The Greek word is "diakonos", which is rendered "deacon" in several places. However, in this one place where it is used in reference to a woman, it is translated "servant". Bias much? Absolutely! The NIV and other modern translations have it correct, while the KJV has it translated incorrectly.
By the way, Strong's says that this word means, specifically, a Christian teacher and pastor.
Post 296/297
Your unwillingness to consider the Greek undermines your position. Where there are actually pronouns in Greek in this passage, they are not gender-specific.
Post 271
No perversion dude. That is a translation. But the Greek word there is diakonos which is a root word for the English deacon. But a deacon's role is one who reads the Gospel in divine worship, one of a body of assistants to a priest or other clergyman. Servant of the church, religious official," literally "servant," from dia- here perhaps "thoroughly, from all sides," + PIE *kon-o-, from root *ken- "to hasten, set oneself in motion.
deacon (n.)
Middle English deken, "one who reads the Gospel in divine worship, one of a body of assistants to a priest or other clergyman," from Old English deacon, diacon, from Late Latin diaconus, from Greek diakonos "servant of the church, religious official," literally "servant," from dia- here perhaps "thoroughly, from all sides," + PIE *kon-o-, from root *ken- "to hasten, set oneself in motion." Related: Deaconess; deaconship.
So as you can see if we are looking for closeness in accuracy, deacon is a better word to fit diakonos. Servant is a true role of deacon but can be misunderstood on its own.
but you in your lack of honesty, say this means gay marriage.
there are others as well, but you choose to ignore them and make silly excuses as to why you reject them....well the excuses are because you believe the KJ is the only Bible....it may be the only Bible for you, an excellent source for miscomprehension and the basis for yours and others claims of your repetitive errors. that's on you
you have not shown any proof of what you say, but contend simply that you are right. which is ridiculous.
I don't need to repeat myself here...you have what you pretended does not exist so don't ask again as we all can read and knew when you asked, that you were just blowing smoke
it's really a waste of people's time when you have no intention of even briefly considering anything but what you already believe