Mind blown, learning of women apostles for the first time.

[Tacenda]

I listened to the recent podcast, "At Last She Said It",  https://atlastshesaidit.org/p/episode-248-revisiting-christ-chose. It was a whole new world in my scripture knowledge. I've never enjoyed reading scriptures, sadly. I enjoyed the Ensign, does it still exist? Oh, I think there was a name change?

Thoughts on the podcast, were that the ancient text has that there were women apostles. But somehow, they get cut out of the scriptures? And Mary Magdalene was who Jesus wanted to tell the world of his resurrection. Basically being a prophetess/apostle. Or a special witness. Isn't that what the apostles of Jesus were?

They mention that at the same meeting Pres Bednar and Pres HInckley were at, Pres Bednar (see references below) mentions women cannot be apostles in the church because the church aligns with ancient text in the Bible, did he totally miss the mark here? And then Pres Hinckley mentioned that if a woman becomes an apostle it will be through revelation, but I think he was coupling it with getting the Priesthood. But I sure like Pres Hinckley's statement better, it more aligns with having a living prophet.

The gals in this podcast mention the thing that blows my mind heavily, is if the Bible hadn't been mistranslated, or if it hadn't been altered, would we actually put women up there with the men? And if so, I think of the harm that could have been avoided if women were put on that platform in the Bible, which is something which sours me on parts of it, the parts causing great harm to women IMO. But also, as one of the podcast host' mentions at the very end, is that it comes down to power, the churches out there in the world would lose power if they actually admit the truth of the Bible. But in the LDS church, it has current prophets, it can change this, if only it would, if the women on the podcast are correct. 

That is why I come to those on this board who do read the scriptures religiously, unlike me. Or those who aren't scholars or like me, who also wonder about these things. Am I and these women wrong?  

If you would rather read than listen, here's the show notes:

Latter-day Saints are often told that the contemporary Church is built on the same model Jesus Christ used to establish His church. In this bonus re-release, Cynthia and Susan offer a few thoughts on that idea, and also discuss the pattern they see: the Bible doesn’t only show Jesus choosing women in the New Testament—beginning with Eve, women are cast in pivotal roles from the very start.

The original episode explores how Jesus’s inclusion of women was radical within its cultural context. Yet for most of history, his namesake religion has been marked by near-total domination of the patriarchy. What happened? Greg Prince once asked Chieko Okazaki a question that bears repeating: “…where do we need to go to get women in the Church where He wants them to be?” In Episode 248, Cynthia and Susan pose that question again, shining light on a few of the women hidden in plain sight at Christianity’s beginnings.

---

Notes & Quotes:

ALSSI Ep. 97, Christ Chose Women
Pres. Gordon B. Hinckley on Larry King Live, 09/08/1998
The Girl Who Baptized Herself: How a Lost Scripture About a Saint Named Thecla Reveals the Power of Knowing Our Worth, by Meggan Watterson
Purity and Parallels: Constructing the Apostasy Narrative of Early Christianity, by Taylor G. Petrey
A Beautiful Year: 52 Meditations on Faith, Wisdom, and Perseverance, by Diana Butler Bass
NPC Headliner Luncheon: Elder David A. Bednar, The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, 05/26/2022
Apostle David Bednar quizzed on declining LDS growth, same-sex marriage, ‘Under the Banner,’ Salt Lake Tribune, by Peggy Fletcher Stack, 05/26/2022
Taylor Petrey on Facebook, 05/27/2022
The LDS Temple Ceremony: Historical Origins and Religious Value, Dialogue Journal, by Edward H. Ashment, 10/01/1994
Christianity is Many Things, Learning to See with Brian McLaren, podcast Season 3 Ep. 1, 05/21/2022
There Is Always a Struggle: An Interview with Chieko N. Okazaki, Dialogue Journal, by Greg Prince, 11/25/2005
Elder Joanna?, By Common Consent: A Mormon Blog, by Kevin Barney, 06/16/2007
Mary Magdalene Revealed: The First Apostle, Her Feminist Gospel, and the Christianity We Haven’t Tried Yet, by Meggan Watterson
The Gospel of Mary Magdalene, Breaking Down Patriarchy, by Amy Allebest, podcast Season 1 Ep. 15, 11/25/2021
Who Was Junia? The Junia Project
Junia The Apostle and Mormonism’s Priesthood, Patheos, by Taylor Petrie, 10/05/2014
Shifting Footings, by Scot McKnight, Patheos, 01/02/2012
3 reasons Mormons don’t know what to do with the Apostle Paul, Religion News Service, by Jana Riess (Flunking Sainthood), 08/02/2019
The Acts of Thecla: A Pauline Tradition Linked to Women, by Nancy A. Carter, January 2000
Rebecca Solnit on Facebook, 06/02/2022

 

“In another usage of the term apostle, Paul offers greetings to Andronicus and a woman named Junia, who are “outstanding among the apostles” (Rom 16:7). These otherwise unknown apostles reveal key information about this group. First, this reference confirms that for Paul the term apostle is not restricted to the twelve but, rather, constitutes those in an informal network of missionary workers. Second, Paul calls a woman an apostle, suggesting that the male-only tradition of apostleship has not yet been established for the communities in which Paul works. A majority of those greeted as coworkers, apostles, and deacons in Romans 16 are women. In no instance does Paul discuss an apostle with a priesthood or an institutional office. Other texts around the turn of the second century … are unaware of a restriction to twelve apostles or their distinctive authority, let alone that they were all dead by the time those texts would have been written. Rather, in these texts the apostles are itinerant teachers and miracle workers, not members of a hierarchy of formal leadership.” —Taylor Petrey

“Power can be defined as the ability to make a particular perspective seem universal.” —Alok Vaid-Menon

“Mary is Mary because of Jesus. But Jesus was born Jesus because of Mary, who responded to the call of God, as did Isaiah of old: Here am I, the servant of the Lord. Without her, the light would not have shined forth amid the oppression and injustice.” —Diana Butler Bass

“Mary Magdalene confessed Jesus as Messiah, served him dinner, anointed him for kingship and burial, witnessed his execution, and proclaimed news of his resurrection. These are the things she did. We’ve forgotten. The memory of her was obscured.

“Lazarus was resurrected centuries ago. Maybe this is the time when his sister—Mary Magdalene—is finally resurrected. It is well past time to remember.” —Diana Butler Bass

“We follow the pattern of the ancient church. … The pattern anciently was that the apostles were men.” —Elder David A. Bednar

“Jesus has not stayed the same for me through my whole life’s journey. And so I’ve had to be open to understanding that even though there’s one verse in Hebrews that says Jesus Christ the same yesterday, today, and forever, I have not stayed the same yesterday, today, and forever. The church does not stay the same yesterday, today, and forever.

