Paula

That same main point about included vs. excluded can apply on many other topics as well. We read too much into things, partly because of tradition, and partly because we presume English upon Greek. A good example on this topic is when in Eph. Paul told husbands to love and wives to respect. He wasn’t saying wives do not need to love and husbands do not need to respect.

This is also the issue with the common claim that leaders must be men solely because Jesus only chose males in the inner group of twelve. Yet, inconsistently, nobody ever claims that there must always be twelve, or that they must all be Jews, or that they must speak Aramaic.

Would male supremacists actually presume that since, in the Great Commission, Jesus said to preach, teach, and baptize, that He must only have meant that Commission for men? Why not? Are women sinning if they “go into all the world and preach the gospel to every nation” as so many missionaries have done?

I often recall the illustration of children in a playground, and a couple of kids are misbehaving. If the teacher reprimands the misbehaving ones, does that mean all the other kids are free to misbehave? Then why, in 1 Tim. 2, do people presume that men are allowed to authenteo? Were only the women, and all of them, misbehaving in Ephesus? So many presumptions!