Does anyone remember when women could be servants in the congregation? (page 2)

BFD

Late 60's early 70's my book study conductor was a sister. She made her own head covering out of lace. It looked like a doily.

BFD

stillajwexelder

During the war in Britain I believe women did a lot of stuff like magazines etc.

tinker

My mother was the Literature Servant in the 50's.......shortage of brothers

I also remember many times at meetings for service and book study, no brothers would show so a sister would pull out a tissue or paper napkin and put it on her head. As a young one, even I thought it was disrespectful. Some years later the WTBS came out with instructions Not to use such things are head coverings. If no proper head piece is available then none should be used. I can't remember though if the sister can still conduct or if they just do not have a meeting. Anyone know?

tijkmo

i don't think they were ever appointed...just did the work.

one c.o gave all the jobs to sisters cos the bros weren't applying themselves - to try and embarrass them into doing better...didn't work

stillajwexelder

I don't think they were ever appointed...just did the work.

EXACTLY

bluebell

I remember once when I was a little kid--one Tuesday noght only women showed up at the book study, except for the conductor. He told his wife she could read the paragraphs but needed to find a head covering. She didn't have a hat so she dug an old kleenex out of her purse and sat there through the evening with a snotrag on her head.

you just made me snort my drink!

beginnersmind

I don't personally remember this (do I sound 2000 years old?), but let's do some of that forbidden (see Sept 2007 KM) research into the Greek language of the bible and explore the 1st century church (as depicted by the biased source The New Testament).
I'll use material from Chapter Six of my source, Truth in Translation, by Jason David BeDuhn. In a lot of bible translations/versions including the New World Translation, one scripture contains a name that has been changed from the feminine form into a made-up masculine form to support the all-males-in-positions-of-church-authority doctrine that a lot of churches try to maintain.
Romans 16:7 (NWT) "Greet Andronicus and Junias my relatives and my fellow captives, who are men of note among the apostles and who have been in union with Christ longer than I have."
The name Junia is a woman's name that is "well-known and common in [the Greco-Roman] culture" in which the apostle Paul was writing. (BeDuhn, 72) At the time, there is no such name "Junias" but this name was made up to provide a masculine version of Junia. Junia is referred to as an apostle here, and to have a woman as an apostle would fly in the face of an all-male church hierarchy. Therefore, this bias has crept into many translations of this scripture.
According to BeDuhn, "Paul generally uses the term 'apostle' broadly of people who have been formally 'sent out' (the meaning of apostolos ) on a mission by God or a Christian community, and who occupy a very high status in the leadership of the Christian movement." (72) Also, the NWT uses "men of note" to translate incorrectly the Greek episemoi which means prominent, outstanding, of note. The phrasing used means that the two people mentioned in the scripture are "prominent 'in (the group of) the apostles." (73) Why the NWT inserts the word "men" and changes the feminine name of "Junia" into a made-up "Junias" is suspiscious. As BeDuhn puts it: "Most translators understand that meaning, and those who find it inconceivable that a woman would be 'in (the group of) the apostles' simply write her out of the group by changing her to a man. [note 5 cited] Such a move is not translation at all. It is changing the Bible to make it agree with one's own prejudices." (73) (Note 5 from Ch. 6 reads: "The...NW [referring to the New World Translation] strengthen[s] the change by referring to both Andronicus and Junias as 'men'....")
So, not only could women be servants in the congregation, but they could be held in high regard as apostles like Paul, spear-heading the preaching and teaching work of the early church and taking a position of leadership.
------
I hope you find this tidbit of information interesting and useful. It is no wonder the WT Society wants to stifle independent research into the translation of the New World Translation. I can't wait to hear how the Sept KM Question Box part goes over this upcoming week.
Erandir

Well my indepenedent research has come up with something a bit different. I agree the NWT isnt the correct translation of Rom 16:7 even according to their own Interlinear. However the phrase "notable in the Apostles" doesnt necessarily mean Junia was an Apostle. It could mean they were well known or famous for whatever reasons among the Apostles. Therefore the verse could be talking about a man and a woman maybe they were even married and that they were well known among the Apostles. Im not saying this is my view im just putting over another view of that scripture that ive come across and makes as much sense as the above.

Some quotes in relation to the above view ive found are below.

Concerning Andronicus and Junia,
Rom_16:7 . Some take them for a man and his wife, and the original will well enough bear it; and, considering the name of the latter, this is more probable than that they should be two men, as others think, and brethren.

They were of note among the apostles, not so much perhaps because they were persons of estate and quality in the world as because they were eminent for knowledge, and gifts, and graces, which made them famous among the apostles, who were competent judges of those things, and were endued with a spirit of discerning not only the sincerity, but the eminency, of Christians.
Matthew Henry

Who are of note -
The word translated "of note" e?p?´s?µ?? epise¯moi , denotes properly those who are "marked," designated, or distinguished in any way, used either in a good or bad sense; compare Mat_27:16 . Here it is used in a good sense.
Among the apostles -
This does not mean that they "were" apostles, as has been sometimes supposed. For,
(1) There is no account of their having been appointed as such.
(2) the expression is not one which would have been used if they "had" been. It would have been "who were distinguished apostles;" compare
Rom_1:1 ; 1Co_1:1 ; 2Co_1:1 ; Phi_1:1 .
(3) it by no means implies that they were apostles All that the expression fairly implies is, that they were known to the other apostles; that they were regarded by them as worthy of their affection and confidence; that they had been known by them, as Paul immediately adds, before "he" was himself converted. They had been converted "before" he was, and were distinguished in Jerusalem among the early Christians, and honored with the friendship of the other apostles.
(4) the design of the office of "apostles" was to bear "witness" to the life, death, resurrection, doctrines, and miracles of Christ; compare Matt. 10;
Act_1:21 , Act_1:26 ; Act_22:15 . As there is no evidence that they had been "witnesses" of these things; or appointed to it, it is improbable that they were set apart to the apostolic office.
(5) the word "apostles" is used sometimes to designate "messengers" of churches; or those who were "sent" from one church to another on some important business, and "if" this expression meant that they "were" apostles, it could only be in some such sense as having obtained deserved credit and eminence in that business; see
Phi_2:25 ; 2Co_8:23 .
Albert Barnes

Rom 16:7
-
Andronicus and Junia, my kinsmen -
As the word s???e?e?? signifies relatives, whether male or female, and as Junia may probably be the name of a woman, the wife of Andronicus, it would be better to say relatives than kinsmen. But probably St. Paul means no more than that they were Jews; for, in Rom_9:3 , he calls all the Jews his kinsmen according to the flesh.

Of note among the apostles -
Whether this intimates that they were noted apostles or only highly reputed by the apostles, is not absolutely clear; but the latter appears to me the most probable. They were not only well known to St. Paul, but also to the rest of the apostles.Adam Clarke

Bonnie_Clyde

i don't think they were ever appointed...just did the work.

In 1963 my pioneer partner was actually appointed to conduct a daytime congregation book study. The circuit servant (overseer) was involved in the appointment.

NewYork44M

I remember in the early 60s young sisters passing the microphone - Shocking.

Witness 007

We had a older Sister who would put on her head covering to abuse and complain to brothers about various spiritual matters....typical Pharasee!...I think she missed the piont of the whole head covering issue!

Does anyone remember when women could be servants in the congregation?

Share this