And so in a very real way, Jesus has changed for me. Jesus changes for the world. Jesus changes for the institutions of faith, for the church.” —Diana Butler Bass

“It seems to me like Christ loved the women. I think he really included them in many areas where Jewish society excluded them. He didn’t mind breaking those rules.” —Chieko Okazaki

“…It is difficult for us to appreciate how radical Jesus was to include women in his entourage. Women simply didn’t travel with men to whom they were not related….Jesus ignored the ritual impurity of a woman’s menstruation, which normally would have been an impediment to this kind of frequent contact.” —Kevin Barney

“According to the canonical gospels, Mary Magdalene was present at the crucifixion, she was there at the burial, and she was there alone at the empty tomb. And she is the first to witness the resurrection. Let me say that again: MM was the one Christ resurrected to. In the Gospel of John, Christ gives MM special instructions and commissions her to be the one to announce the good news. Her. She is the one he chooses.” —Meggan Watterson (MM Revealed, p. 108)

“If Christian theologians in the Latin West were going to establish an exclusively male church, then the central figure to Christ’s story, Mary Magdalene, needed to be retold. Starting in the 4th century, with the formation of the traditional bible, all of the gospels that confirmed Mary’s spiritual authority and unique relationship with Christ were excluded from the canon and deemed ‘heretical,’ like the Gospel of Mary Magdalene, the Gospel of Philip, and the Gospel of Thomas. And the scriptures that confirmed and validated women’s leadership in the earliest forms of Christianity like The Acts of Paul and Thecla, were also excluded.” —Meggan Watterson (MM Revealed, p. 106)

“To be sure, the word ‘apostle’ undoubtedly has a narrow meaning (the twelve, Paul, etc.) and it has a broader meaning (church-planting, founding, missionary). It still means ‘apostle’ (one sent by Christ) and not only that — this term describes the highest office for the first century Christians. And Junia is in that small and highly esteemed circle.” —Scot McKnight

“If we hadn’t silenced women and asked them to leave the altar from the start, I wonder what the world would be like now. And I wonder how girls and women would be treated if we would have been able, all along, to hear who Christ was, who Christ is according to women, to mothers, to daughters … Or to put it another way, I am excited to see how the world might change once we do.” —Meggan Watterson (MM Revealed, p. 47)

 

 

---

 

 

 

[The Nehor]

The Junia debacle was very silly where they altered the name to a masculine form to try to avoid the existence of a female apostle.

You also have the Acts of Paul and Thecla which has a platonic quasi-romance between the two but it doesn’t go anywhere since it sticks to their mutual devotion to asceticism.

I think it is pretty obvious what happened. In the early days women and slaves held church offices. Then when Christianity got going those with power (free men) stepped in to take control and ended all this nonsense about women having power. The bit where Paul commanded silence from women in the Church is likely an interpolation added later according to the general scholarly consensus. A lot of this also probably had to do with much higher levels of literacy amongst men.

The gospels and other books that put women on a more equal playing field were winnowed out long before Nicea and the first attempts at a canonized list. It wasn’t entirely due to the Council itself. The individual churches were choosing which books were authoritative. It is important to remember that what we now call the proto-orthodox (the Christians that won out) were only a subset of early Christians and possibly not even the majority. You had the various gnostic groups. Marcionites (pretty gnostic) actually had the first canon and thus the first “New Testament” but it didn’t win out. It was gnostic and had a different version of the Gospel of Luke. There are a few scholars arguing that the Gospel of Marcion is from an older version of Luke (or even Mark) and would make the Gospels cousins. The general consensus though is that Marcion trimmed Luke.

The Gospel of Mary wasn’t found until the 1890s and it is incomplete. It is sometimes called the Gospel of Mary Magdalene but there is no indication of which Mary is in the text. If she was identified it was probably in the missing beginning. Some think it is Mary Magdalene, some Mary (mother of Jesus), and a smaller group argue it might be Jesus’s sister Mary mentioned in the Gospel of Philip. It is also worth noting that the Gospel of Mary isn’t really a Gospel in the strict sense. It is not a story of the life of Jesus.

Despite the LDS Church’s insistence on an apostasy they tend to mostly line up theologically with the proto-orthodox group that won out. Quite odd that.

[The Nehor]

If you want some divine feminine poetry from Nag Hammadi I recommend “Thunder, Perfect Mind”

https://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/shows/religion/maps/primary/thunder.html

It is not clear if it is gnostic or not but was found with a bunch of gnostic texts. The speaker appears to be a divine feminine being but is also androgynous. I have shared it with some non-binary friends and they tend to love it.

Weirdly, Jordan Scott and her father Ridley Scott made a short film/ad for Prada using the poem. It is one of the better dramatic poetry readings though iirc it only does part of the poem:

https://www.prada.com/us/en/pradasphere/films/2005/thunder-perfect-mind.html#component_static_gal

(Content Warning: While not obscene or lewd it does have what many would consider to be suggestive imagery).

For a bit of a scholarly breakdown I recommend this video:
 

 

[Clear]

While modern english speakers may be surprised that the word "apostle" or "prophet" applies to Women at any age of time, one should keep in mind that the word "apostle" (αποστολοσ) simply applied to one who was "SENT" by someone else and it is not, strictly, a "religious" word in ancient Koine Greek usage. 

As a noun, for example, if I send my son to give cookies to a neighbor, he is then an apostle, simply by virtue of being "sent". 

Similarly, If the Apostle Peter sent an errand boy with a letter to deliver, the errand boy is an "apostle" because he is being "sent".   

Consider the text of John 1:6 where it says: "There was a man sent from God whose name was John.".  The greek text says εγενετο ανθρωποσ απεσταλμενοσ παρα θεου ονομα αυτω ιωαννησ".   The underlined verb is "apostlemenos" and the verb form of the noun "apostle" which means "sent".   The same principle applies whether the one sent is a male or female.

ANYONE who is SENT is an "apostle" in such ancient usage, just as the word for Angel (γρκ αγγελοσ) simply means "messenger" and the only way to tell if it applies to an earthly messenger sent from one king to another, or if it refers to a divine messenger, is the context.  

 

 

[CV75]

1 hour ago, Clear said:

While modern english speakers may be surprised that the word "apostle" or "prophet" applies to Women at any age of time, one should keep in mind that the word "apostle" (αποστολοσ) simply applied to one who was "SENT" by someone else and it is not, strictly, a "religious" word in ancient Koine Greek usage. 

As a noun, for example, if I send my son to give cookies to a neighbor, he is then an apostle, simply by virtue of being "sent". 

