WAS JUNIA A FEMALE APOSTLE?
By Ezekiel Kimosop
Romans 16:7 says "Greet Andronicus and Junia, my countrymen and my fellow prisoners, who are of note among the apostles, who also were in Christ before me." (NKJV). The NIV reads "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 was."
This text lies in the traditional greetings section at the foot of Paul's Epistle to the Romans. Paul reveals his relationship with the Andronicus and Junia. Both were Jews and both had suffered for their faith and had been imprisoned with Paul at one time.
Paul's closing description of the two has been at the centre of theological controversy over the church ages. Were these two believers among the primary apostles of Jesus Christ? If so, why is Scripture silent about them beyond this text? Were the two a Jewish couple or were they siblings?
We shall begin with a theological examination of the first question.
Does this Scripture suggest that the two Jewish believers mentioned in Paul's greetings were New Testament apostles within the context of Matthew 10:1-4; Acts 1:15-26, 9:1-19; Ephesians 4:11 and Revelation 21:14?
Were they part of the New Testament apostles called by Jesus Christ or were they apostolic missionaries that Paul had commissioned to the Gentiles?
My view is that being of note among the apostles is evidence of the good standing of the two believers - Andronicus and Junia - among the apostles. They had perhaps excelled in their service to Christ. This text does not however suggest or imply that the two had been appointed to apostolic office by Jesus Christ during the New Testament church period.
Were they a Christian couple?
Whether or not the two were married to each other is difficult to conclusively establish from Scripture. Some scholars consider this as a strong possibility. Kelly Campbell notably observes that the two are not mentioned elsewhere in Scripture. [1]. This phenomenon considerably limits the reader's reflection on their identity.
It is also instructive that Paul acknowledges the two as having come to faith before him. This suggests that they were perhaps among the first set of New Testament believers identified with the Jerusalem church before the persecution and dispersion that commenced in Acts 7 of which Paul was a leading figure.
John Calvin supposes that Paul may have used the generic name "apostles" to denote apostolic missionaries or "the sent" rather than a reference to the holders of the New Testament apostolic office. [2]. This is a plausible argument.
Some scholars have supposed that the two may have been siblings who had hosted the apostles in Rome. Others have suggested that the two may have been a Christian couple in Rome. The siblings theory is fairly remote because it is difficult to find any convincing evidence in its support in Scripture or historical sources.
We shall now return to the million dollar question: Were the two ministers apostles of Jesus Christ within the context of Matthew 10:1-4; Acts 1:15-26, 9:1-19; Ephesians 4:11 and Revelation 21:14?
These texts of Scripture centre on the appointment of apostles within what we can refer to as the primary apostolic category. It is instructive that there is no mention of a female apostle among those appointed by Jesus in the New Testament Scriptures. This reinforces and lends credence to the conclusion that Jesus never called a woman into His primary apostolic team even though he sent out a large number of believers into the mission field, including the 70 mentioned in Luke 10.
Besides the appointment of Matthias in Acts 1 as a replacement to Judas Iscariot, no evidence in Scripture suggests that some additional primary apostles had been appointed by Jesus or by the Jerusalem church.
Revelation 21:14 appears to suggest that a fixed number of apostles was contemplated in Scripture. The Scripture says "Now the wall of the city had twelve foundations, and on them were the names of the twelve apostles of the Lamb." (NKJV).
There is considerable theological debate on who between Matthias and Paul will feature in those foundations. Some of course may argue that this text conveys an imagery of the world to come and that the number mentioned need not be interpreted in its literal sense. It is however undeniable that numbers convey meaning in Scripture.
Most Bible scholars agree that Junia (Greek: Ἰουνία) was a female Greek name and this strongly refutes the claim to apostolic stature within the primary apostolic context.
Al Wolters observes that Ἰουνιᾶν is the Greek form of the Hebrew male name Yehunni. [3]. This suggests that Junia may have been the Hellenized equivalent of the Jewish male Yehunni. This perspective significantly discounts the possibility that the two were a Christian couple. I would classify it as a peripheral observation. Most Bible scholars agree that Junia was female.
Richard Bauckham, a British classical and Pauline scholar, has exhaustively demonstrated this perspective in his works and concluded that Junia is almost certainly feminine [4]. It is also instructive that Chrysostom did not question her gender but celebrated her apostolic distinction.
Daniel Wallace, a leading New Testament Greek scholar disagrees with the view that the two believers were New Testament apostles. He observes thus in his analysis of Romans 16:7: “In sum, until further evidence is produced that counters the working hypothesis, we must conclude that Andronicus and Junia were not apostles, but were known to the apostles." [5]. This view can be reconciled from a plain reading of the text.
Linda Belleville and Eldon Epp under their critical review of the Journal of Biblical Literature have found the male identity argument by Wolters to be methodologically inconclusive [6]. This conclusion theologically consigns the male gender perspective to the periphery.
My view is that the two believers were either a faithful Christian couple or prominent Jewish believers known to apostle Paul and other New Testament apostles. The two were residing in Rome at the time Paul wrote the Letter to the Romans.
CONCLUSION
I am persuaded and it is my concluding thesis that:
1. Neither Andronicus nor Junia, nor indeed any other New Testament church missionary, can be classified under the primary category of apostles except the twelve called by Jesus in person plus Matthias and Paul. This category is exclusive.
2. Junia was not a New Testament apostle within the meaning of Matthew 10:1-4; Acts 1:15-26, 9:1-19; Ephesians 4:11, and Revelation 21:14. She falls under the secondary category. No female believer or missionary was appointed under the primary category.
3. The primary apostolic office was sealed by Jesus after the calling of Paul in Acts 9. This implies that no additional apostles were contemplated under this category either during the New Testament or subsequent church periods. There is therefore no living primary apostle today.
4. The theological conflation that some have attempted to introduce between the two apostolic categories cannot stand under a faithful biblical exegesis or theological scrutiny. The distinction between the two categories therefore stands in all church ages.
5. The Great Commission by Jesus in Matthew 28:19-20 was made without gender distinction or discrimination. All believers are called into the mission field in all ages of the church until coming of Christ.
Shalom
© Ezekiel Kimosop 2026
________________
REFERENCES
[1] Kelly Campbell, "Who was Junia in the Bible and What do we Know About Her?" In "I Believe", iBelieve.com https://share.google/fSA8k2pcbooELFLAs
[2] John Calvin, Acts (The Crossway Classic Commentaries; eds. Alister McGrath and J.I. Packer; Wheaton, IL: Crossway, 1995), 237–238.
[3] Albert Wolters, “ΙΟΥΝΙΑΝ (Romans 16:7) and the Hebrew Name Yehunni,” Journal of Biblical Literature 127 (2008): 397–408.
[4] Richard Bauckham, Gospel Women: Studies of the Named Women in the Gospels (Grand Rapids: Eerdsmans, 2002), 165-202.
[5] Daniel B. Wallace - Junia Among the Apostles - Double Identification Problem. http://bible.org/article/junia-among-apostles-double-identification-problem-romans-167
[6] Michael Burer and Daniel Wallace, "Was Junia Really an Apostle? A Re-examination of Romans 16:7", New Testament Studies, 47 (2001): 76-79. For counter-arguments, see Epp, Junia (2005), Belleville, NTS, 51 (2005); and Richard Bauckham, Gospel Women (2002).






