What do you think?
Rate this book
Junia: The First Woman Apostle
The name "Junia" appears in Romans 16:7, and Paul identifies her (along with Andronicus) as "prominent among the apostles." In this important work, Epp investigates the mysterious disappearance of Junia from the traditions of the church. Because later theologians and scribes could not believe (or wanted to suppress) that Paul had numbered a woman among the earliest churches' apostles, Junia's name was changed in Romans to a masculine form. Despite the fact that the earliest churches met in homes and that other women were clearly leaders in the churches (e.g., Prisca and Lydia), calling Junia an apostle seemed too much for the tradition. Epp tracks how this happened in New Testament manuscripts, scribal traditions, and translations of the Bible. In this thoroughgoing study, Epp restores Junia to her rightful place.
156 pages, Kindle Edition
First published September 30, 2005
47 people are currently reading
380 people want to read
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 21 of 21 reviews
July 10, 2025
Although this is now 20 yrs. old, I believe it is still the gold standard on closing out the Junia vs. Junias debate. The history behind the totally arbitrary replacement of Junia with Junias mostly in the late nineteenth-twentieth centuries (there is also an earlier shift in that direction in the Middle Ages/Reformation era as well) is absolutely insane. I’m grateful that scholars across the board are now clearly recognizing that Rom. 16:7 has always been a feminine Junia. Ironically, however, now that this is granted, a number of complementarian scholars argue that the passage must read “well known to the apostles” instead of “of note among the apostles”, even though the second has been the assumed translation/interpretation throughout church history (and was a reason why some argued it must have been a male Junias, even though there is zero evidence of such a Greco-Roman name having ever existed). So, basically, if it’s a male, then the translation is “of note among the apostles,” but if it’s a female that can’t possibly be the translation, so it must be changed. Sounds like iffy exegesis to me. The patristic writers (most notably Chrysostom) seemed quite content to hold the view that Junia was a notable apostle (even though-broadly speaking-they generally viewed women as inferior). Ultimately, it seems like this is probably one of the clearest passages in the NT on the whole women debate and should be used to help interpret less clear passages (like 1 Tim. 2) instead of the other way around. Anyways-crazy history, thankful for this book, and the question of women in leadership is clearly a complicated one; I really think most evangelicals are not being given the whole picture.
February 4, 2009
A highly documented case study of how sociocultural assumptions shape exegetical interpretaions. Junia was one of the female apostles hidden by 20th century interpreters who believed only men could be apostles
August 13, 2018
Junia: The First Woman Apostle is a fascinating, well-documented & even-handed journey through the interpretation of Romans 16:7. With a history of grammars, variant readings, Greek New Testament translations & patristics, Epp concludes that Romans 16:7 refers to a woman named "Junia" who was an outstanding apostle in the early Church.
5/5 Stars
5/5 Stars
April 4, 2022
This book is short (which makes sense, since it's only about one verse: Romans 16:7) but dense, and I found it fascinating! It's full of textual criticism and exegesis, with several pages in a row discussing the history of the placement of one accent on the name. And yet it was so interesting to me to get down in the nitty gritty details of how Junia as a woman apostle became disputed overtime.
Epp makes a clear case that Junia was indeed a woman. First, early Christian writers consistently understood her to be a woman, it wasn't until more recent centuries that this became disputed at all. And it's crazy the lengths that people are willing to go to make the argument that she wasn't a woman. For instance, while Junia was a very, very common woman's name in the ancient Roman world, some translators would rather make the case that the name should be translated as Junias, a male's name, though there is not one single piece of evidence in any sort of ancient text that Junias ever existed as a male's name. To sum up how Junia's identity became questioned in the first place, here is a 1977 quote from Bernadette Brooten: "Because a woman could not have been an apostle, the woman who is here called apostle could not have been a woman."
Epp also addresses the question of whether the phrase in this verse means "distinguished apostles" or "well known to the apostles," and again, the evidence overwhelming points to the former interpretation.
