Kristen

Cheryl said,

“If teaching in an “authoritative” way was wrong if you aren’t an expert on something, then why were these “women” only restricted from teaching men this way? Why not also stop them from teaching women authoritatively?”

I didn’t say that Paul was talking only about “teaching in an authoritative way.” I said he was talking about “teaching in an authoritative way that contradicts the authoritative teaching that is currently being given by the leaders of the church.” It isn’t “authoritative teaching” I’m talking about. It’s false teaching that purports to be authoritative and thus usurps the true authoritative teaching.

Cheryl said:
“I don’t see any evidence that there was an “authority” given to “accepted teachers” let alone an authority that could be “usurped”. Since the leaders were to be servants and not lording over the flock, is it their authority to act as a servant that is being’usurped’?”

I never said there was “authority” given to “accepted teachers.” I said the teaching of the “accepted teachers” was considered “authoritative” on the subjects they were teaching about. This has nothing to do with exercising authority over the congregation, any more than the scholar whose book I read to learn what an “authority” on his subject thinks, is exercising authority over my life.

It’s fine if you disagree with me, but it’s better if what you’re disagreeing with is what I actually said! lol