Only one female speaker at General Conference this weekend

[_Gray Ghost]

Jack kicks Zernius's but. He calls name and flees.

Typical of him.

I think that Jack is suffering from contradictions syndrome. She has to contradict everything that everybody says just for the sake of contradicting. If you say, “What a beautiful sunny day it is today!” she will insist that it is raining, and will write you a 20 page essay to prove to you that it is raining when in fact the sun is shining. And if you decide that her 20 page essay is not worth reading let alone replying to, she will declare herself the winner by default! Nothing clever about that though.

No, she's right and you're wrong. She could defend her position and you couldn't.

[_Tator]

You are just being extremely illogical and irrational. I see no point in continuing with this discussion.

I would be surprised if you can see anything or wiggle your ears with your head buried so deep in your own dark place.

[_canpakes]

Ms. Jack, I was just noticing what a beautiful and sunny day that it is outside.

What do you think about that?

[_Chap]

Ms. Jack, I was just noticing what a beautiful and sunny day that it is outside.

What do you think about that?

Hey. same here! I think this is a miracle. Behold, the Lady hath lifted up the light of her countenance upon us, and given us peace ...

[_zerinus]

Some really interesting stuff Ms. Jack from credible sources. You know, Zerinus never got back to me with an example of him discussing or debating something where his knowledge is on full display.

I am not here to “display my knowledge” to anybody. I participate in forum discussions because I enjoy discussing the gospel with others.

His knowledge of course, is the scriptures, and he claims to be a scriptorian. His usual excuse is to not have enough in common to even attempt a debate. Well, Ms. Jack believes the Bible as does he and it looks like an opportunity to show off his vast knowledge of the scriptures, being a self-proclaimed scriptorian and all.

You keep picking up the wrong end of the stick. My reason for being here has nothing to do with any of those things. I am here because I enjoy discussing the gospel with others. As far as Ms. Jack is concerned, I have already given her the appropriate replies in the following posts:

While there have been women prophetesses in the Bible, their numbers have been very small compared to men; and there were no female Apostles. As far as Romans 16:7 is concerned, there is no indication that Junia was either an Apostle or even a woman. And "of note among the apostles" simply means known among them, or have a reputation among them. For alternative translations of that verse, see here:

http://biblehub.com/romans/16-7.htm

That is not the only issue, or even the main one. The main one is that the linguistic construct does not necessitate that he/she be an Apostle, in the same sense that Peter, James, or John were Apostles. We know that Jesus’ original Twelve Apostles were male. Others have been called apostles who do not fall into that category. Jesus is called an apostle in the New Testament (Heb. 3:1), but obviously not in the same sense. Barnabas is called an Apostle (Acts 14:14), but not in the same sense. “apostle” simply means “sent”. In that sense Jesus was an “apostle” because he was “sent” by the father. In the case of the original “Twelve,” the word Apostle becomes a special title for a particular office. Your insistence that Junia is an Apostle is biblically​ and linguistically ridiculous and silly in the extreme.

Nothing more need be added to that.

This is about all a person needed to read to gauge Z's level of Biblical training:

From the article on CARM about Junia

Quoting CARM articles as an authoritative source about says all that needs to be said.

I am not biased about the source I draw my information from. I am interested in good information. Where it comes from is irrelevant as far as I am concerned.

[_Lemmie]

As far as Ms. Jack is concerned, I have already given her the appropriate replies in the following posts:

[stuff MsJack thoroughly discredited]

Nothing more need be added to that.

Too bad zerinus is stuck there. Life-long learning is a real joy.

I am not biased about the source I draw my information from. I am interested in good information. Where it comes from is irrelevant as far as I am concerned.

zerinus has got to be kidding. He doesn't check his sources??

[_MsJack]

I live in Chicago. It was rainy AF yesterday and rainy AF today.

I am not biased about the source I draw my information from. I am interested in good information. Where it comes from is irrelevant as far as I am concerned.

