Phoebe, a leader in the New Testament Church

[Unchained]

This thread definitively needed a bump. Very interesting article, I hadn't read this one before!

[Green Cochoa]

On September 6, 2013 at 8:58 PM, Tom Wetmore said:

While mentioned in other threads, this article from Ministry Magazine deserves to be re-emphasized -

https://www.ministrymagazine.org/archive/2013/04/phoebe-was-she-an-early-church-leader

 

It's too bad our theologians don't read or respect Ellen White anymore.  Why do they think they can know better than what God revealed to her?  The article, nonetheless, does indicate the uncertainties of its author in multiple ways.  Here are some select lines from it.

Quote

Phoebe: Was she an early church leader?

Not only is Paul’s discourse on Phoebe the first and longest in the chapter but also the words and allusions he uses to describe her and her ministry hint at the remarkable stature this woman had among the early Christians.

There has been much discussion in Christian literature with regard to the word servant, which is a translation of the well-known Greek word diakonos, also translated as “deacon.” 

Paul’s calling Phoebe a deacon appears to make her ministry as equally important and valid as that of other early church leaders, such as Tychicus (Eph. 6:21), Epaphras (Col. 1:7), and Timothy (1 Tim. 4:6). Otherwise, why would Paul use such a term in reference to a woman and create intentional misunderstanding?

Phoebe as a courier?

Phoebe as a leader (prostatis)?

The most interesting line of evidence, however, suggesting that Phoebe might have been much more than just a helper, comes from Paul’s own writings.

How is it, then, that most versions seem to water down this important word prostatis and view Phoebe simply as a “helper”? Why not, following the Contemporary English Version, use “respected leader”

After all that uncertainty of questions, assumptions, suggestions, allusions, and appearances, why not look squarely at what can be known with persuasive surety--from the Lord's messenger.  She tells us clearly what it was that Phebe did and was blessed for.

Quote

But the Lord designs that we shall care for the interests of our brethren and sisters. The apostle Paul has given an illustration of this. To the church at Rome he says: "I commend unto you Phebe our sister, which is a servant of the church which is at Cenchrea: that ye receive her in the Lord, as becometh saints, and that ye assist her in whatsoever business she hath need of you: for she hath been a succourer of many, and of myself also." Romans 16:1, 2. Phebe entertained the apostle, and she was in a marked manner an entertainer of strangers who needed care. Her example should be followed by the churches of today.  {6T 343.4}  
     God is displeased with the selfish interest so often manifested for "me and my family." Every family that cherishes this spirit needs to be converted by the pure principles exemplified in the life of Christ. Those who shut themselves up within themselves, who are unwilling to be drawn upon to entertain visitors, lose many blessings.  {6T 344.1}  
     Some of our workers occupy positions where it is necessary for them often to entertain visitors, either their own brethren or strangers. It is urged by some that the conference should make an account of this, and that in addition to their regular wages they should be allowed a sufficient amount to cover this extra expense. But the Lord has given the work of entertaining to all His people. It is not in God's order for one or two to do the entertaining for a conference or a church, or for workers to be paid for entertaining their brethren. This is an invention born of selfishness, and angels of God make account of these things.  {6T 344.2}  
     Those who travel from place to place as evangelists or missionaries in any line should receive hospitality from the members of the churches among whom they may labor. Brethren and sisters, make a home for these workers, even if it be at considerable personal sacrifice.  {6T 344.3}  
     Christ keeps an account of every expense incurred in entertaining for His sake. He supplies all that is necessary for this work. Those who for Christ's sake entertain their brethren, doing their best to make the visit profitable both to their guests and to themselves, are recorded in heaven as worthy of special blessings.  {6T 344.4}  

 

     The Lord designs that we shall care for the interests of one another. The apostle Paul gives us an illustration of this. Addressing the church at Rome, he says: "I commend unto you Phebe our sister, which is a servant of the church which is at Cenchrea; that ye receive her in the Lord as becometh saints, and that ye assist her in whatsoever business she hath need of you: for she hath been a succourer of many, and of myself also."  {RH, July 4, 1899 par. 13}  
     Christ's admonition to his disciples is to be heeded by us. Almost his last words before he gave his life for the world were, "A new commandment I give unto you, That ye love one another." How much, Lord?--"As I have loved you, that ye also love one another. By this shall all men know that ye are my disciples, if ye have love one to another."   {RH, July 4, 1899 par. 14} 

Had Ellen White been in support of women's ordination, she would certainly have capitalized on the case of Phebe for all it could potentially teach us in that regard.  That she did not do this brings any such notion into serious question.  

