Thoughts On Romans 5

Many Eastern Orthodox writers say (contra Augustine's teaching of original sin or the idea that we're guilty of and/or were condemned by Adam's sin) that Romans 5:12 means that people sin because they’re mortal:¹

Romans 5:12 (SBLGNT): 12 Διὰ τοῦτο ὥσπερ διʼ ἑνὸς ἀνθρώπου ἡ ἁμαρτία εἰς τὸν κόσμον εἰσῆλθεν καὶ διὰ τῆς ἁμαρτίας ὁ θάνατος, καὶ οὕτως εἰς πάντας ἀνθρώπους ὁ θάνατος διῆλθεν ἐφʼ ᾧ πάντες ἥμαρτον—

12 Therefore,² just as through one man this thing “sin” came into the world, and, through this “sin,” this thing “death” came into the world—and so to all humans this “death” spread, and that is why all [have] sinned (usually translated “because all sinned”)— (My translation/interpretation of the Greek)

I.e., we don't die because we have somehow inherited Adam's sin. Rather, we sin because we are mortal and subject to death due to Adam's transgression, with all the temptations and weaknesses that entails. As Paul continues:

Romans 5:13–21 (SBLGNT): 13 ἄχρι γὰρ νόμου ἁμαρτία ἦν ἐν κόσμῳ, ἁμαρτία δὲ οὐκ ἐλλογεῖται μὴ ὄντος νόμου, 14 ἀλλὰ ἐβασίλευσεν ὁ θάνατος ἀπὸ Ἀδὰμ μέχρι Μωϋσέως καὶ ἐπὶ τοὺς μὴ ἁμαρτήσαντας ἐπὶ τῷ ὁμοιώματι τῆς παραβάσεως Ἀδάμ, ὅς ἐστιν τύπος τοῦ μέλλοντος. 15 Ἀλλʼ οὐχ ὡς τὸ παράπτωμα, οὕτως καὶ τὸ χάρισμα· εἰ γὰρ τῷ τοῦ ἑνὸς παραπτώματι οἱ πολλοὶ ἀπέθανον, πολλῷ μᾶλλον ἡ χάρις τοῦ θεοῦ καὶ ἡ δωρεὰ ἐν χάριτι τῇ τοῦ ἑνὸς ἀνθρώπου Ἰησοῦ Χριστοῦ εἰς τοὺς πολλοὺς ἐπερίσσευσεν. 16 καὶ οὐχ ὡς διʼ ἑνὸς ἁμαρτήσαντος τὸ δώρημα· τὸ μὲν γὰρ κρίμα ἐξ ἑνὸς εἰς κατάκριμα, τὸ δὲ χάρισμα ἐκ πολλῶν παραπτωμάτων εἰς δικαίωμα. 17 εἰ γὰρ τῷ τοῦ ἑνὸς παραπτώματι ὁ θάνατος ἐβασίλευσεν διὰ τοῦ ἑνός, πολλῷ μᾶλλον οἱ τὴν περισσείαν τῆς χάριτος καὶ τῆς δωρεᾶς τῆς δικαιοσύνης λαμβάνοντες ἐν ζωῇ βασιλεύσουσιν διὰ τοῦ ἑνὸς Ἰησοῦ Χριστοῦ. 18 Ἄρα οὖν ὡς διʼ ἑνὸς παραπτώματος εἰς πάντας ἀνθρώπους εἰς κατάκριμα, οὕτως καὶ διʼ ἑνὸς δικαιώματος εἰς πάντας ἀνθρώπους εἰς δικαίωσιν ζωῆς· 19 ὥσπερ γὰρ διὰ τῆς παρακοῆς τοῦ ἑνὸς ἀνθρώπου ἁμαρτωλοὶ κατεστάθησαν οἱ πολλοί, οὕτως καὶ διὰ τῆς ὑπακοῆς τοῦ ἑνὸς δίκαιοι κατασταθήσονται οἱ πολλοί. 20 νόμος δὲ παρεισῆλθεν ἵνα πλεονάσῃ τὸ παράπτωμα· οὗ δὲ ἐπλεόνασεν ἡ ἁμαρτία, ὑπερεπερίσσευσεν ἡ χάρις, 21 ἵνα ὥσπερ ἐβασίλευσεν ἡ ἁμαρτία ἐν τῷ θανάτῳ, οὕτως καὶ ἡ χάρις βασιλεύσῃ διὰ δικαιοσύνης εἰς ζωὴν αἰώνιον διὰ Ἰησοῦ Χριστοῦ τοῦ κυρίου ἡμῶν.