Similarly, If the Apostle Peter sent an errand boy with a letter to deliver, the errand boy is an "apostle" because he is being "sent".   

Consider the text of John 1:6 where it says: "There was a man sent from God whose name was John.".  The greek text says εγενετο ανθρωποσ απεσταλμενοσ παρα θεου ονομα αυτω ιωαννησ".   The underlined verb is "apostlemenos" and the verb form of the noun "apostle" which means "sent".   The same principle applies whether the one sent is a male or female.

ANYONE who is SENT is an "apostle" in such ancient usage, just as the word for Angel (γρκ αγγελοσ) simply means "messenger" and the only way to tell if it applies to an earthly messenger sent from one king to another, or if it refers to a divine messenger, is the context.  

I was going to say the same thing, that in some Bible text,  "apostle" is describes an action or calling, perhaps less often a formal appointment or office, and nowadays in the Church, exclusively a priesthood office.

[Tacenda]

2 hours ago, CV75 said:

I was going to say the same thing, that in some Bible text,  "apostle" is describes an action or calling, perhaps less often a formal appointment or office, and nowadays in the Church, exclusively a priesthood office.

Well, maybe this makes it a closed case, when tying in with the Priesthood.  Or maybe not, maybe the church would be able to give women apostleship without the Priesthood. All I really hope for is for the Bible to be redacted, IOW, show where it wasn't black and white correct. ETA: it's possible that the word "redacted" fits in. In case it's not, I'd like to say I hope the Bible is corrected.

Edited December 20, 2025 by Tacenda

[manol]

3 hours ago, The Nehor said:

If you want some divine feminine poetry from Nag Hammadi I recommend “Thunder, Perfect Mind”

https://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/shows/religion/maps/primary/thunder.html

It is not clear if it is gnostic or not but was found with a bunch of gnostic texts. The speaker appears to be a divine feminine being but is also androgynous. I have shared it with some non-binary friends and they tend to love it.

"Thunder Perfect Mind" is part of my personal canon (and for the most part the Pauline epistles are not).

Imo there are texts which teach great principles and enlighten the reader's understanding, and there are texts which lift the reader to a higher spiritual energy level even if the exact meanings are elusive, sort of like listening to beautiful songs sung in a foreign language.  "Thunder Perfect Mind" falls into the latter category for me; I read it for the elevation of my spirit rather than for the education of my logical mind.

The first few stanzas, from Anne McGuire's translation:

Thunder Perfect Mind

I was sent from the Power
And I have come to those who think upon me. 
And I was found among those who seek after me.

Look at me, you who think upon me;  
And you hearers, hear me! 
You who are waiting for me, take me to yourselves. 
And do not pursue me from your vision. 
And do not make your sound hate me, nor your hearing. 
Do not be ignorant of me at any place or any time. 
Be on guard! 
Do not be ignorant of me. 

For I am the first and the last. 
I am the honored and the scorned, 
I am the harlot and the holy one.
I am the wife and the virgin. 
I am the mother and the daughter.
I am the members of my mother. 

I am the barren one and the one with many children. 
I am she whose marriage is multiple, and I have not taken a husband. 
I am the midwife and she who does not give birth. 
I am the comforting of my labor pains.

I am the bride and the bridegroom.
It is my husband who begot me.
I am the mother of my father and the sister of my husband.
And he is my offspring.
I am the servant of him who prepared me and I am the lord of my offspring.
But he is the one who begot me before time on a day of birth and he is my offspring in time, and my power is from him.
I am the staff of his power in his youth and he is the rod of my old age. 
And whatever he wills happens to me.

I am the incomprehensible silence and the much-remembered thought.
I am the voice of many sounds and the logos of many forms. 
I am the utterance of my name.

*  *  *  *

6 hours ago, Tacenda said:

I listened to the recent podcast, "At Last She Said It",  https://atlastshesaidit.org/p/episode-248-revisiting-christ-chose. It was a whole new world in my scripture knowledge. I've never enjoyed reading scriptures, sadly. I enjoyed the Ensign, does it still exist? Oh, I think there was a name change?

Thoughts on the podcast, were that the ancient text has that there were women apostles. But somehow, they get cut out of the scriptures? And Mary Magdalene was who Jesus wanted to tell the world of his resurrection. Basically being a prophetess/apostle. Or a special witness. Isn't that what the apostles of Jesus were?

They mention that at the same meeting Pres Bednar and Pres HInckley were at, Pres Bednar (see references below) mentions women cannot be apostles in the church because the church aligns with ancient text in the Bible, did he totally miss the mark here? And then Pres Hinckley mentioned that if a woman becomes an apostle it will be through revelation, but I think he was coupling it with getting the Priesthood. But I sure like Pres Hinckley's statement better, it more aligns with having a living prophet.

The gals in this podcast mention the thing that blows my mind heavily, is if the Bible hadn't been mistranslated, or if it hadn't been altered, would we actually put women up there with the men? And if so, I think of the harm that could have been avoided if women were put on that platform in the Bible, which is something which sours me on parts of it, the parts causing great harm to women IMO. But also, as one of the podcast host' mentions at the very end, is that it comes down to power, the churches out there in the world would lose power if they actually admit the truth of the Bible. But in the LDS church, it has current prophets, it can change this, if only it would, if the women on the podcast are correct. 

That is why I come to those on this board who do read the scriptures religiously, unlike me. Or those who aren't scholars or like me, who also wonder about these things. Am I and these women wrong?  

If you would rather read than listen, here's the show notes:

Latter-day Saints are often told that the contemporary Church is built on the same model Jesus Christ used to establish His church. In this bonus re-release, Cynthia and Susan offer a few thoughts on that idea, and also discuss the pattern they see: the Bible doesn’t only show Jesus choosing women in the New Testament—beginning with Eve, women are cast in pivotal roles from the very start.

The original episode explores how Jesus’s inclusion of women was radical within its cultural context. Yet for most of history, his namesake religion has been marked by near-total domination of the patriarchy. What happened? Greg Prince once asked Chieko Okazaki a question that bears repeating: “…where do we need to go to get women in the Church where He wants them to be?” In Episode 248, Cynthia and Susan pose that question again, shining light on a few of the women hidden in plain sight at Christianity’s beginnings.