Epp makes a clear case that Junia was indeed a woman. First, early Christian writers consistently understood her to be a woman, it wasn't until more recent centuries that this became disputed at all. And it's crazy the lengths that people are willing to go to make the argument that she wasn't a woman. For instance, while Junia was a very, very common woman's name in the ancient Roman world, some translators would rather make the case that the name should be translated as Junias, a male's name, though there is not one single piece of evidence in any sort of ancient text that Junias ever existed as a male's name. To sum up how Junia's identity became questioned in the first place, here is a 1977 quote from Bernadette Brooten: "Because a woman could not have been an apostle, the woman who is here called apostle could not have been a woman."
Epp also addresses the question of whether the phrase in this verse means "distinguished apostles" or "well known to the apostles," and again, the evidence overwhelming points to the former interpretation.
April 23, 2025
Epp’s treatment of the Junia debate is rightly considered the most comprehensive analysis of all sides and angles relevant to understanding the brief verse. At under 100 pages, it is concise yet also exhaustive.
The book is equal parts history, biblical scholarship, and contemporary analysis. Epp uses his extensive skill set in textual criticism to argue persuasively and conclusively that Ίουνιαν is a female name.
He surveys the historical answers given to this question, establishing that this was the unanimous interpretation until the 1300s and the majority interpretation until the 20th century, when commentators began to opt for the masculine reading, without manuscript support.
Along the way, Eldon analyzes the reasons given for various perspective, underlying a large amount of prejudice guiding the conclusions. Many interpreters simply could not imagine a woman being named an Apostle.
Junia: The First Woman Apostle is persuasively argued and is a helpful lesson in the presuppositions at play even in the most “unbiased” scholarship. While some material may go over the heads of those without prior exposure to scholarship, it will be worthwhile for anyone interested in the role of woman in early Christianity, and how our modern culture differs.
The book is equal parts history, biblical scholarship, and contemporary analysis. Epp uses his extensive skill set in textual criticism to argue persuasively and conclusively that Ίουνιαν is a female name.
He surveys the historical answers given to this question, establishing that this was the unanimous interpretation until the 1300s and the majority interpretation until the 20th century, when commentators began to opt for the masculine reading, without manuscript support.
Along the way, Eldon analyzes the reasons given for various perspective, underlying a large amount of prejudice guiding the conclusions. Many interpreters simply could not imagine a woman being named an Apostle.
Junia: The First Woman Apostle is persuasively argued and is a helpful lesson in the presuppositions at play even in the most “unbiased” scholarship. While some material may go over the heads of those without prior exposure to scholarship, it will be worthwhile for anyone interested in the role of woman in early Christianity, and how our modern culture differs.
Read
December 19, 2024In Romans 16:7, Paul writes, "Greet Andronicus and Junia, my fellow Jews who have been in prison with me. They are outstanding among the apostles, and they were in Christ before I."
Or, if you're reading the RSV, "Greet Andronicus and Junias, my kinsmen and my fellow prisoners; they are men of note among the apostles, and they were in Christ before me."
How did Junia (feminine) turn into Junias (masculine)? Did Paul really mean to say that there was a woman who he considered an apostle? How did early Christians view this? How has the interpretation changed over time?
This short, scholarly work delves deep into the history of interpretation of this one verse, also getting into text criticism and its interception with exegesis.
Overall, I thoroughly enjoyed this. It was scholarly yet accessible, and covered many different sides of the argument. I got a bit lost in the section on Greek grammar (I'm more comfortable with Hebrew, tbh, so Greek is new to me). But there was so much I enjoyed about this.
Overall, a gem of a book.
Oh, and do you want to know some of his main points? Sure.
- Early tradition held Junia (feminine) as an apostle
- All early references and interpreters from the 2nd century all through the twelfth century see her as a woman.
- There is no other usage of “Julius” (supposed male version) found in any ancient writing
- When Greek manuscripts did begin using accents, they accented it the feminine way
- Chrysostom, a writer from the 300s, commentates: "Greet Andronicus and Junia... who are outstanding among the apostles: To be an apostle is something great. But to be outstanding among the apostles-just think what a wonderful song of praise that is! They were outstanding on the basis of their works and virtuous actions. Indeed, how great the wisdom of this woman must have been that she was even deemed worthy of the title of apostle."
- Not until 1200s that the first person interpreted Junia as a man
- Martin Luther, in 1522 & 1534, when translating into German, translated them both as male names, and made it explicit they were men. (Personal note, Luther also was against women in ministry in general.)
