Romans 16 is my favorite passage to pull out anytime anyone mentions the possibility of Paul being misogynistic… He uplifted so many women in one single passage it is ridiculously hard to unsee it once you’ve seen it. But sometimes it isn’t seen at all. The Bible is full of those blink-and-you-miss-it kind of moments, and Romans 16:7 might just be one of the most slept-on verses with feminist firepower.
Paul signs off his letter, Romans, with greetings to many of his friends and ministry coworkers. A little more than a third of those he greets are women! Very cool, but it gets cooler.
There is this one particular verse where he mentions Andronicus and Junia, praising them as “outstanding” and calling them his fellow prisoners.
In some English translations it breaks down the Greek to say that Junia was an apostle… “outstanding among the apostles” I TOLD YOU IT WAS COOL!
But…
Some people don’t believe she was an apostle. Depending on who you ask you’ll get one of three answers. And I have explained them all for you here, so you can decide for yourself.
I will admit I am a little bias on this one, I have studied the greek on this and kept my head in Romans 16 to some extent for about 2 years and I really believe Junia was an apostle. BUT I have tried my very best to explain each theory with all the crucial information you would need to go study on your own.
However, please keep in mind that the debate isn’t just about grammar or church history; it’s about power, visibility, and the long shadow of patriarchy in biblical interpretation. Go forth in critical thinking, wisdom and Holy Spirit descernment.
3 Theories on Junia(s) The Apostle
Theory 1: Junia the Female Apostle
This is the mic-drop view backed by myself, many contemporary scholars and, ironically, by most early Church Fathers. Junia is a woman. And she’s not just part of the scene or known amongst the scene, she is “outstanding among the apostles.” That Greek phrase episēmoi en tois apostolois is categorizing her as a disciple. Church tradition for centuries never questioned her gender or her status. It wasn’t until later interpreters— being uncomfortable with a woman holding apostolic authority—began questioning the accuracy of the translation. This theory holds that Junia wasn’t just hanging out with apostles; she was one. Specifically an outstanding one. If this interpretation holds, it reframes the argument that the early church was only male-led. It shows that women weren’t just helpers in the margins. They were central, named, and apostolically leading.
Theory 2: Junia Was Well-Known To the Apostles
This more cautious interpretation argues that Junia, while respected, was not herself an apostle. The Greek phrase will sometimes be translated as “well known to the apostles,” indicating high regard rather than inclusion in the apostolic group. This reading has found a home especially in more conservative theological circles. While still affirming Junia’s faith and reputation, it avoids the question of female apostolic authority. However, most Greek scholars note that the inclusive reading (“among the apostles”) is more linguistically natural and grammatically consistent. Nevertheless, broader interpretations of Paul’s writings (see 1 Timothy 2 and Ephesians 5) have historically influenced how this passage is understood. Often the phrasie “use scripture to interpret scripture” is used to defend the way this theory is upheld.
Theory 3: Junia Was Actually a Man
This one’s the wildest ride. A minority position, now largely dismissed by scholarship, suggests that the name should be “Junias,” a supposed male form. This theory emerged in later centuries and was reflected in some Bible translations throughout the 20th century. The theory would suggest that Junia(s) is indeed, outstanding amongst the apostles. But only because Junia is now Junias — a man. However, there is no evidence that “Junias” was a common (or even attested) male name in the Greco-Roman world, while “Junia” was a well-documented and frequently used female Latin name. The lack of manuscript support for “Junias” and the strength of external naming conventions make it difficult to sustain this view today. However, some still deeply uphold this belief and will only refer to Junias as a man.
The Junia debates show us how theology, history, and gender politics collide in scripture interpretation. Recovering Junia’s story isn’t just a niche academic issue; it’s about reclaiming the voices of women who were written out, renamed, or reimagined to fit someone else’s comfort zone.
Maybe the question isn’t whether Junia was an apostle. Maybe the better question is: why were we so eager to believe she wasn’t?