13 For until there was [the] Law, sin was in the world, but sin is not charged against a person when there is no Law. 14 Yet death reigned from Adam until the time of Moses [and the giving of the Law] even over those who didn’t sin in the same way as Adam’s transgression, who is a type of the one who was to come. 15 But the free gift is indeed not like the trespass. For if by the trespass of the one man the many died, much more have the grace of God and the gracious gift from the [actions of the] one man, Jesus Christ, abounded to the many. 16 And the free gift is not like what resulted from the one man [Adam] having sinned. For the judgment following the one man’s trespass resulted in condemnation, but the free gift following many trespasses resulted in acquittal/justification. 17 For if by the one man’s trespass death reigned through that one man, much more will those receiving the abundance of the grace and the free gift of righteousness reign in life through the one man, Jesus Christ. 18 Therefore just as by the trespass of the one man all humans received condemnation [that results in death], so also by the righteous act of the one man all humans received justification that results in life. 19 For just as by the disobedience of the one man the many were made sinners, so also by the obedience of the one man the many will be made righteous. 20 And [the] Law came in, with the result that the trespass[ing] increased; but in this situation where sin increased, the grace [of God] abounded even more, 21 so that just as sin reigned through death, so also will/might this grace reign by granting justification leading to eternal life through Jesus Christ our Lord. (My translation/interpretation of the Greek)

Murray J. Harris in his book Prepositions and Theology in the Greek New Testament: An Essential Reference Resource for Exegesis discusses the use and meaning of ἐφ᾿ ᾧ in Romans 5:12:

C. Important Constructions Using Ἐπί

1. Ἐπί τὸ αὐτό

...

2. Ἐφʼ ᾧ

There is general unanimity among grammarians that ἐφʼ ᾧ means “because,” “inasmuch as,” or “in view of the fact that,” where ἐφʼ ᾧ = ἐπὶ τούτῳ ὅτι, “on the basis of this reason, namely that,” or = διότι /διὰ τοῦτο ὅτι, “because” (see BDF §235[2]; Moulton 107; Robertson 604, 722, 963; Zerwick §127; Analysis 399; Turner 272, 319; so also BDAG 365a–b; cf. 727c). Such a sense certainly fits the context in Ro 5:12; 2 Co 5:4; Php 3:12, although some have doubts about Php 4:10 (e.g., BDF §235[2], “for”; BDAG 365b “for, indeed”; Turner 272, “whereon”; and Moule 132 suggests “with regard to which” [i.e., τὸ ὑπὲρ ἐμοῦ φρονεῖν, “your concern for me”]).

a. Romans 5:12

Διὰ τοῦτο ὥσπερ διʼ ἑνὸς ἀνθρώπου ἡ ἁμαρτία εἰς τὸν κόσμον εἰσῆλθεν καὶ διὰ τῆς ἁμαρτίας ὁ θάνατος, καὶ οὕτως εἰς πάντας ἀνθρώπους ὁ θάνατος διῆλθεν, ἐφʼ ᾧ πάντες ἥμαρτον

“Therefore, just as sin entered the world through one man, and death entered as a consequence of that sin, and so death has spread to all people, because all have sinned [with Adam].”

In Romans 5:12–21 Paul is comparing (with both similarities and differences) Christ, the sole author of righteousness and life, with Adam, the author of sin and death. Verse 12 is anacoluthic—the true conclusion matching the ὥσπερ would probably have been “so righteousness came into the world through one man, and life through that righteousness.”

