Sunday Message- once again, what's in a name

Php 4:2  I entreat Euodia and I entreat Syntyche to agree in the Lord. 
Php 4:3  Yes, I ask you also, true companion, help these women, who have labored side by side with me in the gospel together with Clement and the rest of my fellow workers, whose names are in the book of life. 

"We don't know what they argued about, but that's a good thing.  Because we can apply what Paul said to them to our conflicts."

-Pastor Steve Fish last Sunday

And Steve is right, so far as it goes.  But the Bible has a wonderful mechanism in it called, "Names mean something", and I decided to apply the principle to these two women.  And while this is only speculation, I think we may glean a principle or two out of it.

First, let's look into Euodia:

From the same as G2137; fine travelling; Euodia, a Christian woman: - Euodias.

And 2137:

From a compound of G2095 and G3598; to help on the road, that is, (passively) succeed in reaching; figuratively to succeed in business affairs: - (have a) prosper (-ous journey).

And those last 2 numbers go to "good" and "road".  If we follow the principle, we can estimate that Euodia had been a Christian for some time, had proven her walk, and was succeeding at reaching others for Christ.  She was prospering in the Lord.  And the reason I think we learn something here is the very different case of Syntyche:

From G4940; an accident; Syntyche, a Christian female: - Syntyche.

And 4940:

From G4862 and G5177; to chance together, that is, meet with (reach): - come at.

And those last two can be put together, in a sense, as, "met up with by accident."

Syntyche, then, just kind of stumbled into the faith later on; perhaps she was the proverbial "friend of a friend" or whatever.  And unlike Euodia, who may have started out as a Jew with at least some grounding in God, Syntyche was trying to find her way in it.  Now you might say, "Why isn't this older woman then teaching the younger, to help her?"  Well, I think I have an idea of what's going on, and I'll have to slip into politics to explain.

Let's consider, briefly, Nancy Pelosi and Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez.  Without the vitriol and jokes, please.

Recently, AOC gave her opinion on making mistakes to Anderson Cooper:

COOPER: One of the criticisms of you is that-- that your math is fuzzy. The Washington Post recently awarded you four Pinocchios --

OCASIO-CORTEZ: Oh my goodness --

COOPER: -- for misstating some statistics about Pentagon spending?

OCASIO-CORTEZ: If people want to really blow up one figure here or one word there, I would argue that they’re missing the forest for the trees. I think that there’s a lot of people more concerned about being precisely, factually, and semantically correct than about being morally right.

COOPER: But being factually correct is important--

OCASIO-CORTEZ: It’s absolutely important. And whenever I make a mistake. I say, “Okay, this was clumsy,” and then I restate what my point was. But it’s -- it’s not the same thing as -- as the president lying about immigrants. It’s not the same thing at all.

So basically she has no problem with leading with her chin, getting bashed, backing up, and taking a slightly different path, much like a robot vacuum bouncing off chair legs.  Nancy, however, with her years of experience (whatever she has made of them), has learned to walk around the table legs in a way that gets her where she's going without the constant bashing and backing up.  And it would seem that AOC's willingness to make a hash of things on the way can get on Nancy's nerves.

Now, apply to a woman who has been a church leader- and a good one- for years, and a probably younger one who isn't willing to gain wisdom the smart way- by listening to those who've been around the block- but wants to charge right in and leave others to clean up the resulting mess.

The fact that Paul urges his "trusted companion", whom the commentators wasted a lot of my time debating who it was- some even suggesting that it was Paul's WIFE, when Paul himself has suggested he is NOT married, just because the conflict is between two women- to get between them and mediate suggests that at least SOMEBODY isn't of a mind to listen.  A timeline I just looked at suggests this is about a decade after Paul's own dust-up with Barnabas, and he probably is seeing in hindsight that if they HAD gotten someone to mediate with them, they would still be working together.  I think this is Paul saying to Syntyche, "Yeah, you can learn from your mistakes, but the best thing you can learn is not to make them in the first place."

I will admit that not long ago, I was like this.  One of many examples I can give involved Dr Robert Jeffress, who you may have watched on Fox News as they often turn to this pastor when they need a "Christian voice" on the show.  His "Pathway To Victory" show plays on my drive to work, and I used to have a handful of problems (of my own making) with some of his points.  One morning I was "arguing" with him and led myself right around to the point HE was making.  And I realized that I needed to be open to his wisdom in these things.  Instead of taking the adversarial tack, look at the wisdom in what he said, and see where I MIGHT be wrong.  More often than not, once I shut up, I found he wasn't wrong at all.  And I started praying for that greater wisdom, to shut up and listen.

I'm guessing that's just what happened with Euodia and Syntyche.  Which still leaves a lot of room for application, as pastor Steve said.  Have a conflict?  Ask God for that greater wisdom- and get some help if needs be.