Either:

1) The Biblical case of Phebe does not support women's ordination; or

2) Ellen White did not support women's ordination.

Either one of the above options is sufficient reason to urge caution on the matter for any true follower of Christ.

[Gregory Matthews]

Green said, below:

Green, haven't your read EGW where she tells us that the Bible is the authorative standard?   Our theologians are simply taking her at her word and if they believe that the Bible  contradicts EGW [NOTE:  I am not saying t hat they believe this.] they take the Bible as the authority.   That is how it should be.

 

It's too bad our theologians don't read or respect Ellen White anymore.  Why do they think they can know better than what God revealed to her?  The article, nonetheless, does indicate the uncertainties of its author in multiple ways.  Here are some select lines from it.

[Green Cochoa]

5 hours ago, Gregory Matthews said:

Green said, below:

Green, haven't your read EGW where she tells us that the Bible is the authorative standard?   Our theologians are simply taking her at her word and if they believe that the Bible  contradicts EGW [NOTE:  I am not saying t hat they believe this.] they take the Bible as the authority.   That is how it should be.

Gregory,

Regarding EGW's statement: You take it out of context, perhaps.  "Authoritative standard" for what?  Doctrine.  Regarding our theologians: If that were only true, you would have a good point, perhaps.  Unfortunately, while not a single quote from Mrs. White was in the article, there were quotes from and references to more non-Biblical sources than to Bible passages (unless you wish to count duplicate Bible references as separate, then the two would be equal).  Consider the evidence for yourself in the following table.

Citation Analysis of Phoebe: Was she an early church leader? by Darius Jankiewicz
Extra-Biblical Authors, alphabetized	Biblical Passages (incl. repeats), alphabetized
Abel Hendy Jones Greenidge Aristotle Arland J. Hultgren Brenda Poinsett Calvin J. Roetzel Chan-Hie Kim Denis Fortin Elizabeth A. McCabe Erich S. Gruen Franz Poland Gerald Lewis Bray Gerhard Schneider Harry Gamble Horst Balz James Dunn Jerome D. Quinn John Chrysostom Joseph Modrzejewski Kevin Giles Kurt A. Raaflaub Margaret H. Williams Masaoki Doi Origen P. J. Rhodes Peter Liddel Ryan K. Balot Thomas P. Scheck Thomas R. Schreiner Tōru Yuge William C. Wacker	1 Chronicles 29:6 1 Thess. 5:12 1 Tim. 4:6 1 Timothy 3 1 Timothy 5:17 2 Chronicles 8:10 2 Chronicles 8:10 and 24:11 2 Cor. 3:6; 4:1; 6:4; 8:4 Acts 18:27 chapter 12 [Romans] chapter 12 [Romans] chapter 16 [Romans] Chapters 13–15 [Romans] Col. 1:7 Eph. 6:21 epistle of Romans First Chronicles 27:31 Heb. 13:6 Mark 10:45 Phil. 2:7 Phil. 4:3 Rom. 16:1, 2 Rom. 16:3 Romans 12:8 Romans 15:8 Romans 16:1 Romans 16:1 Romans 16:1, 2 Romans 16:1, 2 Romans 16:2

Now, regarding the place of Ellen White's writings, here is an important passage from her own pen.

