1 Corinthians 12:28

An Exegetical Analysis of `ἐπίσημοι ἐν τοῖς ἀποστόλοις` in Romans 16:7 and the Semantic Range of `ἀπόστολος`

This exegetical study of “episemoi en tois apostolois” is based on a b-greek discussion from Sun Aug 29 02:11:27 EDT 2004. The initial discussion highlights the crucial semantic question regarding the term `ἀπόστολος` (apostle), questioning whether it should be understood in a strict, authoritative sense (e.g., 1 Cor 15:7, 9) or a broader, less authoritative sense of a general messenger (e.g., 2 Cor 8:23, Phil 2:25). Citing BDAG’s two definitions—referring to messengers without extraordinary status versus those with extraordinary, divinely-commissioned status—the discussion emphasizes the significant role these diverse “messengers” played in the highly interconnected early Christian movement.

The primary exegetical issue centers on the interpretation of the phrase `ἐπίσημοι ἐν τοῖς ἀποστόλοις` in Romans 16:7, particularly as it pertains to the individuals Andronicus and Junia. The debate unfolds across two interconnected fronts: first, the precise semantic range of the noun `ἀπόστολος` in Paul’s writings, and second, the syntactic function of the prepositional phrase `ἐν τοῖς ἀποστόλοις`. Depending on whether `ἀπόστολος` signifies a restricted group of divinely commissioned leaders (such as the Twelve and Paul) or a broader category of church-sent delegates, and whether `ἐν` + dative denotes inclusion (“among”) or evaluation (“in the estimation of” / “well-known to”), the status of Andronicus and Junia as “apostles” is significantly altered. This exegetical complexity is further compounded by the grammatical gender of the name `Ἰουνίαν` and the implications for the possibility of a female apostle, which, while sensitive, is acknowledged as a significant factor in historical and contemporary interpretations of the passage.

Greek text (Nestle 1904)

Ἀσπάσασθε Ἀνδρόνικον καὶ Ἰουνίαν τοὺς συγγενεῖς μου καὶ συναιχμαλώτους μου, οἵτινές εἰσιν ἐπίσημοι ἐν τοῖς ἀποστόλοις, οἳ καὶ πρὸ ἐμοῦ γεγόνασιν ἐν Χριστῷ.

Key differences with SBLGNT (2010):

• There are no significant textual differences in Romans 16:7 between Nestle 1904, NA28, and SBLGNT 2010. The text of the phrase `ἐπίσημοι ἐν τοῖς ἀποστόλοις` is consistent across these critical editions.

Textual Criticism (NA28): The critical apparatus of NA28 confirms no noteworthy variants for the phrase `ἐπίσημοι ἐν τοῖς ἀποστόλοις` in Romans 16:7. The textual integrity of this particular phrase is well-established, directing the exegetical focus primarily to its grammatical and lexical interpretation rather than issues of manuscript transmission.

Lexical Notes:

• ἀπόστολος (`apostolos`):
  • BDAG offers two primary definitions:
    1. “of messengers without extraordinary status: delegate, envoy, messenger” (e.g., 2 Cor 8:23; Phil 2:25). This sense emphasizes the act of being “sent” or “commissioned” by human authorities (e.g., a church) for a specific task.
    2. “of messengers with extraordinary status, esp. of God’s: messenger, envoy” (e.g., 1 Cor 15:7, 9; Gal 1:1). This refers to individuals with a unique, divine commission and authority, often associated with foundational ministry and witnessing to Christ’s resurrection.
  • KITTEL (TDNT) provides a comprehensive historical and theological overview, tracing `ἀπόστολος` from its secular Greek usage (denoting a naval expedition, then a delegate) to its specific Christian significance. It highlights the Jewish concept of `šālîaḥ` (one sent with full authority of the sender) as a significant background. In the New Testament, `ἀπόστολος` denotes not merely a messenger but one who is commissioned with a specific task and authority, often a divine one. Kittel’s discussion supports the idea of both a broader meaning (any commissioned messenger) and a narrower, technical sense (the Twelve, Paul, those who saw the risen Christ and were sent by him), emphasizing the authoritative nature inherent in the sending. The discussion within the posts specifically explores how Paul uses this term, contending that his usage might be broader than Luke’s more restricted application to the Twelve.
• ἐπίσημος (`episēmos`):
  • BDAG defines this term as:
    1. “pertaining to being outstanding—outstanding, well-known, prominent.” This is the widely accepted sense in Rom 16:7, indicating high standing or reputation.
    2. “pertaining to being infamous or notorious—notorious, infamous.” This negative sense is not typically considered for Rom 16:7 given the commendatory context.