Few phrases in Paul’s writings have generated more controversy than ἐφʼ ᾧ πάντες ἥμαρτον. J. A. Fitzmyer lists no fewer than eleven proposed meanings for ἐφʼ ᾧ [J. A. Fitzmyer, Romans (AB; New York: Doubleday, 1993), 413–17]; he himself opts for “with the result that” (cf. LSJ 622c, “wherefore”). The numerous interpretations of the verse fall into two main grammatical categories:

1. those that construe ᾧ as a relative pronoun (whose antecedent may be either ὁ θάνατος, “death,” or ἑνὸς ἀνθρώπου, “one man”), with ἐπί meaning “in” or “because of”
2. those that treat ἐφʼ ᾧ as a conjunction, equivalent to ἐπὶ τούτῳ ὅτι, “because”

The former alternatives are improbable since elsewhere in Paul (2 Co 5:4; Php 3:12; 4:10), ἐφʼ ᾧ is conjunctional, whatever its precise nuance.

Thus, the focus of exegetical attention naturally moves to πάντες ἥμαρτον, which may refer to human beings’ corporate involvement in the transgression of Adam, or to their personal sin either in imitation of Adam or as a result of inheriting a corrupt Adamic nature. Since some nexus between Adam and his descendants regarding sin seems demanded by Paul’s Adam-Christ analogy (see Ro 5:18–19; cf. 1 Co 15:22), the most likely options seem to be:

1. “death spread to all people because all sinned” (either actually in Adam’s primal transgression or in their federal representative, Adam, ἥμαρτον being a constative aorist)
2. “death spread to all people because all do sin” (as those who have inherited Adam’s nature, ἥμαρτον being a gnomic aorist)
3. *“death spread to all people because all [since the time of Adam] have sinned” (ἥμαρτον being a constative aorist).

* = the writer’s own preference when more than one solution is given for a particular exegetical issue and a preference is not expressed.

(Murray J. Harris, Prepositions and Theology in the Greek New Testament: An Essential Reference Resource for Exegesis (Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan, 2012), 139–140.) 

---

¹Here are some examples of Eastern Orthodox sources espousing/defending this view, saying that ἐφʼ ᾧ refers to ὁ θάνατος (death):

http://orthodoxinfo.com/inquirers/frjr_sin.aspx 

...From what has been observed, the famous expression, eph'ho pantes hemarton,[228] can be safely interpreted as modifying the word, thanatos, which precedes it, and which grammatically is the only word which fits the context. Eph'ho as a reference to Adam is both grammatically and exegetically impossible. Such an interpretation was first introduced by Origen, who obviously used it with a purpose in mind, because he believed in the pre-existence of all souls whereby he could easily say that all sinned in Adam. The interpretation of eph'ho as "because" was first introduced into the East by Photius,[229] who claims that there are two interpretations prevalent—Adam and thanatos—but he would interpret it dioti (because). He bases his argument on a false interpretation of II Corinthians 5:4 by interpreting eph'ho, here again, as dioti. But here it is quite clear that eph'ho refers to skensi (sic) (eph'ho skenei ou thelomen ekdysasthai). Photius is interpreting Paul within the framework of natural moral law and is seeking to justify the death of all men by personal guilt. He claims that all men die because they sin by following in the footsteps of Adam.[230] However, neither he nor any of the Eastern Fathers accepts the teaching that all men are made guilty for the sin of Adam.

From purely grammatical considerations it is impossible to interpret eph'ho as a reference to any word other than thanatos. Each time the grammatical construction of the preposition epi with the dative is used by Paul, it is always used as a relative pronoun which modifies a preceding noun [231] or phrase.[232] To make an exception in Romans 5:12 by making St. Paul use the wrong Greek expression to express the idea, "because," is to beg the issue. The correct interpretation of this passage, both grammatically and exegetically, can be supplied only when eph'ho is understood to modify thanatos—kai houtos eis pantas anthropous ho thanatos dielthen eph'ho (thanato) pantes hemarton—"because of which" (death), or "on the basis of which" (death), or "for which (death) all have sinned." Satan, being himself the principle of sin, through death and corruption involves all of humanity and creation in sin and death. Thus, to be under the power of death according to Paul is to be a slave to the devil and a sinner, because of the inability of the flesh to live according to the law of God, which is selfless love....