Quote

It is Satan's plan to weaken the faith of God's people in the Testimonies. Satan knows how to make his attacks. He works upon minds to excite jealousy and dissatisfaction toward those at the head of the work. {CCh 93.5} 

The gifts are next questioned; then, of course, they have but little weight, and instruction given through vision is disregarded. Next follows skepticism in regard to the vital points of our faith, the pillars of our position, then doubt as to the Holy Scriptures, and then the downward march to perdition. When the Testimonies, which were once believed, are doubted and given up, Satan knows the deceived ones will not stop at this; and he redoubles his efforts till he launches them into open rebellion, which becomes incurable and ends in destruction. By giving place to doubts and unbelief in regard to the work of God, and by cherishing feelings of distrust and cruel jealousies, they are preparing themselves for complete deception. They rise up with bitter feelings against the ones who dare to speak of their errors and reprove their sins. {CCh 94.1} 

It is not alone those who openly reject the Testimonies, or who cherish doubt concerning them, that are on dangerous ground. To disregard light is to reject it. {CCh 94.2} 

If you lose confidence in the Testimonies you will drift away from Bible truth. I have been fearful that many would take a questioning, doubting position, and in my distress for your souls I would warn you. How many will heed the warning? 121 {CCh 94.3}

Again, if God gave us these messages for our time, and we fail to read them, study them, or apply them…are we not thereby as much as rejecting them outright?

A man who will go to the likes of Origen, Aristotle, and a host over others for his beliefs over a clear "thus saith the LORD" cannot be trusted.

[Tom Wetmore]

Green,   All of that is all pretty weak criticism, really. Doesn't even speak to the substance of the article. Clearly the article is focused on and uses Scripture as its source material. Just as EGW admonished as noted by Gregory. 

You have quoted almost the entirety of what EGW has to say about Phebe. (Note that you might just miss some, which you apparently did by not also searching the alternate spelling "Phoebe.)  The context of what EGW writing you have quoted clearly does not contradict, or even differ any any substantive way, from the scholarship of Jankiewicz's article.  (As I have noted elsewhere, this understanding of the original Greek was likely not unknown to EGW since Uriah Smith, while editor, had republished an article with a very similar conclusion in one of the very early issues of the Advent Review and Sabbath Herald. James White was also involved with that publication, as you may recall.)  The substance of the passages from EGW's writing that you have quoted were of course part of an extended piece about the importance of showing hospitality, or as noted in the sentence you highlighted, entertaining those who may come your way, just as Abraham entertained the Lord and the angels.  She even starts the article with that account of Abraham entertaining them.  I am not sure how you are seeing this as somehow important in refuting or even critiquing the article by Jankiewicz.  If your point is that hospitality or entertaining is somehow womanly work, perhaps you missed that reference to Abraham doing so too.   EGW's point is clearly that hospitality is incumbent upon all of us, men or women, high or low.  It hardly stands as anything contrary to the article in question.

Anyway, what you did miss apparently in your search by not also searching for "Phoebe" is the following:

Quote

Paul in his letters to the churches makes mention of women who were laborers with him in the gospel. Writing to the Romans, he says: “I commend unto you Phoebe our sister, which is a servant of the church which is at Cenchrea; that ye receive her in the Lord, as becometh saints, and that ye assist her in whatsoever business she hath need of you; for she hath been a succorer of many, and of myself also. Greet Aquila and Priscilla, my helpers in Christ Jesus: who have for my sake laid down their own necks: unto whom not only I give thanks, but also all the churches of the Gentiles. Likewise greet the church that is in their house. Salute my well-beloved Epaenetus, who is the first-fruits of Achaia unto Christ. { NPUGleaner December 4, 1907, par. 8 }

This statement is more to the whole point of Jankiewicz's article, and actually supports it.  These women mentioned specifically by Paul, including Phoebe, were fellow "laborers with him in the gospel." (Perhaps contrary to your unfortunate and unfounded assumption above - "It's too bad our theologians don't read or respect Ellen White anymore" - Jankiewicz actually did read and take this quote of EGW into account, unlike you.  And quite possibly he also carefully read the whole 1907 article by EGW in the Gleaner. I would strongly encourage you to read it as well.  She is quite clearly speaking of both men and women in a preaching of the gospel, working the service of God.

  

 

[Green Cochoa]

Tom,

Since when did laboring "in the gospel" graduate to "ordained status only"?  Your argument is rather weak.  My question stands.  If Ellen White desired women's ordination, there is zero indication of such from her pen regarding Phebe/Phoebe.