    The context strongly suggests a positive connotation of “prominent” or “noteworthy.”

Translation Variants

The interpretation of `ἐπίσημοι ἐν τοῖς ἀποστόλοις` largely depends on the understanding of the preposition `ἐν` (en) with the dative plural and the specific semantic force ascribed to `ἀπόστολος` in this Pauline context. Grammatical and rhetorical analysis of the passage reveals two primary interpretive possibilities, each with distinct implications for the status of Andronicus and Junia.

The first interpretive tradition understands `ἐν τοῖς ἀποστόλοις` as a marker of association or inclusion, signifying that Andronicus and Junia are “among” the apostles, thus identifying them as apostles themselves. This reading relies on `ἐν` functioning in a locative sense, indicating presence within a group. This interpretation is supported by arguments that Paul’s use of `ἀπόστολος` extends beyond the restricted group of the Twelve and himself, encompassing other commissioned messengers. Paul’s references to Barnabas as an apostle (1 Cor 9:5-6, Acts 14:4, 14) and potentially others like Timothy and Silvanus (1 Thess 2:6) suggest a broader application. Furthermore, passages like 1 Cor 12:28-29 and Eph 4:11 list apostles among spiritual gifts or ministries, implying an ongoing, divinely-distributed role rather than a closed office. If `ἀπόστολος` signifies a “sent one” or “delegate” with commissioning from the Holy Spirit and/or the churches, then Andronicus and Junia, described as “prominent” (`ἐπίσημοι`), could indeed be identified as such.

The second major interpretation posits that `ἐν τοῖς ἀποστόλοις` indicates a sphere of evaluation or judgment, meaning “prominent in the estimation of the apostles” or “well-known to the apostles.” This reading draws on the “forensic” or “experiencer” use of `ἐν` + dative, where `ἐν` can signify “in relation to,” “with respect to,” or “before” someone, as seen in examples like Mt 17:12 (`ἐποίησαν ἐν αὐτῷ` – “they did to him as they pleased”) or 1 Cor 6:2 (`εἰ ἐν ὑμῖν κρίνεται ὁ κόσμος` – “if the world is judged by you”). According to this view, Andronicus and Junia are highly regarded or well-known by the authoritative apostles, but are not necessarily apostles themselves. This interpretation tends to presuppose a more restricted understanding of `ἀπόστολος`, limited to the Twelve and Paul as a unique, foundational group. The rhetorical force here is to commend Andronicus and Junia by highlighting their good reputation among those universally acknowledged as apostles, without granting them the title themselves.

Conclusions and Translation Suggestions

The exegetical debate surrounding Romans 16:7 underscores the fluidity of language and the theological implications embedded in lexical and grammatical choices. While no single interpretation can be definitively proven, the discussion highlights the compelling arguments for both a broad and a more restricted understanding of `ἀπόστολος`, as well as the diverse functions of `ἐν` + dative. The choice among these interpretations often reflects broader theological presuppositions about the nature of apostleship and early church leadership. The reference to Andronicus and Junia having been “in Christ before me” (`πρὸ ἐμοῦ γεγόνασιν ἐν Χριστῷ`) further adds to their early and significant standing within the Christian movement, regardless of the precise interpretation of `ἀπόστολος`.

Based on the analysis, the following translation suggestions attempt to capture the nuanced possibilities:

1. Greet Andronicus and Junia, my relatives and fellow prisoners, who are prominent among the apostles, and who were in Christ before me.

   This translation adopts the inclusive reading of `ἐν` and the broader semantic range for `ἀπόστολος`, suggesting that Andronicus and Junia were themselves apostles of notable standing.

2. Greet Andronicus and Junia, my relatives and fellow prisoners, who are highly esteemed by the apostles, and who were in Christ before me.

   This translation favors the “experiencer” or “forensic” sense of `ἐν`, indicating that Andronicus and Junia held a high reputation in the judgment or estimation of the apostles, without necessarily being apostles themselves.

3. Greet Andronicus and Junia, my relatives and fellow prisoners, who are notable in the circle of the apostles, and who were in Christ before me.

   This translation offers a more ambiguous rendering, acknowledging their close association and importance within the apostolic movement without definitively asserting their official title as “apostles,” thus bridging the two primary interpretations.