Quote:
Originally Posted by Sister Alvear
This is the only occurrence of the word in the New Testament (Grenz, 89). It is also another word that is translated in such a way that its main meaning is not obvious in the translation. The normal translation is “helper” or someone who has helped. The basic and most obvious translation of the word is patron or benefactor, and women in this role, are well attested in the Roman world (Dunn, 888). Phoebe was likely another wealthy woman who served the church out of her means as the women in Luke 8 served Jesus out of theirs.Spencer has also suggested that porstatis could be derived from the root verb proistemi, which means to “to stand, place before or over,” or “to help by ruling” The times the verb appears in the New Testament it has the meaning of ruling or governing (Romans 12:8; 1 Thessalonians 5:12-13), and in the Pastoral Epistles both bishops and deacons were to govern their households well. In other Greek sources, such as Josephus, the masculine form of prostatis is used to describe rulers and leaders like Moses, Herod, and Agrippa (Spencer 116). This word could mean that Phoebe was a ruler or another overseer in the church. |
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sister Alvear
The truth of the matter is a woman should not rule her husband...that is what the original says...
|
Sis Alvear, I am trying to reconcile your statements above and am having difficulty doing it. Am I reading these posts correctly?
1) Phoebe was a deacon, "and in the Pastoral Epistles both Bishops and Deacons were to govern their households well."
2) "Phoebe was a ruler or another overseer in the church."
If I read these two statements correctly, as a "ruler or another overseer in the church", Phoebe (if married, or if she would ever marry) could not rule her husband (as you stated in the last quote above), yet as a deacon was required to rule her own household well. What a dichotomy! In the same line of thought according to the last quote above, could not rule her husband, but due to her position of authority and being a ruler in the church evidently could rule over other women's husbands. If Phoebe was a minister in training, why wouldn't Paul who acknowledges her in
Rom. 16, fail to do so in
1 Tim 3? He could have done so by giving qualifications for her present or potential marital status in
1 Tim. 3:12, by stating a deaconess should be the wife of one husband? And considering verse 15, he is discussing expected behavior in the house of God, would you propose she could not govern her husband at home but could at church?
Why doesn't
1Cor. 4:15 read "mothers" instead of "fathers?"
1Co 4:15 For though ye have ten thousand instructors in Christ, yet have ye not many fathers: for in Christ Jesus I have begotten you through the gospel.
Hybrid Mode