Your assumptions about me and my search are incorrect.  Of course, I did not allege I had presented everything from Mrs. White's pen regarding Phoebe, did I?  I just now scrolled back in my EGW search history to find that search, and here is what I had searched for: "phoebe or phebe".  Did you want to hear, too, about "Phebe Knapp" and "Phebe A. Gammon"?  Those were two of the FIVE total hits on the CD about Phoebe/Phebe.  I posted the ones in which I felt Ellen White had gone into more explanation of Phebe, whereas the quote you posted to me seemed to be saying very little, more or less just quoting the Bible verse and moving on, with no additional details of Phebe.  The spelling of the name had nothing to do with it.  In any case, you have now posted the remainder of the sum of Ellen White's material on Phebe--THREE quotes in total.  Congratulations!  You now have fuller evidence of my conclusion that Ellen White did not use Phebe to promote women's ordination!

Here's a paragraph that you appear to have missed, from the article whose quotation you posted containing the "Phoebe" spelling:

     It is not only upon those who preach the word that God has placed the responsibility of seeking to save sinners. He has given this work to all. The words, "Go ye into all the world, and preach the gospel to every creature," are spoken to each one of Christ's followers. All who are ordained unto the life of Christ are ordained to work for the salvation of their fellow-men. The same, longing that He felt for the saving of the lost is to be manifest in them. Not all can fill the same place, but for all there is a place and work. All upon whom God's blessings have been bestowed are to respond by actual service; every gift is to be employed for the advancement of His kingdom.  {NPU Gleaner, December 4, 1907 par. 12}  

That agrees with other statements made by Mrs. White that "those who preach the word" (implying ministers here) are joined by others (non-ministers) in preaching the gospel.  For example:

     Women Can Enter Where Ministers Cannot.--Those women who labor to teach souls to seek for the new birth in Christ Jesus are doing a precious work. They consecrate themselves to God, and they are just as verily laborers for God as are their husbands. They can enter families to which ministers could find no access. They can listen to the sorrows of the depressed and oppressed. They can shed rays of light into discouraged souls. They can pray with them. They can open the Scriptures, and enlighten them from a "Thus saith the Lord."--5MR 327 (1898).{DG 229.2} 

It would make no sense to say that "women can enter where women cannot," so obviously, Mrs. White considers "ministers" to be men.  This is corroborated fully by other passages, such as the following:

     The primary object of our college was to afford young men an opportunity to study for the ministry and to prepare young persons of both sexes to become workers in the various branches of the cause. These students needed a knowledge of the common branches of education and, above all else, of the word of God. Here our school has been deficient. There has not been a man devoted to God to give himself to this branch of the work. Young men moved upon by the Spirit of God to give themselves to the ministry have come to the college for this purpose and have been disappointed. Adequate preparation for this class has not been made, and some of the teachers, knowing this, have advised the youth to take other studies and fit themselves for other pursuits. If these youth were not firm in their purpose, they were induced to give up all idea of studying for the ministry.  {5T 60.1}  

Being a woman does not exclude one from working for God.  That should be clear.  It should also be clear that the work of the ordained minister was set apart for men.

 

In 5T 597 Mrs. White says "Those who enter the missionary field should be men and women who walk and talk with God. Those who stand as ministers in the sacred desk should be men of blameless reputation; their lives should be spotless, above everything that savors of impurity."   Clearly, women should enter missionary labors.  Yet Mrs. White plainly reserves the "sacred desk" for men.  Phebe was a hospitalitarian, not an ordained minister of the gospel.  In that capacity, she labored for God in the cause of the gospel, and Paul commends her service.

 

 

[Tom Wetmore]

Missing the point...  Not specifically about ordination.  It's about women in leadership.  Notice the title of the topic and the article in question?  The whole point is about the role of women in the church.  Really, ordination is just a convenient excuse by those unwilling to recognize that women can carry out the same roles in the church as men, namely gospel/pastoral ministry and leadership. Many of those opposed to women functioning in the church speak just as you have that women can serve... but not as______ or ____ or ____. For example, those pushing the headship heresy adamantly reject women in leadership except over other women and children.

 

You are just ripping that one paragraph out of the context of the whole article and miss what she is saying. Understand the context and where this paragraph appears in the whole article.  She has already set the topic as about those preaching the gospel, both men and women.  Read it all the way through from the beginning.  Notice this is at the end of the article, which logically says in addition to what she was talking about, that saving sinners is not only the responsibility of those she has already mentioned.  She is at that point broadening the call to everyone.