---

Notes & Quotes:

ALSSI Ep. 97, Christ Chose Women
Pres. Gordon B. Hinckley on Larry King Live, 09/08/1998
The Girl Who Baptized Herself: How a Lost Scripture About a Saint Named Thecla Reveals the Power of Knowing Our Worth, by Meggan Watterson
Purity and Parallels: Constructing the Apostasy Narrative of Early Christianity, by Taylor G. Petrey
A Beautiful Year: 52 Meditations on Faith, Wisdom, and Perseverance, by Diana Butler Bass
NPC Headliner Luncheon: Elder David A. Bednar, The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, 05/26/2022
Apostle David Bednar quizzed on declining LDS growth, same-sex marriage, ‘Under the Banner,’ Salt Lake Tribune, by Peggy Fletcher Stack, 05/26/2022
Taylor Petrey on Facebook, 05/27/2022
The LDS Temple Ceremony: Historical Origins and Religious Value, Dialogue Journal, by Edward H. Ashment, 10/01/1994
Christianity is Many Things, Learning to See with Brian McLaren, podcast Season 3 Ep. 1, 05/21/2022
There Is Always a Struggle: An Interview with Chieko N. Okazaki, Dialogue Journal, by Greg Prince, 11/25/2005
Elder Joanna?, By Common Consent: A Mormon Blog, by Kevin Barney, 06/16/2007
Mary Magdalene Revealed: The First Apostle, Her Feminist Gospel, and the Christianity We Haven’t Tried Yet, by Meggan Watterson
The Gospel of Mary Magdalene, Breaking Down Patriarchy, by Amy Allebest, podcast Season 1 Ep. 15, 11/25/2021
Who Was Junia? The Junia Project
Junia The Apostle and Mormonism’s Priesthood, Patheos, by Taylor Petrie, 10/05/2014
Shifting Footings, by Scot McKnight, Patheos, 01/02/2012
3 reasons Mormons don’t know what to do with the Apostle Paul, Religion News Service, by Jana Riess (Flunking Sainthood), 08/02/2019
The Acts of Thecla: A Pauline Tradition Linked to Women, by Nancy A. Carter, January 2000
Rebecca Solnit on Facebook, 06/02/2022

 

“In another usage of the term apostle, Paul offers greetings to Andronicus and a woman named Junia, who are “outstanding among the apostles” (Rom 16:7). These otherwise unknown apostles reveal key information about this group. First, this reference confirms that for Paul the term apostle is not restricted to the twelve but, rather, constitutes those in an informal network of missionary workers. Second, Paul calls a woman an apostle, suggesting that the male-only tradition of apostleship has not yet been established for the communities in which Paul works. A majority of those greeted as coworkers, apostles, and deacons in Romans 16 are women. In no instance does Paul discuss an apostle with a priesthood or an institutional office. Other texts around the turn of the second century … are unaware of a restriction to twelve apostles or their distinctive authority, let alone that they were all dead by the time those texts would have been written. Rather, in these texts the apostles are itinerant teachers and miracle workers, not members of a hierarchy of formal leadership.” —Taylor Petrey

“Power can be defined as the ability to make a particular perspective seem universal.” —Alok Vaid-Menon

“Mary is Mary because of Jesus. But Jesus was born Jesus because of Mary, who responded to the call of God, as did Isaiah of old: Here am I, the servant of the Lord. Without her, the light would not have shined forth amid the oppression and injustice.” —Diana Butler Bass

“Mary Magdalene confessed Jesus as Messiah, served him dinner, anointed him for kingship and burial, witnessed his execution, and proclaimed news of his resurrection. These are the things she did. We’ve forgotten. The memory of her was obscured.

“Lazarus was resurrected centuries ago. Maybe this is the time when his sister—Mary Magdalene—is finally resurrected. It is well past time to remember.” —Diana Butler Bass

“We follow the pattern of the ancient church. … The pattern anciently was that the apostles were men.” —Elder David A. Bednar

“Jesus has not stayed the same for me through my whole life’s journey. And so I’ve had to be open to understanding that even though there’s one verse in Hebrews that says Jesus Christ the same yesterday, today, and forever, I have not stayed the same yesterday, today, and forever. The church does not stay the same yesterday, today, and forever.

And so in a very real way, Jesus has changed for me. Jesus changes for the world. Jesus changes for the institutions of faith, for the church.” —Diana Butler Bass

“It seems to me like Christ loved the women. I think he really included them in many areas where Jewish society excluded them. He didn’t mind breaking those rules.” —Chieko Okazaki

“…It is difficult for us to appreciate how radical Jesus was to include women in his entourage. Women simply didn’t travel with men to whom they were not related….Jesus ignored the ritual impurity of a woman’s menstruation, which normally would have been an impediment to this kind of frequent contact.” —Kevin Barney

“According to the canonical gospels, Mary Magdalene was present at the crucifixion, she was there at the burial, and she was there alone at the empty tomb. And she is the first to witness the resurrection. Let me say that again: MM was the one Christ resurrected to. In the Gospel of John, Christ gives MM special instructions and commissions her to be the one to announce the good news. Her. She is the one he chooses.” —Meggan Watterson (MM Revealed, p. 108)

“If Christian theologians in the Latin West were going to establish an exclusively male church, then the central figure to Christ’s story, Mary Magdalene, needed to be retold. Starting in the 4th century, with the formation of the traditional bible, all of the gospels that confirmed Mary’s spiritual authority and unique relationship with Christ were excluded from the canon and deemed ‘heretical,’ like the Gospel of Mary Magdalene, the Gospel of Philip, and the Gospel of Thomas. And the scriptures that confirmed and validated women’s leadership in the earliest forms of Christianity like The Acts of Paul and Thecla, were also excluded.” —Meggan Watterson (MM Revealed, p. 106)

“To be sure, the word ‘apostle’ undoubtedly has a narrow meaning (the twelve, Paul, etc.) and it has a broader meaning (church-planting, founding, missionary). It still means ‘apostle’ (one sent by Christ) and not only that — this term describes the highest office for the first century Christians. And Junia is in that small and highly esteemed circle.” —Scot McKnight

“If we hadn’t silenced women and asked them to leave the altar from the start, I wonder what the world would be like now. And I wonder how girls and women would be treated if we would have been able, all along, to hear who Christ was, who Christ is according to women, to mothers, to daughters … Or to put it another way, I am excited to see how the world might change once we do.” —Meggan Watterson (MM Revealed, p. 47)

 

 

---

 

 

 

In my opinion Joseph Smith was moving in the direction of women being openly acknowledged as Priestesses when he was killed.  Women were already blessing and healing the sick.  Joseph Smith's journal entry of April 28, 1842, includes his preface to Eliza R. Snow's notes from the talk he gave to the Relief Society on that date (from History of the Church, Volume 4, Page 602), emphasis mine:

"At two o'clock I met the members of the "Female Relief Society," and after presiding at the admission of many new members, gave a lecture on the Priesthood, showing how the sisters would come in POSSESSION of the privileges, blessings and gifts OF THE PRIESTHOOD, and that the signs should follow them, such as healing the sick, casting out devils, &c., and that they might attain unto these blessings by a virtuous life, and conversation, and diligence in keeping all the commandments; a synopsis of which was reported by Miss Eliza R. Snow, as follows..."