Well, now that you know CARM gave you false information on Origen and cherry-picked Epiphanius, hopefully you'll Google more carefully in the future. You should always check and double-check everything the folks at CARM write, whether on Mormonism or anything else.

by the way, here is the commentary on Andronicus and Junia from Origen for anyone who cares:

"It is indeed possible that they were Paul's relatives even according to the flesh and that they believed in Christ before him and were held to be noble among the apostles of Christ. It can also be understood that perhaps they were of the seventy-two, who themselves were also named apostles, and on that account he would call them noble among the apostles, even among those apostles who were before him." (Commentary on the Epistle to the Romans 10.21.2, as translated into Latin and preserved by Rufinus, translated into English by Thomas Scheck)

And here is a full list of commentators from the first ~1100 years of Christian history who said Junia was a woman (though some used the variant "Julia," also feminine):

Origen (mentioned earlier) as translated by Rufinus (AD 345 - 410), Ambrose (339 - 397), John Chrysostom (cited earlier), Ambrosiaster (ca. 375), Jerome (c. 345-419), Theodoret of Cyrrhus (cited earlier), Oecumenius (first half of the sixth century), Ps.-Primasius (died c. 567), John Damascene (c. 675-ca. 749), Claudius of Turin (d. 827), Sedulius-Scotus (Florida. 848-858), Rabanus Maurus (c. 776 - 856), Hraban of Fulda (780-856), Haymo of Halberstadt (Florida. 840-853), Hatto of Vercelli (10th century), Lanfranc of Bec (c. 1005 - 1089), Bruno of Carthusian (c. 1030 - 1101), Theophylact (Florida. 1070 - 1081); Peter Abelard (1079 - 1142), Guillelmus Abbas (1085 - 1147/48), Peter Lombard (c. 1095 - 1169), and Herveus Burgidolensis (late 11th century - 1151).

I'm putting together a post for my blog because I'm tired of having these same dumb arguments with people over and over again, I'll post the link when I'm done.

[_Jersey Girl]

I live in Chicago. It was rainy AF yesterday and rainy AF today.

I'm putting together a post for my blog because I'm tired of having these same dumb arguments with people over and over again, I'll post the link when I'm done.

Some day, when it's rainy AF again, would you mind doing a blog post on Paul/women speaking in church? I'd really appreciate it.

[_MsJack]

Some day, when it's rainy AF again, would you mind doing a blog post on Paul/women speaking in church? I'd really appreciate it.

I actually have an unfinished draft for that in my blog queue. I'll try to wrap it up sometime soon.

If you look at the "God's Word to Women" tab on my site, you'll see there is a list of passages I want to do posts on.

[_zerinus]

by the way, here is the commentary on Andronicus and Junia from Origen for anyone who cares:

"It is indeed possible that they were Paul's relatives even according to the flesh and that they believed in Christ before him and were held to be noble among the apostles of Christ. It can also be understood that perhaps they were of the seventy-two, who themselves were also named apostles, and on that account he would call them noble among the apostles, even among those apostles who were before him." (Commentary on the Epistle to the Romans 10.21.2, as translated into Latin and preserved by Rufinus, translated into English by Thomas Scheck)

Where does it say in there that Junia was either a woman, or an Apostle (in the sense of the original 12 Apostles?) Neither is implied in that statement. The implication is that Junia was a man, and possibly one of the "seventies" (who were also in a certain sense called "apostles" ---i.e. sent).

And here is a full list of commentators from the first ~1100 years of Christian history who said Junia was a woman (though some used the variant "Julia," also feminine):

Origen (mentioned earlier) as translated by Rufinus (AD 345 - 410), Ambrose (339 - 397), John Chrysostom (cited earlier), Ambrosiaster (California. 375), Jerome (c. 345-419), Theodoret of Cyrrhus (cited earlier), Oecumenius (first half of the sixth century), Ps.-Primasius (died c. 567), John Damascene (c. 675-ca. 749), Claudius of Turin (d. 827), Sedulius-Scotus (Florida. 848-858), Rabanus Maurus (c. 776 - 856), Hraban of Fulda (780-856), Haymo of Halberstadt (Florida. 840-853), Hatto of Vercelli (10th century), Lanfranc of Bec (c. 1005 - 1089), Bruno of Carthusian (c. 1030 - 1101), Theophylact (Florida. 1070 - 1081); Peter Abelard (1079 - 1142), Guillelmus Abbas (1085 - 1147/48), Peter Lombard (c. 1095 - 1169), and Herveus Burgidolensis (late 11th century - 1151).

Origen certainly did not say that Junia was a man; and I have no reason to assume that the rest of your citations accurately represent what you claim. If you are blatantly wrong about Origen, what reason do I have to assume that you are right about the rest?

I'm putting together a post for my blog because I'm tired of having these same dumb arguments with people over and over again, I'll post the link when I'm done.

Good. I hope you will include this post in it as well.