2 hours ago, Green Cochoa said:

Here's a paragraph that you appear to have missed, from the article whose quotation you posted containing the "Phoebe" spelling:

     It is not only upon those who preach the word that God has placed the responsibility of seeking to save sinners. He has given this work to all. The words, "Go ye into all the world, and preach the gospel to every creature," are spoken to each one of Christ's followers. All who are ordained unto the life of Christ are ordained to work for the salvation of their fellow-men. The same, longing that He felt for the saving of the lost is to be manifest in them. Not all can fill the same place, but for all there is a place and work. All upon whom God's blessings have been bestowed are to respond by actual service; every gift is to be employed for the advancement of His kingdom.  {NPU Gleaner, December 4, 1907 par. 12}  

That agrees with other statements made by Mrs. White that "those who preach the word" (implying ministers here) are joined by others (non-ministers) in preaching the gospel.  For example:

 

 

[Tom Wetmore]

How about addressing the substance of the article?

[Green Cochoa]

38 minutes ago, Tom Wetmore said:

Not specifically about ordination.

Then why have you posted this in the Women's Ordination section of this forum?

Every Adventist studying these things knows how crucial finding at least something from the Bible that might hint at an ordained woman, or even a woman in leadership, would be.  That is why people endeavor to make something of where the mere mention of a woman exists.

Of course, what you have said is a lie.  In the Bible, it is not about ordination AT ALL.  And here on this forum, that is exactly what it is all about.  

38 minutes ago, Tom Wetmore said:

Really, ordination is just a convenient excuse by those unwilling to recognize that women can carry out the same roles in the church as men, namely gospel/pastoral ministry and leadership.

If "laboring together" means all of the co-laborers are "leaders," you may need to start writing your own dictionaries to establish the fact.

38 minutes ago, Tom Wetmore said:

For example, those pushing the headship heresy adamantly reject women in leadership except over other women and children.

Headship is Biblical, therefore it is not a heresy.  God never once put a woman into a position of authority over His people.  Jesus selected and ordained no female disciples.  In order to endorse women's ordination, you will need good explanations for these facts, and for why they should not be used as examples of today's gospel order.  In the end, you will be grasping for support from all of the world's authors, and rejecting Ellen White, just as the author of the article in the OP here has had to do.

 

42 minutes ago, Tom Wetmore said:

How about addressing the substance of the article?

What substance?

[CoAspen]

Unbelievable! Never have seen a more self encapsulated stance.

 

[rudywoofs (Pam)]

40 minutes ago, Green Cochoa said:

God never once put a woman into a position of authority over His people.

Ellen White wasn't in a position of authority over the Lord's people, including men?

(we've actually been in a position of authority over men most of the time, but we've just been too gracious to let you men realize it..  )

[Green Cochoa]

2 minutes ago, rudywoofs (Pam) said:

Ellen White wasn't in a position of authority over the Lord's people, including men?

(we've actually been in a position of authority over men most of the time, but we've just been too gracious to let you men realize it..  )

Was Jeremiah in a position of authority over the king who put him in stocks?

Was Nathan in a position of authority over David?

Were Anna and Simeon in positions of authority over Jesus?

If Elijah was in a position of authority over Ahab and Jezebel, why did he run away from them?

No, these messengers were not in positions of authority.  They were ambassadors for God--the real Authority figure.  They were spokespersons.

Ellen White was also a messenger.  That is a term she used for herself.  When did she speak of herself as an authority?

[Tom Wetmore]

Your view of authority is far too narrow.  Do you recognize EGW's authority on any level? Do you understand what she writes as being authoritative? Would you consider her to have been a God appointed leader of the Adventist Church?  Did she not lead us in some important ways?  Did the human appointed leaders of the Church not look to her for direction and guidance?  Is that not leadership in a real sense? Or does her femaleness nullify or limit that?  So many of the arguments and Biblical texts employed today to reject women in pastoral ministry and leadership are exactly the same ones employed by those in EGW's lifetime who rejected her calling, because she was a woman. Ironic isn't it?  And how exactly are things different now?  What has time done other than give men a chance to just change the target.  Different women, different roles.  Same arguments. 