- “In summary, the feminine understanding of Ιουνιαν appears to have been dominant for at least the first millennium of Christianity, but then evolved, through what very much appears to have been an arbitrary change from "Junia" to "Junias," into a view that came to be widely assumed/accepted without discussion or justification until the abbreviated-name explanation was invoked.” (page 39)
- There is some debate about what "among the apostles" could mean - whether it meant these two people were themselves apostles, or merely well-known to the apostles. Scholars have found Greek texts that use the phrase "among the ___" to mean both inclusive and exclusive, but more use it as inclusive. And, ultimately, all the earliest writers viewed it as clear that Junia was indeed an apostle. So, there you have it.
Or, if you're reading the RSV, "Greet Andronicus and Junias, my kinsmen and my fellow prisoners; they are men of note among the apostles, and they were in Christ before me."
How did Junia (feminine) turn into Junias (masculine)? Did Paul really mean to say that there was a woman who he considered an apostle? How did early Christians view this? How has the interpretation changed over time?
This short, scholarly work delves deep into the history of interpretation of this one verse, also getting into text criticism and its interception with exegesis.
Overall, I thoroughly enjoyed this. It was scholarly yet accessible, and covered many different sides of the argument. I got a bit lost in the section on Greek grammar (I'm more comfortable with Hebrew, tbh, so Greek is new to me). But there was so much I enjoyed about this.
Overall, a gem of a book.
Oh, and do you want to know some of his main points? Sure.
- Early tradition held Junia (feminine) as an apostle
- All early references and interpreters from the 2nd century all through the twelfth century see her as a woman.
- There is no other usage of “Julius” (supposed male version) found in any ancient writing
- When Greek manuscripts did begin using accents, they accented it the feminine way
- Chrysostom, a writer from the 300s, commentates: "Greet Andronicus and Junia... who are outstanding among the apostles: To be an apostle is something great. But to be outstanding among the apostles-just think what a wonderful song of praise that is! They were outstanding on the basis of their works and virtuous actions. Indeed, how great the wisdom of this woman must have been that she was even deemed worthy of the title of apostle."
- Not until 1200s that the first person interpreted Junia as a man
- Martin Luther, in 1522 & 1534, when translating into German, translated them both as male names, and made it explicit they were men. (Personal note, Luther also was against women in ministry in general.)
- “In summary, the feminine understanding of Ιουνιαν appears to have been dominant for at least the first millennium of Christianity, but then evolved, through what very much appears to have been an arbitrary change from "Junia" to "Junias," into a view that came to be widely assumed/accepted without discussion or justification until the abbreviated-name explanation was invoked.” (page 39)
- There is some debate about what "among the apostles" could mean - whether it meant these two people were themselves apostles, or merely well-known to the apostles. Scholars have found Greek texts that use the phrase "among the ___" to mean both inclusive and exclusive, but more use it as inclusive. And, ultimately, all the earliest writers viewed it as clear that Junia was indeed an apostle. So, there you have it.
May 15, 2022
Blisteringly academic treatment of one verse of scripture. Why has the Greek word almost universally translated Junia (feminine) in Romans 16:7 since the early church, been translated Junias (Masculine) in the last 150ish years?
It would mean there was a female apostle. Shock. Horror.
I actually learned a stack about biblical studies, even if I didn't understand a lot about accentuation in ancient Greek.
It would mean there was a female apostle. Shock. Horror.
I actually learned a stack about biblical studies, even if I didn't understand a lot about accentuation in ancient Greek.
September 30, 2019
This book was far too in the weeds of Greek and Latin grammar for me. All this evidence is important but hard to read. The main point is that Junia, an apostle referenced in Romans 16:7 is often misgendered as a man but the original text uses feminized language; she was also understood as a woman by Christian writers until the last half century or so.
February 8, 2018
Epp makes a compelling case for Junia in Romans 16 being a woman and an apostle. If you are not into the particulars of the Greek, skip over the comparisons of several Greek manuscripts. But read the rest.
June 3, 2020
I don't agree with his conclusion, but he's very thorough and I think mostly charitable to his opponents. He also argues well, albeit from outside the Evangelical community. He's given me a lot to ponder!
