Hello, I am a 17 year old trying to convince my female youth group leader who is the director of youth ministry who is teaching and exercising spiritual authority over three other male youth group leaders, of the truthfulness of "complementarianism", and my concern is from the fact that the number of the word anēr in 1 Timothy 2:12 is singular. For the past few months I engaged in a constructive discussion with her, and by the evidence presented to her about the syntactic and morphological information of the greek in 1 Timothy and other relevant texts it came to the point where her inquiries of doubt regard my explanations and her confidence in her understanding of her stance from the bible subsided. However in Acts 28:23, it is written that Paul "ektithēmi diamartyromai ho basileia ho theos", "ektithēmi" being the word used in Acts 18:26. The reason why I brought this up because previously by considering the NT systematically, the difference between didasko and propheteuo has been settled between us, which I defined didasko being "a form of teaching or instruction done in a position of authority, either formally or informally, in a public or private setting, regarding the inerrant word of God.", but it seems that Paul in Acts 28:23 verse is doing just that. Ultimately, my question is that seeing "ektithēmi" as the main verb, with "diamartyromai" then later "peithō" being participles, is "diamartyromai" and "peithō" the outcome of "ektithēmi", or are they distinct from each other? Right now what I see is that since the participles are present participles, they are happening in a simultaneous fashion to "ektithēmi", hence it seem to suggests that they are the same thing. Thank you in advance.