Search — Theology Explorer

thinking biblically Mike Winger

Mike's stated goal is to teach people how to think biblically rather than just declaring what is true, enabling independent biblical reasoning.

Series introduction — Mike's teaching philosophy

eldership gender roles egalitarianism

Definition of egalitarianism: equality in both personhood and role, with no limits on what women can do in the church including serving as elders.

Framing the debate — defining key terms

women in ministry secondary issue Christian unity

Women in ministry is a secondary issue — sincere believers on both sides are still Christians, and it is not worth dividing over.

Mike's personal framing of the debate

guest speakers Joni Eareckson Tada Sunday morning teaching

The question of women as guest speakers on Sunday mornings, referencing Joni Eareckson Tada as an example.

Scope of practical questions raised by this debate

soft complementarianism Philip Payne Linda Belleville

Mike's personal journey: he wanted to become egalitarian, prioritized egalitarian scholarship, read Philip Payne and Linda Belleville, but did not change his mind.

Mike's personal stance and research journey

hermeneutics Trinity philosophical presuppositions

Analogy to Trinity denial: some reject the Trinity not from scripture but from a philosophical conviction that 'three in one' is impossible, then read the Bible through that lens.

Bypassing the Bible — analogy

Rebecca Merrill Groothuis equality of personhood role differences

Mistake #4: Believing that equality of personhood philosophically rules out differences in roles. Mike introduces Rebecca Merrill Groothuis and her work.

Mistake #4: Equality of personhood rules out role differences

egalitarian scholarship Rebecca Merrill Groothuis Discovering Biblical Equality

Groothuis's argument appears in chapter 20 of 'Discovering Biblical Equality' — a brand new edition of the premier egalitarian multi-author volume that Mike read including an advance copy.

Mistake #4: Equality of personhood rules out role differences

Rebecca Merrill Groothuis Discovering Biblical Equality syllogism

Groothuis's syllogism: if women's subordination is permanent, comprehensive, and ontologically grounded, then women are inferior persons; women are not inferior; therefore subordination is unjustified.

Mistake #4: Analyzing Groothuis's syllogism

Rebecca Merrill Groothuis submission vs. inferiority personhood

Mike agrees women are not inferior persons but argues that submissive roles and inferior personhood are not the same thing — children submit to parents, employees to bosses.

Mistake #4: Rebutting Groothuis's syllogism

Rebecca Merrill Groothuis definition of human dehumanization argument

Groothuis defines 'human' as having higher rational functions including decision-making, then argues that denying women leadership over men is inherently dehumanizing.

Mistake #4: Analyzing Groothuis's definition of human

Rebecca Merrill Groothuis Levites priestly roles

The Levite analogy: Levites had exclusive priestly roles based on tribal lineage (nature), not ability — yet non-Levites were not less human. Groothuis addresses but does not defeat this.

Mistake #4: Levite analogy against Groothuis

Rebecca Merrill Groothuis nature-based roles Davidic kingship

Additional analogy: only a son of David could be king of Israel — this eliminates most people from the highest authority by nature, yet does not make them less human.

Mistake #4: Davidic kingship analogy

Rebecca Merrill Groothuis Christ and the Church Eph 5

Possible non-inferiority reasons for role differences: picturing Christ and the Church, societal order, or unstated divine purposes. Groothuis rejects all of these.

Mistake #4: Alternative explanations Groothuis ignores

Philip Payne Man and Woman, One in Christ equality in Christ

Philip Payne's related argument in 'Man and Woman, One in Christ': if we are equal in Christ, we cannot exclude anyone from leadership based on gender.

Mistake #4: Payne's variant of the philosophical argument

church hurt story-driven theology Beth Allison Barr

Beth Allison Barr's 'The Making of Biblical Womanhood' as a prime example of story-driven theology — the book frames the entire discussion through personal pain and church hurt.

Mistake #5: Critique of Beth Allison Barr's book

complementarianism and abuse Beth Allison Barr The Making of Biblical Womanhood

Barr equates complementarianism with abuse — 'you cannot separate the issues' — making the book about stories creating theology rather than understanding scripture in context.

Mistake #5: Critique of Beth Allison Barr's book

story-driven theology Beth Allison Barr The Making of Biblical Womanhood

Barr uses the story of a rude complementarian male student to overrule Russell Moore's distinction between pagan patriarchy and biblical complementarianism.