The text of Eliza's notes can be found in Teachings of the Prophet Joseph Smith starting on page 223, but the foregoing preface from Joseph Smith's journal, which indicates his intention, is missing.  Ignore the section headings in TPJS; they are not part of Eliza's notes. 

In my opinion the Endowment Ceremony indicates that women are ALREADY Priestesses, no ordination needed. 

Edited December 19, 2025 by manol

[SeekingUnderstanding]

25 minutes ago, Tacenda said:

Well, maybe this makes it a closed case, when tying in with the Priesthood.  Or maybe not, maybe the church would be able to give women apostleship without the Priesthood. All I really hope for is for the Bible to be redacted, IOW, show where it wasn't black and white correct.

Nah. The history and consensus among biblical scholars all confirm Junia as female and prominent among the apostles (as a calling not one who is sent). The only people arguing otherwise are people with an ideological ax to grind.

 

[Clear]

Tacenda said: "Well, maybe this makes it a closed case, when tying in with the Priesthood.  Or maybe not, maybe the church would be able to give women apostleship without the Priesthood. All I really hope for is for the Bible to be redacted, IOW, show where it wasn't black and white correct. "

If the Koine word apostle applied to ANYONE (male OR female) who was sent by another for ANY reason, why does this mean to you that the bible needs to be “redacted”?  Can you clarify why you think the bible needs to be "redacted" in this specific case?

 

SeekingUnderstanding said: “The only people arguing otherwise are people with an ideological ax to grind.”

Hi SeekingUnderstanding:

To claim a Koine Greek speaker pointing out correct meaning and usage of koine Greek has “an ideological axe to grind” seems bizarre.   It is perfectly fine for a female to be sent by anyone for any reason to be called an “apostle”.  This is not ideological, but  it is simply common sense correct use of language.

There must be an underlying motive to make this sort of claim. 

It seems to me that correct use of koine Greek doesn’t require any religious ideology since even an atheist Greek might point out correct usage of their language while the leap to conclude a female apostle was ordained to be an apostle, ordained of Jesus Christ or one of the original twelve apostles requires some sort of religous (i.e. ideological) motive.   Is this a case of a kettle trying to call other utensils "black"?

While the aberrant motive may simply be a desire for “clicks” or "sensationalism" to attract viewers for a youtube influencer, this strange motive seems to be more ideological than the motive for a a Greek speaker to point out correct usage of their language.

Why is correct usage of language "ideological" in your judgment?

[Calm]

1 hour ago, Tacenda said:

maybe the church would be able to give women apostleship without the Priesthood.

If apostles were primarily defined as “special witnesses of Christ” “sent out” from the Church to witness of Christ, I think it would be relatively easy to appoint women as apostles while reserving (assuming no revelation had come to give priesthood office to women at the same time as naming them apostles was revealed since I don’t see a change with the label except through revelation) membership in the 12 for men ordained to the Priesthood.

[Calm]

1 hour ago, SeekingUnderstanding said:

as a calling not one who is sent

Do you mean a leadership calling because LDS interpret being missionaries as a calling and I don’t see why it couldn’t have been the same initially, as in before being sent out they were ordained to the work?

[The Nehor]

5 hours ago, Clear said:

While modern english speakers may be surprised that the word "apostle" or "prophet" applies to Women at any age of time, one should keep in mind that the word "apostle" (αποστολοσ) simply applied to one who was "SENT" by someone else and it is not, strictly, a "religious" word in ancient Koine Greek usage. 

As a noun, for example, if I send my son to give cookies to a neighbor, he is then an apostle, simply by virtue of being "sent". 

Similarly, If the Apostle Peter sent an errand boy with a letter to deliver, the errand boy is an "apostle" because he is being "sent".   

Consider the text of John 1:6 where it says: "There was a man sent from God whose name was John.".  The greek text says εγενετο ανθρωποσ απεσταλμενοσ παρα θεου ονομα αυτω ιωαννησ".   The underlined verb is "apostlemenos" and the verb form of the noun "apostle" which means "sent".   The same principle applies whether the one sent is a male or female.

ANYONE who is SENT is an "apostle" in such ancient usage, just as the word for Angel (γρκ αγγελοσ) simply means "messenger" and the only way to tell if it applies to an earthly messenger sent from one king to another, or if it refers to a divine messenger, is the context.  

 

 

Saying Junia was prominent amongst the messengers doesn’t fit that alternate context.

Edit: Dan McClellan said it better.

Edited December 20, 2025 by The Nehor

[The Nehor]

1 hour ago, Clear said:

Tacenda said: "Well, maybe this makes it a closed case, when tying in with the Priesthood.  Or maybe not, maybe the church would be able to give women apostleship without the Priesthood. All I really hope for is for the Bible to be redacted, IOW, show where it wasn't black and white correct. "

If the Koine word apostle applied to ANYONE (male OR female) who was sent by another for ANY reason, why does this mean to you that the bible needs to be “redacted”?  Can you clarify why you think the bible needs to be "redacted" in this specific case?

 

SeekingUnderstanding said: “The only people arguing otherwise are people with an ideological ax to grind.”

Hi SeekingUnderstanding:

To claim a Koine Greek speaker pointing out correct meaning and usage of koine Greek has “an ideological axe to grind” seems bizarre.   It is perfectly fine for a female to be sent by anyone for any reason to be called an “apostle”.  This is not ideological, but  it is simply common sense correct use of language.

There must be an underlying motive to make this sort of claim. 

It seems to me that correct use of koine Greek doesn’t require any religious ideology since even an atheist Greek might point out correct usage of their language while the leap to conclude a female apostle was ordained to be an apostle, ordained of Jesus Christ or one of the original twelve apostles requires some sort of religous (i.e. ideological) motive.   Is this a case of a kettle trying to call other utensils "black"?

While the aberrant motive may simply be a desire for “clicks” or "sensationalism" to attract viewers for a youtube influencer, this strange motive seems to be more ideological than the motive for a a Greek speaker to point out correct usage of their language.

Why is correct usage of language "ideological" in your judgment?

If it was a clear-cut case on Junia just being a regular messenger then why did those who transcribed the Bible butcher her name to be masculine? You don’t try to cover something up if you think it is innocuous.

[SeekingUnderstanding]

1 hour ago, Calm said:

Do you mean a leadership calling because LDS interpret being missionaries as a calling and I don’t see why it couldn’t have been the same initially, as in before being sent out they were ordained to the work?

