that Aaron was not a prophet (like Moses and Miriam). A friend recently pointed out that this is why Miriam is struck with leprosy in Numbers after both siblings challenge Moses—because she was the real threat, as a prophet, whereas Aaron’s office was just a priest.
Also if Phoebe were a mere servant the term would be conjugated feminine 🙃 the masculine “diakonos” also points to a title rather than adjective.
I find it telling that Colossians 4:15 mentions “Nymphus and the church in his house”, according to the KJV and the NKJV.
Subsequent translators, checking the earliest copies, found that the reading should be, “Nympha, and the church that is in her house.”
I cannot imagine having the stones to change the original wording to fit the translator’s religious worldview.
And, if you argue that the church may have been in her house m, but she is not the pastor of the church, you may be right. But then you must explain why Paul would greet her and not the pastor by name. That is unlikely.
Appreciate this. Stephen B. Clark in his big book on Christian gender roles (written in 1980) lays out a fairly standard conservative reading of gender roles. However, one aspect of the book I found interesting is that he advocates for visible and valued roles for women within the church. And that if there is not some sort of feminine leadership, this would actually be detrimental to the church.
He solves this problem by advocating for a robust role of deaconess that operates under the overall governance of the elders. However you want to categorize it, I wonder if visible and valued roles for women in the church community might alleviate some of the push to allow female elders. In my layman’s opinion, it seems there is a gap here in your standard conservative evangelical church, and that filling this gap does not necessitate allowing women to be elders. It makes sense from a natural design standpoint that if we have church fathers (elders), there should be corresponding mothers of the church who have some sort of weightiness and influence.
Last thing, another example you didn’t mention is Synteche and Euodia. Apparently they were influential enough that their disagreement was affecting the whole body.
Love this. You laid these ideas out so succinctly! Have you read Bauckham’s “Gospel Women”? He agrees and provides fascinating details to bring these women to life.
I’d just point out that Aaron was not a prophet (like Moses and Miriam). A friend recently pointed out that this is why Miriam is struck with leprosy in Numbers after both siblings challenge Moses—because she was the real threat, as a prophet, whereas Aaron’s office was just a priest.
Also if Phoebe were a mere servant the term would be conjugated feminine 🙃 the masculine “diakonos” also points to a title rather than adjective.
I find it telling that Colossians 4:15 mentions “Nymphus and the church in his house”, according to the KJV and the NKJV.
Subsequent translators, checking the earliest copies, found that the reading should be, “Nympha, and the church that is in her house.”
I cannot imagine having the stones to change the original wording to fit the translator’s religious worldview.
And, if you argue that the church may have been in her house m, but she is not the pastor of the church, you may be right. But then you must explain why Paul would greet her and not the pastor by name. That is unlikely.