I have been in favor of going back to the Greek and checking the surrounding passages to inform the meaning from the get-go, I'm glad y'all have come around. In fact, that's what I was doing earlier. If that's
really what you would like to do,
let's do it, cause I'm game.
Performing the exegesis yourself is a very informative process and not that hard (thanks internet). I think these types of arguments can be resolved by doing so since we are often arguing about translations (which are faithful and scrupulous for the most part, but may sometimes lend themselves to ambiguity).
Let's take a point that I thought I nailed down firm with the Greek but got brought right back up anyway:
Junia, female apostle
Sole mention of Junia is found in Romans 16:7, here's the NIV text of the verse, "7 Greet Andronicus and Junia, my fellow Jews who have been in prison with me. They are outstanding among the apostles, and they were in Christ before I was."
A plain reading of the English NIV does seem to imply that Junia (definitely a female name) was an apostle. The surrounding verses do not serve in informing the meaning as this is an introduction by Paul to the specific persons of Andronicus and Junia and their sole mention in the text.
Now let's look at the Greek, especially the phrase "They are outstanding among the apostles" as that is the basis for identifying Junia as an apostle:
Romans 16:7
ἀσπάσασθε Ἀνδρόνικον καὶ Ἰουνιᾶν τοὺς συγγενεῖς μου καὶ συναιχμαλώτους μου, οἵτινες εἰσιν ἐπίσημοι ἐν τοῖς ἀποστόλοις, οἳ καὶ πρὸ ἐμοῦ γέγοναν ἐν Χριστῷ.
Here is a link to the Greek of Romans 16:7, complete with Strong's references.
Now, the specific phrase "They are outstanding amongst the apostles":
οἵτινες
εἰσιν
ἐπίσημοι <-- special attention
ἐν <-- special attention
τοῖς
ἀποστόλοις
I noted the words rendered "outstanding among" because these serve as the crux of the controversy. As can be seen, the rest of the phrase is unambiguous and reads essentially as the NIV renders it.
First,
ἐπίσημοι, the word rendered "outstanding": referring to the link presented here, the obvious meaning of the word is not qualitative as 'outstanding' may be understood to mean, but rather 'of note' or 'notable'.
Second, and perhaps more confusing, is
ἐν. As seen from the link, this is an inclusive preposition, essentially equivalent to 'in' or 'among'. This may imply that Junia is 'among' the apostles, but let's look at a few other uses of ἐν for clarification.
(Examples from
GNT Concordance)
Matthew 2:1 Τοῦ δὲ Ἰησοῦ γεννηθέντος ἐν Βηθλέεμ τῆς Ἰουδαίας ἐν ἡμέραις Ἡρῴδου τοῦ βασιλέως, ἰδοὺ μάγοι ἀπὸ ἀνατολῶν παρεγένοντο εἰς Ἱεροσόλυμα
Now when Jesus was born
in Bethlehem of Judea
in the days of King Herod, behold, wise men from the east came to Jerusalem, saying,
Matthew 2:2 λέγοντες· ποῦ ἐστιν ὁ τεχθεὶς βασιλεὺς τῶν Ἰουδαίων; εἴδομεν γὰρ αὐτοῦ τὸν ἀστέρα ἐν τῇ ἀνατολῇ καὶ ἤλθομεν προσκυνῆσαι αὐτῷ.
"Where is he who is born King of the Jews? For we saw his star
in the east, and have come to worship him."
These examples are not exhaustive, but it at least allows us to divine that the inclusive preposition ἐν modifies the noun directly after it. Thus, 'in' the apostles does not modify Junia and hence cannot be taken to mean that Junia was an apostle.
I think this is enough to prove my point that Junia was not an apostle, using the Greek. This is a singular point among many in this debate, chosen for brevity. However, its hardly a matter of my personal interpretation. I've provided
objective references and I ask that any opposing voice would do the same.
Um, in all those examples the preposition is giving us the location of the noun preceding it. Jesus was born in Bethlehem. Bethlehem wasn't born in Jesus. The star was in the east, the east wasn't in the star. 
You can't just take the word out of the sentence. "A&J are of note the apostles" doesn't make any sense either. You're essentially trying to replace the preposition with a different one. It doesn't say they were of note by the apostles. "They were of note in the apostles" still means they were apostles.
