Now you’re just re-asserting your point.

Let’s not talk in circles and just end this interaction here.

So then the correct interpretation is that women are not to speak over men, at least in matters within the domain of the faith? And as such the OP stands at face value, no?

Ah, I read you as saying that the verse is to be taken as only relevant to Timothy. If it does indeed inform how to run Christian churches as part of the official Word, they should be followed, no?

Or is the argument that they only inform overall sect marketing strategy, just as Leviticus should only pertain if you’re to enter a church? (As it was God’s commands for Israelites to be in the presence of God)

(Let’s set aside the discussion on how to interpret context, as each denomination seem to have their own and seldom any actual historical methodology in how to form that context.)

So why are there directives on how to run a church in the official doctrine of this religion? If they’re only meant to be relevant to Timothy, shouldn’t they have been cut with the rest of the apocrypha?