Women Deacons

When the Revised Standard came out they changed I Timothy 3:11 from wives to women, opening the door for women deacons. In most versions it referred to the deacons wives until then.

The argument was there was no definite article before the word for wives so it should be translated women.

Here is a quote from John Gill's commentary,

1 Timothy 3:11

Even so must their wives be grave,.... Some instead of "wives" read "women", and understand them of deaconesses, such as were in the primitive churches; whose business it was to visit the poor and sick sisters of the church, and take care of things belonging to them; but it is better to interpret the words of the wives of the deacons, who must be as their husbands, "grave" in speech, gesture, and dress, of an honest report, a good behaviour, and chaste conversation; which will reflect honour and credit to their husbands:

The question is why would the translation wives be better. Where did they come up with the rule it should read women instead of wives without a definite article.

1. An article doesn't dictate whether women or wives is translated, many verses translate the word wife without the article being present.

2. An article like his or their is not used when groups are the context, it is usually supplied in English translations, but with groups an article isn't used in Greek..

Well lets look at #2, it seems a definite article like their or his was not used all the time when speaking of wives of a general pool of people. See

Matthew 19:10

Matthew 19:29

Matthew 22:28

Mark 10:2

I Corinthians 7:10-12

and several others. When it is speaking of a group and not a specific individual it often leaves out the article.

Mar 10:2  AndG2532 theG3588 PhariseesG5330 came toG4334 him, and askedG1905 him,G846 (G1487) Is it lawfulG1832 for a manG435 to put awayG630 his wife?G1135 temptingG3985 him.G846 

The word his is supplied and not actually in the text, as in I Timothy 3:11. Under their made up rules it would be translated women, but all know wife is accurate here.

It seems the revised standard was probably incorrect and speculative. There are other arguments for women deacons but the original that was used concerning the missing article doesnt make sense.

Some versions even inserted the word deaconness in I Timothy 3:11, a total adlib from the original wording. Such translators may be in jeopardy of losing their souls.

Lets look at another verse.

1Co 7:10  AndG1161 unto theG3588 marriedG1060 I command,G3853 yet notG3756 I,G1473 butG235 theG3588 Lord,G2962 Let notG3361 the wifeG1135 departG5563 fromG575 her husband:G435 

1Co 7:11  ButG1161 andG2532 ifG1437 she depart,G5563 let her remainG3306 unmarried,G22 orG2228 be reconciledG2644 to her husband:G435 andG2532 let notG3361 the husbandG435 put awayG863 his wife.G1135 

I Cor 7:10-12 uses a supplied article referring to both men and women. Under their rules since the greek is missing the article it should be translated women instead of wife, but we know wife and husband are appropriate. The original argument they used to get the debate started was false.