When you say that God never put a woman in authority over his people, you also forget Deborah, a judge of Israel.  That was without question a position of authority, even as you apparently limit it, among God's people.  Are you saying that she was not put in that position by God?  Was she self-appointed? Was her being a judge in Israel really different than the male judges in Israel during that period?  

The notion that a prophet is somehow different in this whole topic is such an incredibly blind false distinction. The idea that people cannot appoint a women to Church leadership, as a pastor, or responsibility of whatever type where some would draw that line is almost always claimed to be because it is not God's will, or cannot be blessed by God, or not God ordained, in some form not of God. Yet, it is precisely and only God that is the one that seems to have no issue or problem with appointing a woman as a prophet.  What an unequivocal endorsement that God does not gender screen those who He deems fit to speak for him!  Oddly blind to the irony of saying God would not do something that He most clearly in fact does do!

The issue is not about God.  So don't blame it on Him.  Don't limit Him with human limitations.  This is only about what people are willing to do or not.  The restriction is man made.  Not God made.

Clearly in Paul's case, he got it.  He recognize certain women as being qualified to work along side as equals, as co-laborers in God's work, working in the same way and doing the same work as Paul himself and the other men. He included them in his list in Roman's 16.  And leading that list was Phoebe.  So much so that he identifies her first, devotes more words of commendation and affirmation than any of the rest. And he uses words that were well understood by his audience in that time to be an endorsement of her as a leader that he was appointing to lead the believers in Rome.  The first bishop of Rome, if you will.  The substance  of those two verses, which the article focuses on and you apparently refuse to see and address directly, very specifically identifies her as a leader, even someone that Paul himself views as a leader to himself.  

And who is refusing to recognize the obvious in those two verses?  Is it God? Or is it man?  God is not the problem here...  Don't pretend it is all His doing.

[CoAspen]

Regardless of the topic or discussion, the following seems most appropriate.......

Quote

The issue is not about God.  So don't blame it on Him.  Don't limit Him with human limitations.  This is only about what people are willing to do or not.  The restriction is man made.  Not God made.

 

[Dr. Shane]

Great article

[Gregory Matthews]

To say  on the one hand that Ellen White was used as a messenger from God and on the other hand that she did not have any authority is to diminish and negate that importance, value and authority of the message that she brings. 

If Ellen White was used by God as a messenger, she had authority over all who were to be subject to that message.  If both males and females were to be subject to that message then she had authority over both males and females.

Yes, her authority was a derived authority.  Her authority was not inherent in herself.  It was derived from the claim that God had selected her to be His messenger.  If God could select her, God could remove her.  She functioned only as long as God   desired  her to function.

This  is the same as we see in the political world today.  The Chief of Staff for the U.S. President has real authority, but only as long as the President has that person as Chief of Staff.  A Cabinet Secretary has real power and authority, but only as long as the President and Congress agree that the person so selected shall continue to remain in that position.  Either Congress of the President can remove that person from the position.

The U.S. President has real power, but again it is derived authority.  The President's authority is derived from  an election by the voters and remains only while so elected and not impeached.

So, also the authority of a messenger of God is real and powerful, but only as long as God agrees.

To say otherwise is to diminish what God has established.

NOTE:  Now if you do not believe that God established Ellen White as a messenger/prophet, then that is another issue.

 

 

[Gregory Matthews]

In an earlier post, in responding to Tom Wetmore, Green said in the quote below:

Green, we here in CA have no problem with you forcefully telling another that they are wrong.  But, as has been explained to you earlier, we have strong objections to you suggesting in any way that another person lied.  To do so is to speak to motive.  To do so is to suggest that the other person intended to deceive.  That judgement of another's motive is well beyond any power and/or authority that you have been given. Please refrain from doing such.

Quote

Of course, what you have said is a lie.

[Mark Leslie]

On 2/19/2014 at 12:35 PM, Tom Wetmore said:

The article's summation...

 

 

Quote:

A careful reading of Romans 16:1, 2, thus, offers us a new glance at this remarkable woman who appears to be a close associate of Paul in spread­ing the gospel of Christ; who served as a leader of her house church in Cenchreae; who, despite all the dangers associated with travel on Roman roads, accepted the task of carrying the mes­sage of salvation to the Roman church; and who was recognized by Paul and others as a Christian leader in her own right.

