sm

Mike writes:
“It seems odd to me that your entire case for the first part of your answer is that there is no such thing as “authority” in the church…that the Word of God is the authority and then you spend the second part of your answer saying that there is inferiority if women cannot teach men, just showing a type of authority system.”

While I would welcome some clarity on what exactly Cheryl is saying about authority within the church, I believe I understand what she writes in the latter part.

Cheryl writes in the latter part:
“When we go against the scripture and take a verse out of its context (1 Timothy 2:12…) we create a way to allow men to *devalue women*. (emphasis added) If a man is told that he isn’t allowed to listen to women teach the bible, what is he going to *think about her teaching*? (emphasis added) Would it not be normal that he would think that he is the one gifted to teach the church and she is an *inferior teacher whose value is far less than his own value* as a teacher?” (emphasis added)

I understand that Cheryl is appealing to the logical conclusion of what men would naturally think when they are regularly taught they are not to listen to a woman teach and even told they have the responsibility to remove themselves from such situations. Such as, if a man walks into a session or if a session takes the route of a woman teaching, a man is to walk out.

I understand Cheryl to be saying, the logical conclusion, the natural tendency of fallen mankind is that this kind of thinking has implications for the way men perceive women: i.e. “inferior” in “quality and value”. She even says this “devalues women” and would lead men to believe women are “inferior teachers”.

I did not understand Cheryl to be “showing an authority system” in her comment, but rather drawing out the logical conclusion of heirchalists thinking and practices.

Cheryl, correct me if I misunderstood.