Why Can't Men Believe what the Scriptures Say?

[firehill]

It's good to look at all the possibilities except that they are nothing more:

'The second of four statements found in Rom. 16:7 about this pair is that they were Paul's "fellow prisoners" (NASB, HCSB, KJV, ASV, RSV, NAB, St. Joseph edition, McCord, Phillips, NJB). Other translations are: "fellow captives" (NWT) ..... "comrades in captivity" (NEB) ..... "in prison with me" (NIV, E-T-RV, LB, Williams) ..... "in jail with me" (CEV) ..... "shared a jail cell" (The Message). The Greek word employed here is sunaichmalotos, which is more literally translated "a fellow prisoner of war." This word appears only two other times in the NT writings, and is used exclusively by the apostle Paul (Col. 4:10; Philemon 23). Bishop Moule perhaps captures the meaning of this word best when he writes that Andronicus and Junia were Paul's "fellow-captives in Christ's war."

There are several possible interpretations here. One meaning is that these two may actually have been physically imprisoned together with Paul on some occasion. Another possibility is that, because of their faith, both Paul and this couple experienced imprisonment. Thus, they could well be "fellow prisoners" for the cause of Christ, but not have been imprisoned at the same time or at the same location. In other words, they shared the experience of having been jailed for their faith. A more remote possibility, though one embraced by a handful of scholars, is that Paul may have been speaking figuratively -- they were fellow "captives" to the cause of Christ Jesus; fellow slaves to His divine will for their lives. Paul was imprisoned a great many times, however, thus "the expression in this case is doubtless intended to be taken literally, even though we are left uninformed as to the circumstances" (The Expositor's Bible Commentary, vol. 10, p. 164). At this point in his ministry Paul had experienced several imprisonments (2 Cor. 6:5; 11:23); the number being set at seven according to Clement of Rome (a contemporary of the first century apostles of Christ). '

http://www.zianet.com/maxey/reflx201.htm

I myself sway more towards the literal translation.

[Guest Biblicist]

Did they take women prisoner's of war back then?

[firehill]

Did they take women prisoner's of war back then?

Paul himself did and he murdered them before his calling.

[Guest shiloh357]

Did they take women prisoner's of war back then?

Paul himself did and he murdered them before his calling.

That is not the question asked of you, and furthermore, Paul did not persecute send Jewish believers to their deaths in acts of war. Paul was not operating in a military capacity, so your answer really does not fit the question. It is has been demonstrated that Junias was a prisoner with Paul, and Paul was never considered a military combatant, and would not have qualified as a "prionser of war."

[Ovedya]

Did they take women prisoner's of war back then?

Paul himself did and he murdered them before his calling.

Actually they didn't. There's another example of using cultural perspective to support Scripture, not to discount or combat it.

Paul didn't murder a single soul. His commission was to bind up believers and carry them away for trial.