I mean Paul called Junia as a prominent  “Apostle” in the same sense that Paul calls himself an “Apostle.”

Edited December 20, 2025 by SeekingUnderstanding

[SeekingUnderstanding]

1 hour ago, Clear said:

Tacenda said: "Well, maybe this makes it a closed case, when tying in with the Priesthood.  Or maybe not, maybe the church would be able to give women apostleship without the Priesthood. All I really hope for is for the Bible to be redacted, IOW, show where it wasn't black and white correct. "

If the Koine word apostle applied to ANYONE (male OR female) who was sent by another for ANY reason, why does this mean to you that the bible needs to be “redacted”?  Can you clarify why you think the bible needs to be "redacted" in this specific case?

 

SeekingUnderstanding said: “The only people arguing otherwise are people with an ideological ax to grind.”

Hi SeekingUnderstanding:

To claim a Koine Greek speaker pointing out correct meaning and usage of koine Greek has “an ideological axe to grind” seems bizarre.   It is perfectly fine for a female to be sent by anyone for any reason to be called an “apostle”.  This is not ideological, but  it is simply common sense correct use of language.

There must be an underlying motive to make this sort of claim. 

It seems to me that correct use of koine Greek doesn’t require any religious ideology since even an atheist Greek might point out correct usage of their language while the leap to conclude a female apostle was ordained to be an apostle, ordained of Jesus Christ or one of the original twelve apostles requires some sort of religous (i.e. ideological) motive.   Is this a case of a kettle trying to call other utensils "black"?

While the aberrant motive may simply be a desire for “clicks” or "sensationalism" to attract viewers for a youtube influencer, this strange motive seems to be more ideological than the motive for a a Greek speaker to point out correct usage of their language.

Why is correct usage of language "ideological" in your judgment?

I wasn’t aware that you were fluent in 1st century CE Greek. Where did you get your degree. Have you published in the field? On what credential do you claim to speak with authority on this subject? Can you point to an analysis done by someone who actually has broad experience in Greek that agrees with you when it comes to Junia? The only misogynistic apologetics I’ve seen either see to claim Junia must have been male, or they claim that Junia was simply known to the apostles (based on possible Greek usage dating five centuries prior). Please educate me! 

[CV75]

2 hours ago, Tacenda said:

Well, maybe this makes it a closed case, when tying in with the Priesthood.  Or maybe not, maybe the church would be able to give women apostleship without the Priesthood. All I really hope for is for the Bible to be redacted, IOW, show where it wasn't black and white correct. ETA: it's possible that the word "redacted" fits in. In case it's not, I'd like to say I hope the Bible is corrected.

Using the old-fashioned/testament meaning, women are given an apostleship when they are sent out as missionaries. This is apostleship without priesthood office, but with priesthood power. But we call them missionaries, just as we do the young male missionaries who have the office of Elder. I think Joseph Smith started correcting the errors in the Bible (perhaps more accurately, our understanding of the Bible), and God started correcting the loss of priesthood power, authority and understanding. 

[CV75]

2 hours ago, Clear said:

Tacenda said: "Well, maybe this makes it a closed case, when tying in with the Priesthood.  Or maybe not, maybe the church would be able to give women apostleship without the Priesthood. All I really hope for is for the Bible to be redacted, IOW, show where it wasn't black and white correct. "

If the Koine word apostle applied to ANYONE (male OR female) who was sent by another for ANY reason, why does this mean to you that the bible needs to be “redacted”?  Can you clarify why you think the bible needs to be "redacted" in this specific case?

 

SeekingUnderstanding said: “The only people arguing otherwise are people with an ideological ax to grind.”

Hi SeekingUnderstanding:

To claim a Koine Greek speaker pointing out correct meaning and usage of koine Greek has “an ideological axe to grind” seems bizarre.   It is perfectly fine for a female to be sent by anyone for any reason to be called an “apostle”.  This is not ideological, but  it is simply common sense correct use of language.

There must be an underlying motive to make this sort of claim. 

It seems to me that correct use of koine Greek doesn’t require any religious ideology since even an atheist Greek might point out correct usage of their language while the leap to conclude a female apostle was ordained to be an apostle, ordained of Jesus Christ or one of the original twelve apostles requires some sort of religous (i.e. ideological) motive.   Is this a case of a kettle trying to call other utensils "black"?

While the aberrant motive may simply be a desire for “clicks” or "sensationalism" to attract viewers for a youtube influencer, this strange motive seems to be more ideological than the motive for a a Greek speaker to point out correct usage of their language.

Why is correct usage of language "ideological" in your judgment?

30 minutes ago, SeekingUnderstanding said:

I wasn’t aware that you were fluent in 1st century CE Greek. Where did you get your degree. Have you published in the field? On what credential do you claim to speak with authority on this subject? Can you point to an analysis done by someone who actually has broad experience in Greek that agrees with you when it comes to Junia? The only misogynistic apologetics I’ve seen either see to claim Junia must have been male, or they claim that Junia was simply known to the apostles (based on possible Greek usage dating five centuries prior). Please educate me! 

As far as I can tell, her exact status continues to be debated in scholarly discussion (whether she had the conferral of priesthood keys, or was simply well-regarded by those who did). I don't see the best discussion on this point as ideological at all. Some few of these scholars certainly look overly zealous (cray-cray?) and sound disappointingly ideological, though.

[The Nehor]

2 hours ago, CV75 said:

As far as I can tell, her exact status continues to be debated in scholarly discussion (whether she had the conferral of priesthood keys, or was simply well-regarded by those who did). I don't see the best discussion on this point as ideological at all. Some few of these scholars certainly look overly zealous (cray-cray?) and sound disappointingly ideological, though.

The scholars are not discussing whether Junia had Priesthood Keys. That is an LDS concept that doesn’t appear in the New Testament or the early Christian Church in any equivalent sense.

[Clear]

1)  THE ANCIENT MEANING AND USAGE OF APOSTLE AS ONE WHO IS SENT.  ANY ADDITIONAL MEANING MUST BE CREATED BY VARYING CONTEXT.

Calm said: “If apostles were primarily defined as “special witnesses of Christ” “sent out” from the Church to witness of Christ…”  

“Sent out” to “witness for Christ” adds additional meaning to the base word “apostle”.   The Greek word “apostle” simply means one who is “sent” (or metaphorically one can “send” a message…). 

However, additional meaning must be added to a text in order distinguish whether the one being sent (the apostle), is a “special witness of Christ” or they are simply a boy sent on an errand by his mother.  BOTH are individuals who are “sent”.

The religious person (like many of us) tends to add context to words that say, an atheist, using the same base term does not.  I might say the word “heaven” (thinking of a life after death) while the atheist astronomer is thinking about the night sky.  Both of us think of the same word, but take away different meanings because of our paradigms. 

