[aron]

A related point: Jesus was very respectful of all persons; everyone got respect (or, love). But note what Jesus told the promiscuous person: "do not sin again". So if you read Paul against this, women in a changed society would likely have changed rights, as would previously oppressed minorities. But behaviours (drunkenness, promiscuity, theft, violence) would still be censored. We're to be a holy people.

My point is that if society becomes more "liberal", or permissive of behaviours, the assembly of Jesus does not. But being a female is not a behaviour. Neither is being African-American or Jewish. All genders are equal, as are races and cultures and classes. In this regard, there is neither male nor female, greek nor Jew, slave nor free. Christ has subsumed all.

But against this new freedom and equality in Christ Jesus, Paul was reminding them, this now doesn't mean that anything goes. If you read his various restrictions this way it matches Jesus very well. The Spirit of Jesus has come, but our new orientation and obedience to the freedom of the Spirit doesn't mean we forget the various laws, social and political.

But to say, "Women should be silent. Why? Paul said so", is to miss Jesus by a country mile. Not saying anyone did this here. But in authoritarian assemblies like the LC one may find the letter of Paul used to discourage conversation.