December 10, 2023
A brief but thorough summary of the issue surrounding Junia and why it should be clearly understood as a feminine and not as a masculine apostle (Junias). I also found the brief discussion of First Corinthians 14:34-35 as interpolation in chapter 2 helpful.
July 10, 2018
A bit repetitive and in-depth on the language studies, but it does exactly what it sets out to do.
August 6, 2024
Indestructible proof that Paul supported women in the highest levels of church leadership
July 10, 2025
My ‘Council of Nicea’ friends will love this.
Summary: there was a female apostle. The nonsense of ‘women should be seen not heard in church’ is an interpolation that Paul did not write.
Summary: there was a female apostle. The nonsense of ‘women should be seen not heard in church’ is an interpolation that Paul did not write.
November 16, 2025
Very useful to have as a synopsis of the Rom 16:7 debate. IMO this argument unassailable on historical/philological grounds.
September 9, 2008
As far as I know, this is the first book devoted to the entire academic, exegetical, historical and theological issues surrounding the controversy of Romans 16:7, wherein for 100 years, Junia, the first female apostle was literally erased from scripture translations, including some versions of the Greek text.
This book might be a rough read for non New Testament scholars (a lot hinges on understanding Koine Greek grammar) but its a short book and a highly recommended skim for anyone interested in how far cultural biases can sway not only Biblical interpretation, but translations as well. The issues discussed in Epp's finely organized study, are still being felt today. By the end of the book you may find yourself thinking the same thing I did- "Why wasn't this issue on CNN? It's mind blowing!"
and it is. check it out. Or read my 15 page paper on the Junia debate :)
This book might be a rough read for non New Testament scholars (a lot hinges on understanding Koine Greek grammar) but its a short book and a highly recommended skim for anyone interested in how far cultural biases can sway not only Biblical interpretation, but translations as well. The issues discussed in Epp's finely organized study, are still being felt today. By the end of the book you may find yourself thinking the same thing I did- "Why wasn't this issue on CNN? It's mind blowing!"
and it is. check it out. Or read my 15 page paper on the Junia debate :)
November 5, 2013
I sort of feel like I should give this book a higher rating, but "I liked it" describes how I feel about it, so three stars it is.
This book was rather technical, but I was still able to follow Epp's arguments even though I knew maybe half a semester's worth of Greek at some point and I mostly don't remember any of that now. Epp's arguments about Junia seem solid and it was fun to see how the tore other arguments apart and demolished other statements by showing they were never supported by any sort of scholarship. Epp also briefly introduces textual criticism (which I enjoyed) and argues that 1 Cor. 14:34-35 is not Pauline (which made me go, "whoa, what?" and realize I need a better grounding the Doctrine of the Word before I start reading textual criticism books).
This book was rather technical, but I was still able to follow Epp's arguments even though I knew maybe half a semester's worth of Greek at some point and I mostly don't remember any of that now. Epp's arguments about Junia seem solid and it was fun to see how the tore other arguments apart and demolished other statements by showing they were never supported by any sort of scholarship. Epp also briefly introduces textual criticism (which I enjoyed) and argues that 1 Cor. 14:34-35 is not Pauline (which made me go, "whoa, what?" and realize I need a better grounding the Doctrine of the Word before I start reading textual criticism books).
January 15, 2014
Eldon Jay Epp's short book, 81 pages, in a force to be reckoned with. His style is irenic and respectful of differing opinions. He pays careful attention to the text critical issues surrounding Junia whether it is a feminine or masculine noun and traces the history of grammars, critical editions of the NT, and patristic handling of Romans 16:7. Even though you may disagree with his conclusion, that Junia was a woman and an apostle, it is still a very helpful book.
September 15, 2012
An interesting and illuminating look into the role of the female apostle. Addressing both textual variants, exegetical considerations and cultural shifts, this is an excellent little book.
October 10, 2014
Донякъде прекалено специализирано четиво от един от най-добрите текстови критици. За интересуващите се от темата в такава дълбочина книгата е чудесна.
August 7, 2016
Good read short and to the point
Displaying 1 - 21 of 21 reviews