It would have been atypical in either Roman or Jewish culture to take women away as prisoners.

~~~~~

Has anybody mentioned yet that "Junius" is a Latin name and not Greek?

[Floatingaxe]

After reading all 14 pages of this thread, I have a couple of opinions to add.

Apostle means -sent one (missionary)

The disciples were called disciples (students)WHILE they were being taught by Jesus .

When Jesus left, they were called apostles because Jesus sent them out to proclaim His word.

Men and women were jailed seperately, so Junias was a man since he was in jail with Paul.

Scripture tells us that Christ is the head of the Church, man is head of the woman.

Woman cant be held in authority over a man so women preachers is a no no.

bibleb.com

In 1 Corinthians 11:3 Paul says, "The head of every man is Christ; and the head of the woman is the man; and the head of Christ is God. " That verse teaches that women are to be in submission to men in the sense that they are not to usurp the role of leadership in the church, which belongs to qualified men only.

a) The source of subjection

No one argues that the head of every man is Christ. There is no Christians' Liberation movement demanding equality with Christ! Also, everyone understands that God the Father is the head of Christ. Philippians 2:5-8 teaches that Christ took upon Himself the form of a servant during His Incarnation. Since Christ is the head of the man, and the Father is the head of Christ, why do we debate about whether the man is the head of the woman?

Because there is a total misinterpretation of the word used for "head"! The word for "head" means, "source" or "origin" and best describes the relationship between God and Jesus Christ, and Jesus Christ and the Church. God is the source of Christ. Christ is the source of the Church, and man (Adam) is the source of woman (Eve). This proper interpretation takes it out of the realm of debate and into the realm of TRUTH.

[Guest shiloh357]

Because there is a total misinterpretation of the word used for "head"! The word for "head" means, "source" or "origin" and best describes the relationship between God and Jesus Christ, and Jesus Christ and the Church. God is the source of Christ. Christ is the source of the Church, and man (Adam) is the source of woman (Eve). This proper interpretation takes it out of the realm of debate and into the realm of TRUTH.

This is wrong because for starters, God is not the source of Christ. That implies that Jesus had a beginning, and was not eternally existent with the Father. Jesus as God, has no source, therefore, cannot be applied in comparison to man woman. Furthermore, to render the word "source" is inconsistent with the context. There may be other contexts where the word is used as "source" but that is not what Paul has in view here.

[Floatingaxe]

Because there is a total misinterpretation of the word used for "head"! The word for "head" means, "source" or "origin" and best describes the relationship between God and Jesus Christ, and Jesus Christ and the Church. God is the source of Christ. Christ is the source of the Church, and man (Adam) is the source of woman (Eve). This proper interpretation takes it out of the realm of debate and into the realm of TRUTH.

This is wrong because for starters, God is not the source of Christ. That implies that Jesus had a beginning, and was not eternally existent with the Father. Jesus as God, has no source, therefore, cannot be applied in comparison to man woman. Furthermore, to render the word "source" is inconsistent with the context. There may be other contexts where the word is used as "source" but that is not what Paul has in view here.

No it is not wrong. Jesus calls God His Father. He chose to take on the role of Son, thus allowing God as source. We all know they are equally part of the Godhead.

[firehill]

Did they take women prisoner's of war back then?

Paul himself did and he murdered them before his calling.

That is not the question asked of you, and furthermore, Paul did not persecute send Jewish believers to their deaths in acts of war. Paul was not operating in a military capacity, so your answer really does not fit the question.

I misread the question. Paul imprisoned and killed christian women just as he did men.

It is has been demonstrated that Junias was a prisoner with Paul, and Paul was never considered a military combatant, and would not have qualified as a "prionser of war."

Nothing has been demonstrated. It is one possibility that the three were in prison together. I already posted the other possibilities...

[firehill]

It's good to look at all the possibilities except that they are nothing more:

'The second of four statements found in Rom. 16:7 about this pair is that they were Paul's "fellow prisoners" (NASB, HCSB, KJV, ASV, RSV, NAB, St. Joseph edition, McCord, Phillips, NJB). Other translations are: "fellow captives" (NWT) ..... "comrades in captivity" (NEB) ..... "in prison with me" (NIV, E-T-RV, LB, Williams) ..... "in jail with me" (CEV) ..... "shared a jail cell" (The Message). The Greek word employed here is sunaichmalotos, which is more literally translated "a fellow prisoner of war." This word appears only two other times in the NT writings, and is used exclusively by the apostle Paul (Col. 4:10; Philemon 23). Bishop Moule perhaps captures the meaning of this word best when he writes that Andronicus and Junia were Paul's "fellow-captives in Christ's war."

There are several possible interpretations here. One meaning is that these two may actually have been physically imprisoned together with Paul on some occasion. Another possibility is that, because of their faith, both Paul and this couple experienced imprisonment. Thus, they could well be "fellow prisoners" for the cause of Christ, but not have been imprisoned at the same time or at the same location. In other words, they shared the experience of having been jailed for their faith. A more remote possibility, though one embraced by a handful of scholars, is that Paul may have been speaking figuratively -- they were fellow "captives" to the cause of Christ Jesus; fellow slaves to His divine will for their lives. Paul was imprisoned a great many times, however, thus "the expression in this case is doubtless intended to be taken literally, even though we are left uninformed as to the circumstances" (The Expositor's Bible Commentary, vol. 10, p. 164). At this point in his ministry Paul had experienced several imprisonments (2 Cor. 6:5; 11:23); the number being set at seven according to Clement of Rome (a contemporary of the first century apostles of Christ). '

http://www.zianet.com/maxey/reflx201.htm

I myself sway more towards the literal translation.

Here they are again, Shilo!