Journal: Journal for Biblical Manhood and Womanhood
Volume: JBMW 06:2 (Fall 2001)
Article: Was Junia Really an Apostle? A Reexamination of Romans 16:7 ,
Author: Michael H. Burer

JBMW 6:2 (Fall 2001) p. 4

Was Junia Really an Apostle?
A Reexamination of Romans 16:71 ,2

Michael H. Burer

Daniel B. Wallace

Dallas Theological Seminary

In Rom 16:7, there are two issues relevant to biblical ‘gynecology.’ First is whether ᾿Ιουνιαν is a man’s name or a woman’s. Second is whether this individual is part of the apostolic band. This first issue has garnered a great deal of attention, with quite a bit of evidence enlisted on both sides. But the second has been the object of almost no substantive discussion; indeed, most commentators simply assume a particular viewpoint that has surprisingly never been demonstrated. We will address the first issue briefly, as it is somewhat tangential to our overall thesis.

The name ᾿Ιουνιαν can be accented in one of two ways: ᾿Ιουνίαν with an acute accent on the penult, which is feminine, or ᾿Ιουνιᾶν with a circumflex accent on the ultima, which is masculine. The majority of patristic commentators regard this as a feminine name.3 Origen seems to cite the name once as masculine and once as feminine, though the masculine is most likely a later corruption of his text.4 Although most commentators believe that the patristic evidence through the first twelve hundred years or so universally supports the feminine name,5 one patristic writer is inexplicably overlooked. Epiphanius (c. 315–403 CE), bishop of Salamis in Cyprus, mentions Junias in his Index discipulorum 125: ᾿Ιουνιᾶς, οὗ καὶ αὐτοῦ ὁ Παῦλος μέμνηται, ἐπίσκοπος ᾿Απαμείας τῆς Συρίας ἐγένετο (‘Junias, whom Paul also mentions, became bishop of Apameia of Syria’). That Junias is masculine here is evident from the masculine relative pronoun (οὗ) following the name.6 Epiphanius’ reference is unusual in that he only indirectly alludes to Rom 16:7, but adds additional information about Junias, perhaps preserving an independent tradition.7 However, Epiphanius’ testimony here ought not to be weighed too heavily, for he calls Prisca in the previous sentence a man, too!