http://saintandrewgoc.org/home/2014/8/11/the-wages-of-sin.html

...Adam died because he sinned; now we sin because we die. "And so death passed to all men, "because of which all have sinned (έφ΄ ώ πάντες ήμαρτον)" [Rom. 5:12]. The passage is given as Saint Paul wrote it and as the Holy Fathers, untainted by Augustine's doctrine of original sin, understood it: Death is the cause of all men having sinned. The West (Roman Catholicism), however, is steeped in Augustine's doctrines and teaches that death passed to all men as a punishment imposed by God because all men, from their conception, have sinned. They sinned by inheriting legal guilt and culpability of the original sin. Therefore, they also inherit death, the just punishment. Protestant and Roman Catholic Bibles present this erroneous understanding in one way or another, obscuring the true meaning that "sin reigns in death" (Romans 5:21), in our corruptibility and mortality, that the "sting of death is sin" (1 Cor. 15:56), that death is the root, and sin is the thorn that springs from it....

 https://www.saintjohnchurch.org/original-sin-vs-ancestral-sin/

Instead of original sin, which is used in Western Christianity, the Orthodox Church uses the term ancestral sin to describe the effect of Adam’s sin on mankind. We do this to make one key distinction; we didn’t sin in Adam (as the Latin mistranslation of Romans 5:12 implies). Rather we sin because Adam’s sin made us capable of doing so.

The Greek word for sin, amartema, refers to an individual act, indicating that Adam and Eve alone assume full responsibility for the sin in the Garden of Eden. The Orthodox Church never speaks of Adam and Eve passing guilt on to their descendants, as did Augustine. Instead, each person bears the guilt of his or her own sins.

² When Paul uses διὰ τοῦτο (Romans 1:26; 4:16; 5:12; 13:6; 15:9; 1 Corinthians 4:17; 11:10; 11:30; 2 Corinthians 4:1; 7:13; 13:10; Ephesians 1:15; 5:6; 5:17; 6:13; Colossians 1:9; 1 Thessalonians 2:13; 3:5; 3:7; 2 Thessalonians 2:11; 1 Timothy 1:16; 2 Timothy 2:10; Philemon 15), the τοῦτο usually refers back to something he just stated, but I have difficulty figuring out what precisely in Romans 5:1–11 (or earlier) he might be referring to as the basis for what he says in 5:12–21 about Adam, Christ, sin, death, and the Law. Though there are other attempted explanations, I’ll defer to Dunn in his WBC on Romans and leave the question alone as far as this discussion is concerned: “The διὰ τοῦτο does not signify a conclusion drawn simply from an immediately preceding argument; v 11 had already effectively rounded off the preceding train of thought. Its function is rather to indicate that vv 12–21 serve as a conclusion to the complete argument from 1:18–5:11 (see further 5:1–21 Introduction).” (James D. G. Dunn, Romans 1–8, vol. 38A, Word Biblical Commentary (Dallas: Word, Incorporated, 1988), 271–272.)

³ “In Augustine's view (termed "Realism"), all of humanity was really present in Adam when he sinned, and therefore all have sinned. Original sin, according to Augustine, consists of the guilt of Adam which all humans inherit.” (Wikipedia on “Original Sin”)

The Amazing Romans 16

Papyrus 46 - Romans 16:4-13

λθ [39]