Where does paul call her a "Christian Leader"?  The text says she was a "servant" at the church, not a "leader".

[APL]

15 hours ago, Mark Leslie said:

Where does paul call her a "Christian Leader"?  The text says she was a "servant" at the church, not a "leader".

Pastors are to be servants.  GC presidents are to be servants.  Christ is your servant.  Phebe is in good company!

[Mark Leslie]

On 1/14/2018 at 10:07 PM, APL said:

Pastors are to be servants.  GC presidents are to be servants.  Christ is your servant.  Phebe is in good company!

Stating she was a servant doesn't mean she was a pastor or in a headship position - and the text comes nowhere close to hinting, alluding to, or suggesting that she was. This is just another example of reading into the text that which doesn't exist. 

[Gregory Matthews]

The word "servant" is an English word and the original word in the Bible was a Greek word that could be translated as "deaconess."   We might even say that she was a female deacon.  The context also suggests that Phoebe was the one  who carried the letter that Paul was writing.  IOW, Phoebe was probably a close associate of Paul and a highly trusted personal envoy.  On the assumption that she was a female deacon or deaconess, we could refer to acts 6:1-10 for the duties of a deacon.

Yes, it is true that none of these state that Phoebe was a pastor of a congregation.  But, they do present Phoebe as a person of importance and leadership in the early Church.  We  should not dismiss her as a simple servant in the English meaning of the word simply because she was female.  The Bible presents females as being in leadership positions in a number of cases.  We can debate whether they should serve as pastors.  But, we misunderstand Scripture of regulate women in the Bible to mere positions of a servant in the English  meaning of the word.

 

  

[APL]

On 1/17/2018 at 10:07 PM, Mark Leslie said:

Stating she was a servant doesn't mean she was a pastor or in a headship position - and the text comes nowhere close to hinting, alluding to, or suggesting that she was. This is just another example of reading into the text that which doesn't exist. 

What does "headship" mean to you? To rule over another person?  Is that what Christ did?  Is someone wants to "rule" as Christ did, then I'm all for it. What does it look like when Christ is in a person? 

Galatians 5:17 For the flesh lusts against the Spirit, and the Spirit against the flesh: and these are contrary the one to the other: so that you cannot do the things that you would.

Galatians 5:18 But if you be led of the Spirit, you are not under the law.

Galatians 5:19 Now the works of the flesh are manifest, which are these; Adultery, fornication, uncleanness, lasciviousness,

Galatians 5:20 Idolatry, witchcraft, hatred, variance, jealousies, wrath, strife, seditions, heresies,

Galatians 5:21 Contentions, murders, drunkenness, revelings, and such like: of the which I tell you before, as I have also told you in time past, that they which do such things shall not inherit the kingdom of God.

Galatians 5:22 But the fruit of the Spirit is love, joy, peace, long-suffering, gentleness, goodness, faith,

Galatians 5:23 Meekness, temperance: against such there is no law.

Galatians 5:24 And they that are Christ’s have crucified the flesh with the affections and lusts.

Galatians 5:25 If we live in the Spirit, let us also walk in the Spirit.

Galatians 5:26 Let us not be desirous of vain glory, provoking one another, envying one another.

[Mark Leslie]

On 1/18/2018 at 6:38 AM, Gregory Matthews said:

The word "servant" is an English word and the original word in the Bible was a Greek word that could be translated as "deaconess."   We might even say that she was a female deacon.  The context also suggests that Phoebe was the one  who carried the letter that Paul was writing.  IOW, Phoebe was probably a close associate of Paul and a highly trusted personal envoy.  On the assumption that she was a female deacon or deaconess, we could refer to acts 6:1-10 for the duties of a deacon.

Yes, it is true that none of these state that Phoebe was a pastor of a congregation.  But, they do present Phoebe as a person of importance and leadership in the early Church.  We  should not dismiss her as a simple servant in the English meaning of the word simply because she was female.  The Bible presents females as being in leadership positions in a number of cases.  We can debate whether they should serve as pastors.  But, we misunderstand Scripture of regulate women in the Bible to mere positions of a servant in the English  meaning of the word.