The same is true of the Greek word “apostle” (αποστολος). 

The writers of sacred literature did not create a special word for sending or the one sent, they simply used the common Koine word, “Apostolos” (a thing or person that is “sent”).

Αποστολος (apostle) started out as a nautical term for ships, laden with cargo, “sent out” to all the ancient world.  This is why a merchant “ship” was called an “αποστολος / apostle” in ancient Koine literature for a time.

 

2)  A SIMPLE, BUT OBJECTIVE DEMONSTRATION OF THE TERM “APOSTOLOS’s USAGE FOR “SENDER”

Readers, take 20 seconds and simply ask google: “HOW DO YOU WRITE “SENDER” IN GREEK?  It will tell you the word αποστολεας, is the word they use for “sender”.

Now take 20 more seconds and simply ask google”:  “HOW DO YOU SAY “SENDER” IN GREEK?”, 

Again, Google A.I. will objectively tell us that when a greek wants to place the word: “The Sender” on a package, the Sender writes: “Ο αποστολεας” meaning “The Sender” on the package. 

The A.I. will explain that Αποστολη (Apostole) is the act of Sending or mission.  This should be simple.

Google is perfectly simple and correct regarding the base meanings and usage of this word in its various base forms.

 

3)  IT IS ADDITIONAL CONTEXT THAT DETERMINES THE NATURE OF THE ONE BEING SENT

Hence, Consider a Greek 9 year old who is sent to a store on the mission to by bread is an apostle.

A 30ish year old Peter is sent out on the mission to be a special witness is also an apostle.

Though both are apostles in Koine Greek, their missions and qualifications are vastly different.

It is the CONTEXT that reveals to us what type of individuals are being “sent” and what their missions and qualifications are.

 

 

4)  EXAMPLES FROM ANCIENT GREEK BIBLICAL TEXT

2 Sam 10:2, The text says David SENDS servants “ και απεστειλε Δαωιδ ...δουλων αυτου” / “David SENT…his servants…”  The Greek verb indicates davids messengers are “apostles”.

2 Sam 11:1 – This time David send Joab: “απεστειλε Δαωιδ τον Ιωαβ..” / “David SENT Joab…”   Again, the verb refers to Joab as an apostle, sent by David.

Whether the Greek word "Junian" was the shortened male ιυλιανυς as the Greek linguist Milligan believed or if it is female (as Moulton, his partner) believed, it doesn’t matter.  It only matters that If the sentence refers to a female, she be “sent” on some errand to be referred to as an “apostle” (αποστολος).  

The word does not tell us if she is sent as a “witness“, or as a “special witness” like the 12 were, or she was simply sent as help for a dozen other reasons.  She was “sent” and so she is an “apostle” (one who is sent).   One has to add more context if one wants to describe her other characteristics.  

If one is making specific theories, one must ask, where is the additional context in the biblical text?  

IF this additional context is not in the text, then where did it come from?

We need to be careful in our claims.

 

 

5)  Nehor said: “If it was a clear-cut case on Junia just being a regular messenger then why did those who transcribed the Bible butcher her name to be masculine? 

I am not sure what you are asking since the specific word "ιουνιαν" seems to be female both in the Greek and in English (Julia). 

Perhaps you are referring to the phrase “fellow servants” (kinsmen in some translations) as a masculine (referring to julia)?

If so, I don’t think the transcribers/translators of the bible “butchered” her name or the text.   There are other considerations. 

For example, Greek is like Spanish, if you are describing a group of three individuals who are ONLY women, then you describe them as “they”, using a feminine term.  BUT, if there is a single man in group of three, then “they” is a masculine term, “ellos”.  Since Andronicus (male) was with Junia(n), the term for "they" is masculine and the translator did not "butcher" the text.  Also, if one assumes they were speaking hebrew the it is important to know that not only is Greek this way, but Hebrew is as well.

If neither of these offer insight, then I am simply confused regarding what you mean by claiming a possible “butching her name to be masculine.

 

 

6)  Seeking understanding said: “I mean Paul called Junia as a prominent  “Apostle” in the same sense that Paul calls himself an “Apostle.”

You're making three specific claims I've not seen, can you clarify them?

1)  you claim "Paul CALLED Junia".  

Can you clarify what you mean by Paul “called” Junia.  What do you mean by "call".   Simply "asking", a formal calling or ordination or some sort of religious rite of some sort?

It is important that you clarify what you mean by this claim.

 

2) You claim she was called "as a PROMINENT "Apostle"'

Can you then clarify what you mean by your additional claim that she was a “prominent apostle”.    What MAKES her a "prominent apostle" in your mind?

Are you saying Paul simply mentioning Junia makes her "prominent" or are you referring to something she did to make her "prominent"?

 

3) You claim she was a prominent Apostle "IN THE SAME SENSE THAT PAUL CALLS HIMSELF AN "APOSTLE"

When you say she was an apostle "in the same sense that Paul called himself an "Apostle", what do you mean by this claim?

 “to go with them”, or are you saying Junia had a “vision” as Paul did and was “sent” by Jesus in this way, or what do you mean that Paul “called” Junia?

If you mean Paul actually “called” Junia, where does the text give you a description of this?

 

7) THERE IS NO NEED TO BECOME ANGRY OR DEMANDING. WE ARE SIMPLY TALKING ABOUT THE ANCIENT KOINE GREEK USAGE OF A SINGLE WORD

THE LDS PARADIGM AND ANCIENT PARADIGM DOESN'T CHANGE WHETHER THE WORD IS USED ON A FEMALE OR A MAN OR A 9 YEAR OLD "APOSTLE"  IF WE ARE USING ANCIENT KOINE GREEK

Seekingunderstanding said: regarding Greek: “Please educate me! “

Seeking, try to be at peace… World peace does not depend on whether this theory of yours is correct or incorrect. 

We are simply talking about the Usage of a single word, αποστολος and it’s very simple and very basic meaning to the ancient greeks who used the term.

 

Do you have an opinion as to what the base term αποστολοσ meant in שמבןקמא everyday Koine speech that differs what I have said?  

[Clear]

The final line of my above post says: Do you have an opinion as to what the base term αποστολοσ meant in שמבןקמא everyday Koine speech that differs what I have said? 

The hebrew in black was an accidental keybord change to hebrew characters (I think).   Its jibberish.  

[Calm]

One more post (25) and you can edit 

[The Nehor]

4 hours ago, Clear said:

5)  Nehor said: “If it was a clear-cut case on Junia just being a regular messenger then why did those who transcribed the Bible butcher her name to be masculine? 