της ψυχης μου τον εαυτων τρα
χηλον ϋπεθηκαν οις ουκ εγω μο
νος ευχαριστω αλλα και πασαι αι εκ
κλησιαι των εθνων 5 και την κατ οι
κον αυτων εκκλησιαν′ ασπασασθε
επαινετον τον αγαπητον μου ος
εστιν απ αρχης της ασιας εις χ̅ν̅′
6 ασπασασθε μαριαμ ητις πολλα εκο
πιασεν εις ϋμας′ 7 ασπασασθε ανδρο
νεικον και ϊουλιαν τους συγγενεις μου
και τους συναιχμαλωτους μου οιτινες
εισιν επισημοι εν τοις αποστολοις ος
και προ εμου γεγονεν εν χ̅ρ̅ω̅′ 8 ασπασασ
θε αμπλιατον τον αγαπητον εν κ̅ω̅′
9 ασπασασθε ουρβανον τον συνεργον
ημων εν χ̅ρ̅ω̅ και σταχυν τον αγαπη
τον μου 10 ασπασασθε απελλην τον δοκι
μον εν χ̅ρ̅ω̅ ασπασασθε τους εκ των>
αριστοβουλου 11 ασπασασθε ηρωδιωνα
τον συνγενην μου ασπασασθε τους
εκ] των ναρκισσου τους οντας εν κ̅ω̅
12 ασ]πασασθε τρυφαιναν και τρυφωσαν
τας κο]πιουσας* εν κ̅ω̅ ασπασασθε περσι
δα την] αγαπητην ητις πολλα εκοπι
ασεν εν κ̅]ω̣̅ 13 ασπασασθε ρουφον τον εγ
λεκτον εν κ̅]ω̣̅ και την μητερα αυτ
[ου και εμου 14 ασπασασθε ασυνκριτον]

Philip Wesley Comfort and David P. Barrett, “P46,” in The Text of the Earliest New Testament Greek Manuscripts (Wheaton, IL: Tyndale House, 2001), Ro 16:4–14.

I bet people most people skim right through (or right over) Romans 16, thinking it's just a list of names.

DON'T DO IT!!!

Look at the list:

"I commend to you Phoebe" - a woman - probably the person Paul trusted to carry his letter to Rome - "a deacon(ess)" [diakonos*, a common gender noun used for both men and women, and hence could refer to an office she held, and not just a statement that she was a "servant"] - "she has been a prostatis to many and to myself, too" - i.e., a benefactor, perhaps a wealthy or powerful citizen who introduced Paul to the persons in her city, or even protected Paul and supplied his needs, etc.

"Greet Prisca and Aquila" - note that Prisca (Priscilla), a woman's name, comes first (as it does in most of the other New Testament mentions of this couple) - and she is a "fellow-worker" too, one who risked her own neck for Paul's life. And ... she has a church in her house.

"Greet Mary" - another woman.

"Greet Andronicus and Junia" - a woman - one who is "well known to the apostles" or "outstanding among the apostles" - i.e., possibly a woman apostle. John Chrysostum and the Early Church Fathers took the Greek to mean that she was an apostle.

Dan Wallace reports that a massive computer search of Greek literature shows that the construction of the phrase overwhelmingly favors the translation "well known to the apostles." See Innovations in the Text and Translation of the NET Bible, New Testament - II.B.2. Also see Junia Among the Apostles: The Double Identification Problem in Romans 16:7 and Was Junia Really an Apostle? A Re-examination of Rom 16.7.

A discussion (June 3, 2002ff.) on B-Greek cites Eldon Jay Epp, "Text-Critical, Exegetical, and Socio-cultural Factors affecting the Junia/Junias Variation in Romans 16,7," pp. 227-291 in New Testament Textual Criticism and Exegesis: Festschrift J. Delobel, Edited by A. Denaux, BETL 161, Leuven: Leuven University Press/Peeters, 2002, in opposition to Wallace's conclusions, however. (I can't find this discussion in the B-Greek archives now.) And Suzanne McCarthy (died 2015) has a seven-part rebuttal to the Wallace-Burer position: McCarthy vs Wallace (and Grudem)

Whether or not an apostle, the name is "Junia," i.e., a woman, and not a shortened version of the male "Junianus" - an apparent fiction invented by those who found the idea of a woman apostle hard to accept. "Junias" (the Greek form - accusative case) was considered to be a woman at least until the 13th century, as Douglas Moo writes in his acclaimed commentary on Romans. (Epp - see above - apparently argues for the name being masculine.)

