Discussion Questions

David Bercot argues that neither Paul nor Luke cared about whether Priscilla or Aquila was named first, and that ancient commentators didn’t read “Priscilla first” as evidence of prominence—what assumptions about status, leadership, and “importance” are modern readers bringing to the text that the ancient writers apparently didn’t? JumpstartAnother way to ask: If ancient readers didn’t think “Priscilla named first” meant she was more important, what modern ideas about rank and leadership are we bringing to the passage?

Paul uses both “Prisca” and “Priscilla,” and Bercot notes that “Priscilla” is the affectionate diminutive—what does that small observation suggest about Paul’s tone toward coworkers and the kind of relational warmth the early church assumed could exist inside serious ministry? JumpstartAnother way to ask: Since “Priscilla” is the more affectionate name, what does that show about Paul’s warmth toward coworkers and the kind of closeness early Christians had in ministry?

The early Christian commentators Bercot cites interpret “the church in their house” not primarily as a meeting location but as an *honorary title* for a household marked by holiness, hospitality, and disciple-making among servants and employees—what would it take for your home to deserve to be called “a church” in that sense? JumpstartAnother way to ask: If “the church in their house” meant an honored home known for holiness, hospitality, and making disciples, what would need to change for your home to fit that description?

Origen and others connect “church in their house” to servants faithfully participating in hospitality and discipleship—how does this challenge modern individualistic ideas of spirituality that treat employees, children, and daily household order as spiritually “neutral”? JumpstartAnother way to ask: If servants, children, and daily home life were part of discipleship, how does that challenge the idea that faith is only personal and the household doesn’t matter spiritually?

Bercot highlights that Paul uses “church in their house” only for Aquila/Priscilla and Philemon—if that rarity implies “special households,” what does it reveal about what God values, and how does it confront the modern tendency to measure faithfulness by public ministry rather than household holiness? JumpstartAnother way to ask: If only a few homes get called “a church,” what does that say God values, and how does it challenge the idea that public ministry matters more than a godly home?

Chrysostom says “firstfruits” could mean either “first convert” or “most godly behavior”—if Paul’s praise might be about *quality of life* rather than spiritual résumé, how should that reshape what your church celebrates and what you personally want to be known for? JumpstartAnother way to ask: If “firstfruits” could mean “most godly life,” not just “first convert,” how should that change what your church praises and what you want to be known for?

When discussing Mary and other women who “labored,” Bercot emphasizes Paul’s “special honor” and Origen lists practical, demanding forms of women’s work (training younger women, hospitality, washing the saints’ feet, governing the home well)—what parts of that list feel invisible or undervalued today, and what would repentance look like if we’ve treated those labors as “lesser”? JumpstartAnother way to ask: Which kinds of hard, behind-the-scenes work (like hospitality, training others, serving at home) do we ignore today, and what would it look like to repent for treating them as less important?

The Andronicus/Junia debate is framed around the phrase “of note among the apostles,” and Bercot points out that some reject Junia partly because it would be the only place a woman is called an apostle—what does this controversy expose about how we decide what Scripture “must” mean, especially when a reading threatens our existing categories? JumpstartAnother way to ask: In the Junia debate, how do our assumptions about what the Bible “can’t” mean shape our reading, especially when the plain reading challenges our usual categories?

Chrysostom interprets “fellow prisoners” as shared dangers and sufferings rather than literal shared jail time—what does that reveal about how early Christians viewed persecution as normal Christian experience, and how does that contrast with modern expectations that faith should make life safer or more comfortable? JumpstartAnother way to ask: If “fellow prisoners” could mean sharing danger and suffering, what does that show about how early Christians expected persecution, and how is that different from expecting faith to make life easier?

The lesson describes the “holy kiss” as a structured part of worship before communion and as a “revolutionary institution” that erased class distinctions (masters kissing servants, rich kissing poor)—what present-day practices in your church actually function to flatten status and reconcile relationships before communion, and what concrete changes would be needed if they don’t? JumpstartAnother way to ask: What does your church do before communion to break down status and fix relationships, and what specific changes are needed if it doesn’t really do that?