I am not sure what you are asking since the specific word "ιουνιαν" seems to be female both in the Greek and in English (Julia). 

Perhaps you are referring to the phrase “fellow servants” (kinsmen in some translations) as a masculine (referring to julia)?

If so, I don’t think the transcribers/translators of the bible “butchered” her name or the text.   There are other considerations. 

For example, Greek is like Spanish, if you are describing a group of three individuals who are ONLY women, then you describe them as “they”, using a feminine term.  BUT, if there is a single man in group of three, then “they” is a masculine term, “ellos”.  Since Andronicus (male) was with Junia(n), the term for "they" is masculine and the translator did not "butcher" the text.  Also, if one assumes they were speaking hebrew the it is important to know that not only is Greek this way, but Hebrew is as well.

If neither of these offer insight, then I am simply confused regarding what you mean by claiming a possible “butching her name to be masculine.

The name was altered to make it masculine in the Medieval Period despite a long history of the name being feminine.

4 hours ago, Clear said:

6)  Seeking understanding said: “I mean Paul called Junia as a prominent  “Apostle” in the same sense that Paul calls himself an “Apostle.”

You're making three specific claims I've not seen, can you clarify them?

1)  you claim "Paul CALLED Junia".  

Can you clarify what you mean by Paul “called” Junia.  What do you mean by "call".   Simply "asking", a formal calling or ordination or some sort of religious rite of some sort?

It is important that you clarify what you mean by this claim.

 

2) You claim she was called "as a PROMINENT "Apostle"'

Can you then clarify what you mean by your additional claim that she was a “prominent apostle”.    What MAKES her a "prominent apostle" in your mind?

Are you saying Paul simply mentioning Junia makes her "prominent" or are you referring to something she did to make her "prominent"?

 

3) You claim she was a prominent Apostle "IN THE SAME SENSE THAT PAUL CALLS HIMSELF AN "APOSTLE"

When you say she was an apostle "in the same sense that Paul called himself an "Apostle", what do you mean by this claim?

 “to go with them”, or are you saying Junia had a “vision” as Paul did and was “sent” by Jesus in this way, or what do you mean that Paul “called” Junia?

If you mean Paul actually “called” Junia, where does the text give you a description of this?

I can’t tell if you are being ridiculous deliberately or naively.

We are literally talking about one passage in one of Paul’s epistles. That is the only possible source for this and you are acting like it is some great mystery where this information comes from.

Also you are abusing formatting at this point. Why the random all caps, bolding, underlining, and italics? There is not consistency? Just…….why?

[SeekingUnderstanding]

7 hours ago, Clear said:

)  Seeking understanding said: “I mean Paul called Junia as a prominent  “Apostle” in the same sense that Paul calls himself an “Apostle.”

You're making three specific claims I've not seen, can you clarify them?

1)  you claim "Paul CALLED Junia".  

Can you clarify what you mean by Paul “called” Junia.  What do you mean by "call".   Simply "asking", a formal calling or ordination or some sort of religious rite of some sort?

This is just me being a poor editor. Paul referred to Junia and Andronicus as Apostles   (called them apostles) in the same sense of the word as when he called himself an apostle. 

7 hours ago, Clear said:

It is important that you clarify what you mean by this claim.

 

2) You claim she was called "as a PROMINENT "Apostle"'

Can you then clarify what you mean by your additional claim that she was a “prominent apostle”.    What MAKES her a "prominent apostle" in your mind?

This is the wrong question. You should be asking what made them prominent (of note, important),  to Paul. 
 

https://www.biblestudytools.com/romans/16-7-compare.html#google_vignette

 

7 hours ago, Clear said:

Are you saying Paul simply mentioning Junia makes her "prominent" or are you referring to something she did to make her "prominent"?

 

Um, I’m saying Paul calling them “of note” or “prominent” makes them prominent. Are we talking about the same verse here?

7 hours ago, Clear said:

3) You claim she was a prominent Apostle "IN THE SAME SENSE THAT PAUL CALLS HIMSELF AN "APOSTLE"

When you say she was an apostle "in the same sense that Paul called himself an "Apostle", what do you mean by this claim?

 “to go with them”, or are you saying Junia had a “vision” as Paul did and was “sent” by Jesus in this way, or what do you mean that Paul “called” Junia?

If you mean Paul actually “called” Junia, where does the text give you a description of this?

https://www.biblestudytools.com/romans/16-7-compare.html#google_vignette
 

Can you find a translation of the Bible that distinguishes the kind of apostle Paul was and the kind of Apostle Junia was? 

7 hours ago, Clear said:

7) THERE IS NO NEED TO BECOME ANGRY OR DEMANDING. WE ARE SIMPLY TALKING ABOUT THE ANCIENT KOINE GREEK USAGE OF A SINGLE WORD

THE LDS PARADIGM AND ANCIENT PARADIGM DOESN'T CHANGE WHETHER THE WORD IS USED ON A FEMALE OR A MAN OR A 9 YEAR OLD "APOSTLE"  IF WE ARE USING ANCIENT KOINE GREEK

 

Seekingunderstanding said: regarding Greek: “Please educate me! “

Seeking, try to be at peace… World peace does not depend on whether this theory of yours is correct or incorrect. 

We are simply talking about the Usage of a single word, αποστολος and it’s very simple and very basic meaning to the ancient greeks who used the term.

So you have no training in the understanding of 1st century CE Greek. Who could have guessed?

7 hours ago, Clear said:

Do you have an opinion as to what the base term αποστολοσ meant in שמבןקמא everyday Koine speech that differs what I have said?  

Maybe spend sometime pondering why not a single biblical translation renders the term ‘sent’ in this specific verse? Then spend some time looking up the https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Etymological_fallacy. Then ask yourself if you would be disputing any of this if it was Junias instead of Junia. 

Edited December 20, 2025 by SeekingUnderstanding

[MustardSeed]

17 hours ago, manol said:

my opinion the Endowment Ceremony indicates that women are ALREADY Priestesses, no ordination needed

We as a people need to catch up with God.  We absolutely get in our own way. 

[CV75]

11 hours ago, The Nehor said:

The scholars are not discussing whether Junia had Priesthood Keys. That is an LDS concept that doesn’t appear in the New Testament or the early Christian Church in any equivalent sense.

Yes, and that is what I suggested earlier in a broader, less ideologically-fueled exchange on this subject: Posted 18 hours ago and Posted 14 hours ago I still don't see the best discussion on this point as ideological at all (and some scholars do discuss whether she had keys  https://people.brandeis.edu/~brooten/Articles/Junia_Outstanding_among_Apostles.pdf )

Edited December 20, 2025 by CV75