Re: Junias Redivivus!

From: Carl W. Conrad (
Date: Fri Dec 01 1995 - 11:58:47 EST

At 9:50 AM 12/1/95, wrote:
>Just a note regarding this discussion of Junias in Romans 16:7. It was
>mentioned previously that the accent is relatively recent (20th century). It
>is my contention that the accent really doesn't have much impact one way OR
>the other so it should be ignored (since it isn't from the early manuscripts
>Also, it was noted that the feminine Junias is very common and the masculine
>form is not found. Let it also be known that a female apostle is also not
>found in Scripture. Danker as noted takes the contextual interpretation of
>masculine. Some have opposed this, but I don't see any argument against the
>context. The form itself can clearly support a masculine.

There's a bit of confusion here. The feminine form is NOT Junias but Junia;
Junias, if it were a known name, would be the 1st declension masculine
As for the other argument, that "a female apostle is not found in
Scripture," there's a pretty good chance that there's one found right here
in Romans 16:7.
A good deal here depends on what precise sense we attach to APOSTOLOS also:
does it refer to one holding some kind of authority? one of the 12? It
certainly would not appear to be the case here. When Paul uses the term
APOSTOLOS it appears to mean, fundamentally, "missionary."

Carl W. Conrad
Department of Classics, Washington University
One Brookings Drive, St. Louis, MO, USA 63130
(314) 935-4018 OR

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Sat Apr 20 2002 - 15:37:33 EDT