"Greet Tryphaena and Tryphosa" - also women.

"Persis" is a woman, as the description of her as "the beloved" is in the feminine gender.

"Greet Rufus the chosen one in the Lord and his mother - and mine also." Now, if this is the same Rufus who was the son of Simon the Cyrene, who carried Jesus's cross, since Cyrene is in Africa, Simon and hence Rufus were likely Black - and Paul is claiming Rufus' mother as being like his own mother. So now we have another praiseworthy woman, and an African one at that.

"Greet Julia" - another woman ... "and Nerea's sister" (a woman).

Not to mention that, as Moo points out, Paul identifies three, and possibly five separate house churches (vv. 5,14,15; cf. also vv. 10,11).

(I originally wrote and/or last edited this June 23, 2002 when I used to have a Web page, though I have updated/added the links.)

* διάκονος, ου, ὁ, ἡ (s. διακονέω, διακονία; Trag., Hdt. et al.;ins, pap, LXX; TestSol 6:10 L, for δράκοντας; TestJud 14:2; Philo,Joseph., Just., Tat., Iren., Hippol.) gener. one who is busy with someth. in a manner that is of assistance to someone

① one who serves as an intermediary in a transaction, agent, intermediary, courier (cp. Jos., Ant. 1, 298 of Rachel who brought Jacob to Laban; s. also Ant. 7, 201; 224 al.; Jos., Ant. 8, 354 Elisha isἨλίου καὶ μαθητὴς καὶ δ.; Epigonos is δ. καὶ μαθητής of Noetus inHippol., Ref. 9, 7, 1). Of a deity’s intermediaries: gener. θεοῦ δ. (Epict. 3, 24, 65 Diogenes as τοῦ Διὸς διάκονος; Achilles Tat. 3, 18, 5 δ. θεῶν; cp. Philo, De Jos. 241; Jos., Bell. 3, 354) 2 Cor 6:4; 1 Th 3:2 (cp. 1 Cor 3:5) s. below; Tit 1:9b v.l.; Hs 9, 15, 4; δ. Χριστοῦ 2 Cor 11:23; Col 1:7; 1 Ti 4:6 (cp. Tat. 13, 3 δ. τοῦ πεπονθότος θεοῦ); of officials understood collectively as a political system agentἡ ἐξουσία the (governmental) authorities as θεοῦ δ. Ro 13:4, here understood as a fem. noun (Heraclit. Sto. 28 p. 43, 15; of abstractionsEpict. 2, 23, 8; 3, 7, 28). W. specific ref. to an aspect of the divine message: of apostles and other prominent Christians charged with its transmission (δ. τῆς διδασκαλίας Orig., C. Cels. 1, 62, 30) Col 1:23;Eph 3:7; δ. καινῆς διαθήκης 2 Cor 3:6; δ. δικαιοσύνης (opp. δ. τοῦ σατανᾶ) 2 Cor 11:15. δ. τοῦ θεοῦ ἐν τ. εὐαγγελίῳ God’s agent in the interest of the gospel 1 Th 3:2 v.l. (for συνεργός); cp. δ. χριστοῦ Ἰησοῦ (if Timothy provides proper instruction he will be considered an admirable transmitter of the gospel tradition) 1 Ti 4:6;δ. ἐν κυρίῳ Eph 6:21; Col 1:25 indirectly as δ. ἐκκλησίας; of Christ as God’s agent δ. περιτομῆς for the circumcision=for descendants of Abraham, Ro 15:8. Cp. Phoebe Ro 16:1 and subscr. v.l.; of Tychicus as faithful courier Col 4:7 (Pla., Rep. 370e ‘intermediary, courier’; of Hermes, s. G Elderkin, Two Curse Inscriptions: Hesperia 6, ’37. 389, table 3, ln. 8; Jos., Ant. 7, 201; 224 al.).

