Should women lead men in the church?

Paul the apostle seemed to say, “No way!” And in this article, it is his teaching upon which we must center.

For, if indeed this apostle was opposed to women, perhaps especially wives, ruling over or teaching men, maybe even their own husbands, in a public assembly, is it likely that he would be lifting up for adulation a female apostle of his day?

I think not.

Nevertheless, consider Junia. Or is it Junias? Aye, this is the question that begs our attention. Answer that, and the debate is over. But can the question be answered? Unfortunately Biblical scholars have not answered it in all these hundreds of years, and the discussion continues.

But what is disheartening to me is to see otherwise sound Bible teachers come to the pulpit and announce that it’s a done deal. Junia was the name, and apostle was her fame. Therefore it’s open season for women to do as they please in any assembly they please.

Let me quote the only verse in the Bible that mentions Junia(s). It is Romans 16:7. I am using the New King James Version:

“Greet Andronicus and Junia, my countrymen and my fellow prisoners, who are of note among the apostles, who also were in Christ before me.”

The NKJV here follows the KJV, as would be expected. The KJV is one of eight versions of the New Testament you will find in the Precise Parallel New Testament. Let me share with you how Junia(s) fares in the others.

First and foremost, though quite unhelpful as a debate stopper, is the Greek itself. Because the name in question is an object in the sentence, it is in the accusative case, and has an ending that could mean it is feminine or masculine. No help here.

Still, I found it of note that Strong’s Concordance, no lightweight in Biblical reference works, does not list the name ‘Iounia (Junia) in its Greek Dictionary section. Instead, the male is assumed (‘Iounias).

As for the other seven translations, the KJV, NAB, and NRSV all say “Junia.”

But the NASB says “Junias,” a male name, as do the other three, all of which have weight attached to their decisions:

The NIV is perhaps the most popular of all English versions in our day. Junias.

The Rheims is the Catholic version. Why is this interesting? Because there is Catholic tradition that Junia (if she really existed) is indeed to be honored, and a feast day has been set up in her name! Strange that the Catholic translators did not get the memo…

Most captivating of all is how explicit is the Amplified Version. The verse is expanded to read (in part), “… Andronicus and Junias…they are men held in high esteem...”

So, though the Biblical evidence for the gender of this name is conclusively inconclusive, it would seem the weight falls more toward a male.

What else do we know about Junia(s) from this verse?

1. A relative of Paul. Saved before Paul was.
2. A fellow-prisoner of Paul. Were they in the same prison dungeon at the same time? A male and a female? Here’s another possible clue as to where we should go with this.
3. The only other clue we have is, alas, also unsatisfying to those looking for resolution here:

“of note among (among is the Greek en, a multi-purpose preposition that can mean a whole lot of things!) the apostles”

Does that mean that the apostles as a group thought that this Junia(s), apostle or no, was a hero of the faith in those days?

Or does it mean that Junia(s) was indeed an apostle, and a truly eminent one, even by Paul’s standards?

But this is where we came in. Paul’s standards. Paul’s standards did not allow a woman to rule over a man, or to teach him. We’re left with clear statements by Paul vs. an unsolvable riddle at the end of one of Paul’s letters.