 

  

When I use the word "servant" in the context of Christian discussion, I think most people - Christians of course - know exactly what I mean. 

Phebe was a "servant" in that context, and in the context of even Paul's own language.  She was a servant of the Lord in the Context of being just that - one who was converted, holy, loving God and His people and working for the Lord in that capacity. This is the calling of all believers. When I hear the Holy Spirit when reading that passage, I am convicted that I too need the same kind loving servant's heart the she had. That is the work of the Bible, isnt it? To be a mirror?

God is not a God of  "could be",  "probably'", or "assumptions" - all terms you used frequently in your post.  These are words describing personal conjectures and largely biased opinions. 

Phoebe's role in the local church in Cenchrea was that "She is the servant to many" - including Paul. Paul used that language himself. The text speaks for itself. She was a godly, caring, loving, servant of God and His people. She is an example to us as believers everywhere, and knowing Paul's other writings, that is what he was getting at. He had the habit of mentioning others in their saintly roles. Why? Because they were examples. 

What we can say with assurance about Phebe is that she was a Godly woman, in the service of the Lords saints.  Anything else is embellishment. 

 

 

 

[Mark Leslie]

Great passage, except it has nothing to do with the topic except that it describes the rules of engagement for Christians 

Galatians 5:22 But the fruit of the Spirit is love, joy, peace, long-suffering, gentleness, goodness, faith,

Galatians 5:23 Meekness, temperance: against such there is no law.

 

Most of the passage has to do with surrendering our lusts instead to be the ruled of the Spirit. 

 

Headship means Men are overseer at home, and the Church, with Christ as head. Plenty of Bible examples to show it. 

 

I am so glad I am not confused over this issue.

 

 

 

10 hours ago, APL said:

What does "headship" mean to you? To rule over another person?  Is that what Christ did?  Is someone wants to "rule" as Christ did, then I'm all for it. What does it look like when Christ is in a person? 

Galatians 5:17 For the flesh lusts against the Spirit, and the Spirit against the flesh: and these are contrary the one to the other: so that you cannot do the things that you would.

Galatians 5:18 But if you be led of the Spirit, you are not under the law.

Galatians 5:19 Now the works of the flesh are manifest, which are these; Adultery, fornication, uncleanness, lasciviousness,

Galatians 5:20 Idolatry, witchcraft, hatred, variance, jealousies, wrath, strife, seditions, heresies,

Galatians 5:21 Contentions, murders, drunkenness, revelings, and such like: of the which I tell you before, as I have also told you in time past, that they which do such things shall not inherit the kingdom of God.

Galatians 5:22 But the fruit of the Spirit is love, joy, peace, long-suffering, gentleness, goodness, faith,

Galatians 5:23 Meekness, temperance: against such there is no law.

Galatians 5:24 And they that are Christ’s have crucified the flesh with the affections and lusts.

Galatians 5:25 If we live in the Spirit, let us also walk in the Spirit.

Galatians 5:26 Let us not be desirous of vain glory, provoking one another, envying one another.

 

[Mark Leslie]

While looking a little more, I found notes from the New English Translation - commonly called the NET Bible. Here is what those scholars say:

 1 tn Or “deaconess.” It is debated whether διάκονος (diakonos) here refers to a specific office within the church. One contextual argument used to support this view is that Phoebe is associated with a particular church, Cenchrea, and as such would therefore be a deacon of that church. In the NT some who are called διάκονος are related to a particular church, yet the scholarly consensus is that such individuals are not deacons, but “servants” or “ministers” (other viable translations for διάκονος). For example, Epaphras is associated with the church in Colossians and is called a διάκονος in Col 1:7, but no contemporary translation regards him as a deacon. In 1 Tim 4:6 Paul calls Timothy a διάκονος; Timothy was associated with the church in Ephesus, but he obviously was not a deacon. In addition, the lexical evidence leans away from this view: Within the NT, the διακον- word group rarely functions with a technical nuance. In any case, the evidence is not compelling either way. The view accepted in the translation above is that Phoebe was a servant of the church, not a deaconess, although this conclusion should be regarded as tentative.

This verse, Rom 16:1 cannot be used as evidence in any way as support for womens ordination - or for any headship role for that matter.