② one who gets someth. done, at the behest of a superior,assistant to someone (the context determines whether the term, with or without the article ὁ, οἱ is used inclusively of women or exclusively) Mt 20:26; 23:11; Mk 10:43; of all 9:35; Pol 5:2. Of table attendants (X., Mem. 1, 5, 2; Polyb. 31, 4, 5; Lucian, Merc. Cond. 26; Athen. 7, 291a; 10, 420e; Jos., Ant. 6, 52) J 2:5, 9. Of a king’s retinue Mt 22:13.—Of Jesus’ adherents gener.: those in the service of Jesus J 12:26. Satirically, ἁμαρτίας δ. agent for sin Gal 2:17 (cp. the genitival constructions in 1 above; cp. Tat. 19, 2 of divination as instrument or medium for immoderate cravingsπλεονεξιῶν … δ.). One who serves as assistant in a cultic context (Hdt. 4, 71, 4 ‘aide, retainer’; Pausanias 9, 82, 2 ‘attendants’) attendant, assistant, aide (the Eng. derivatives ‘deacon’ and ‘deaconess’ are technical terms, whose mng. varies in ecclesiastical history and are therefore inadequate for rendering NT usage of δ.) as one identified for special ministerial service in a Christian community (s. Just., A I, 65, 5; 67, 5; Iren. 1, 13, 5 [Harv. I 121, 6]; Hippol., Ref. 9, 12, 22) esp. of males (the δ. as holder of a religious office outside Christianity: IMagnMai 109 [c. 100 b.c.]; IG IV, 474, 12; 824, 6; IX, 486, 18; CIG II, 1800, 1; 3037, 4; II addenda 1793b, 18 p. 982;Thieme 17f; MAI 27, 1902, p. 333f no. 8, 22) Phil 1:1 (EBest, Bishops and Deacons, TU 102, ’68, 371–76); 1 Ti 3:8, 12; 4:6; Tit 1:9a v.l.; Phlm subscr. v.l.; 1 Cl 42:4f (Is 60:17); Hv 3, 5, 1; Hs 9, 26, 2; IEph 2:1; IMg 2; 6:1; 13:1; ITr 2:3; 3:1; 7:2; IPhld: ins; 4; 7:1; 10:1f; 11:1; ISm 8:1; 10:1; 12:2; IPol 6:1; Pol 5:3; D 15:1.—Harnack, D. Lehre d. Zwölf Apostel: TU II 1; 2, 1884, 140ff, Entstehung u. Entwicklung d. Kirchenverfassung 1910, 40ff; FHort, The Christian Ecclesia 1898, 202–8; Ltzm., ZWT 55, 1913, 106–13=Kleine Schriften I, ’58, 148–53; HLauerer, D. ‘Diakonie’ im NT: NKZ 42, ’31, 315–26; WBrandt, Dienst u. Duienen im NT ’31 (diss. Münster: Diakonie u. das NT, 1923); RAC III, 888–99; JCollins, Diakonia ’90 (p. 254: ‘Care, concern, and love—those elements of meaning introduced into the interpretation of this word and its cognates by Wilhelm Brandt—are just not part of their field of meaning’.) Furtherlit. s.v. ἐπίσκοπος and πρεσβύτερος.—Since the responsibilities of Phoebe as διάκονος Ro 16:1 and subscr. v.l. seem to go beyond those of cultic attendants, male or female (for females in cultic settings: ministra, s. Pliny, Ep. 10, 96, 8; cp. CIG II 3037 διάκονος Τύχη; ἡ δ. Marcus Diaconus, Vi. Porphyr. p. 81, 6; MAI [s. above] 14, 1889, p. 210; Pel.-Leg. 11, 18; many documentary reff. in New Docs 4, 239f), the reff. in Ro are better classified 1, above (but s. DArchea, Bible Translator 39, ’88, 401–9). For the idea of woman’s service cp. Hv 2, 4, 3; hence Hs 9, 26, 2 may include women. Furtherlit. s.v. χήρα b.—Thieme 17f. B. 1334. DELG. M-M. TW. Sv. (BDAG)