I see a lot of misquotations of and additions to Scripture in this thread, mostly around 1 Timothy 2, such that people claim it says something which it does not. So, I'll paste the verses so often misquoted and then comment...
1 Tim 2:11-14 A woman must quietly receive instruction with entire submissiveness. But I do not allow a woman to teach or exercise authority over a man, but to remain quiet. For it was Adam who was first created, and then Eve. And it was not Adam who was deceived, but the woman being deceived, fell into transgression. (NASB).
First... what it does not say: lead, pastor or preach, or anything about the assembly, or the church or the meeting. Those words simply aren't in those verses, or in their immediate context. As an aside, "leading" does not necessarily incorporate authority (one can lead by example!).
Second... what it does say: a woman, singular, and a man, singular. Women and men (both plural) appear in the previous verses, but not after v. 10.
A key issue... the verb authentein ("exercise authority") is notoriously hard to translate. Its exact meaning in English is much debated. Frankly, getting dogmatic with this word at the centre of the verse in question is unwise... for all of us.
A few thoughts... Those who use this verse to argue against female pastors need to explain why Paul switches to the singular at this point. It would have been much clearer to say, "I do not permit women to teach men at all in the Church". He didn't. Also, once "a woman" has learned, then what? Must she remain quiet forever? Must she remain under the tutelage of men forever, who may well know less than her?
I submit that our understanding of this passage is hindered by a lack of understanding of cultural context, without which we don't really know what Paul meant by authentein or by referencing the creation order. The one view I've read which makes great sense of this whole passage is that Paul was dealing with proto-Gnostics who taught that women were superior, having been created first and holding secret knowledge passed down from Eve. Paul directly refutes this by declaring that Adam was formed first and that Eve was deceived. A woman teaching such things needs to "be quiet and learn the truth". By the way, the "anti-Gnostic" view also makes sense of verse 5 being placed where it is.
Are all women forbidden from teaching men because Adam was formed first, or because Eve was deceived? Ask yourself... in any other context, would those arguments make any sense at all? Do we hold the children guilty for the crimes of the parents? Should we hold all women under judgment for the deception of Eve? (Even modern legal systems are better than that!) If so, we should then also hold men under judgment for the sin of Adam... a little consistency is in order! Let me ask one more question though: consider the righteousness, holiness and wisdom of our God. Do you honestly think that God, having just witnessed the sin of Adam, would set now-sinful male humans in permanent authority over female humans for all time? Sorry, that doesn't wash with me. It makes far more sense to me that the enforced suppression of women in the church merely proves the consequence which God stated way back in Genesis 3: "but he will rule over you." Nowhere in that passage does God ever say (or even hint) that such is what He desired. If you think so, follow the logic carefully and find a monster who "wants" women to suffer greatly in the pain of childbirth. That ain't Jesus!
A word to those who appeal to fear, warning dire judgment on those "who rebel against the authority of God's word" (or however they phrase it): don't lump us in with liberals who disregard Scripture... that is simply incorrect. Also, don't waste your imprecations on us: we believe as we do because we take the word of God seriously... enough to do some digging and thinking beyond the translated words on the page. You believe differently; fine, but don't demonize those who disagree with you, for you won't convince anyone of your view by being vicious, vindictive or insulting.