Kay

Mark,
You said,
“I do admit that this verse is hard. But so does everybody else. It is not a weakness to admit that you don’t understand a certain verse. Since this is the case, we ought to be very cautious of people who think they have a flawless exegesis of this passage. History should tell us otherwise.”

I certainly understand your call for caution. Yet, I have to wonder why you are here to critique Cheryl’s exegesis efforts??
You admit that the verse is considered difficult by the best of exegetes – we all do. You say to Cheryl that “evidence against your interpretation is the writings of church leaders, exegetes theologians.” Yet, clearly, you have nothing concrete to offer or you would have already given THE flawless interpretation every Christian should adopt a long time back on the blog. You have no clear evidence in the verses themselves and no clear concensus among theologians, past or present, to prove her exegesis to be less trustworthy than any other.

So, is your point in commenting here to show that since, in your opinion Cheryl’s interpretation has “holes” in it just like all the others, then sticking to your favorite comp. interpretation is really o.k.?
And therefore, mutualists and egals should not question or criticize the comp/hierarchist’s even though there is not one unquestioned flatly stated prohibition against women teaching men in all of Scripture?