1 Timothy 3:11

Women in like manner must be grave, not slanderers, temperate, faithful in all things.

Hervey summarized the three possible meanings of this verse, making it applicable to: (1) the wives of the deacons; (2) the wives of the elders and deacons; or (3) the women deacons.[32] Hervey, like so many present-day commentators opted for the third meaning, but this commentator is certain that the third meaning is wrong.

If the women in view here had been deacons, Paul would have called them deacons, which he certainly did not do; and furthermore, in the very next verse Paul said that deacons "must be husbands of one wife," leaving women out of sight altogether as possible holders of this office.

Both the KJV and Nestle Greek-English New Testament translate the word "wives" instead of "women" in this verse, and that is doubtless the correct rendition. It is alleged that the word "women" is ambiguous in the Greek, and well it may be; but in context the word has to mean wives. To make it read "female deacons" is a gross transgression of the word of God. This verse says absolutely nothing about any female deacons; and the supposition that it does would mean that no qualifications whatever are laid down for the wives of elders and deacons, a fault that no man has the right to charge against the apostle Paul. This verse on the qualities of officers' wives is absolutely mandatory to be observed. The wrong kind of wife can ruin any elder or any deacon; and to make the qualifications in sight here applicable to a whole new class of church officials would be to make Paul guilty of a very glaring omission.

But isn't Phoebe called a deaconess (Romans 16:1)? Yes, indeed; but policemen are also called deacons of God (Romans 13:4), the Greek word being the same in both cases (except for the gender). See exegesis on this in my Commentary on Romans under those verses. In this connection, it is proper to note that if Paul had meant these women to be installed as "deaconesses" he certainly knew the word and would have referred to them in this passage by their proper title. The New Testament word "apostle" is used in its both official and limited sense and also in a secondary and more general sense when applied to men like Barnabas and Silas, who were not, strictly speaking, "apostles." The view here is that "deaconess" as applied to Phoebe, in the same manner, does not mean that she was officially a deacon in the church of the Lord. It should always be remembered that deaconess translates the Greek word for "servant," and that, for centuries, the translators have rendered the word "deacon" only when the official church office was meant. But in the case of Romans 13:4 and Romans 16:1, they usually rendered it "servant." That is the way the KJV renders both places; and the gratuitous injection of the official title DEACON into Romans 16:1 in some subsequent versions is absolutely incorrect and misleading.

If churches were commanded to appoint women deacons, where is the record of it, either in the New Testament or in the custom of the historical church? When women deacons are appointed, they are appointed without divine authority and with no adequate list of qualifications to serve as guidelines for their appointment. If 1 Timothy 3:11 is to be construed as the standard for appointing women deacons, why, it may be inquired, did Paul list fifteen qualifications for elders, and four for so-called deaconesses? Such a view simply does not make sense.