Mistake #5: Barr's story overruling theological argument

bypassing scripture story-driven theology Beth Allison Barr

Barr's argument: personal stories overrule any theological distinction — 'nice try, tell that to my story' — all nuance and distinction between pagan patriarchy and complementarianism is erased.

Mistake #5: Stories overruling scripture

bypassing scripture egalitarianism abuse arguments

Abuse can be addressed without proving egalitarians are right — let egalitarians be right because of biblical arguments, not extra-biblical ones. This was probably the biggest reason Mike did not become egalitarian.

Mistake #5: Conclusion

Philip Payne Gen 2:24 parental authority

Payne's third argument: father and mother sharing authority over the son before he leaves shows egalitarian parental authority.

Egalitarian argument about shared parental authority

Tom Schreiner Two Views on Women in Ministry Gen 2

Introduction to Tom Schreiner's six reasons from Genesis 2 for Adam having a leadership role, from 'Two Views on Women in Ministry.'

Transition to complementarian case from Genesis 2

Two Views on Women in Ministry ezer Craig Blomberg

Craig Blomberg's nuanced view: 'ezer' means the one being helped bears primary responsibility -- Mike disagrees, citing Psalm 146:3-7 as a counter-example.

Blomberg's complementarian take on 'ezer'

ezer Gen 2:18 changed mind

Mike's conclusion on 'ezer': the complementarian view is weak if based on this word; it doesn't imply subordination or submission. The consistent thread is that the person being helped can't do it alone.

Mike's settled view on the 'ezer' debate

Mark Stephen Francois etymology fallacy R. David Freedman A Power Equal to Man

Mike's critique of Freedman's article: it uses circular reasoning (own translations to prove own translations) and has been refuted by Dr. Mark Stephen Francois.

Refutation of the 'ezer as power' etymology

Tom Schreiner Gen 2:23 ish

Schreiner's point 4: Adam exercised leadership by naming Eve -- first as 'woman' (isha) in Genesis 2:23, then as 'Eve' in Genesis 3:20.

Complementarian argument #4: naming as authority

Tom Schreiner Gen 2:23 Phyllis Trible

Trible's second objection: 'woman' is a common noun (gender classification), not a proper name -- Schreiner's reply: Adam classified animals the same way (types, not personal names).

Complementarian rebuttal on naming as classification

Discovering Biblical Equality Mary Conway naming as authority

Mary Conway's alternative approach to naming: it's an act of discernment, not authority, based on George Ramsey's 1988 paper.

Alternative egalitarian argument on naming

naming as authority common sense argument

Mike's rhetorical argument: even if naming is 'only discernment,' no one would accept a stranger renaming their child or village -- naming inherently involves authority.

Common-sense argument for naming and authority

Tom Schreiner 1 Tim 2:14 Eve's deception

Schreiner appeals to 1 Timothy 2:14 ('Adam was not deceived, but the woman was deceived') to support point 5 -- Mike thinks the verse can be explained without the subversion-of-authority reading.

NT support for serpent-targeting-Eve argument

Philip Payne Eve's sin against God Gen 3:1-6

Bad complementarian argument #1: Eve usurped Adam's authority by eating of the tree -- Mike refutes this; Eve's sin was against God, not Adam.

Bad complementarian arguments identified by Payne

bad complementarian arguments Gen 3:17 listening to wife

Bad complementarian argument #2: Adam's sin was 'listening to his wife' -- Mike refutes this; the problem was the content (eating the fruit), not the act of listening to a woman.

Bad complementarian arguments

Song 7:10 Gen 3:16 teshukah Gen 4:7

Analysis of 'teshukah' (desire): lexicons show it could mean sexual desire or desire to dominate; it appears only 3 times in the OT.

Hebrew word study on 'desire' in Gen 3:16

Song 7:10 Linda Belleville teshukah Gen 4:7

Belleville's counter: all three uses of 'teshukah' are linked by gender/intimacy -- she interprets Gen 4:7 as a lion wanting to 'consume' (intimate metaphor) Cain. Mike finds this forced.

Belleville's attempt to maintain the intimacy reading across all three uses

Song 7:10 Gen 3:16 Gen 4:7 Song 7:10

NET Bible note supports the control interpretation: Gen 3:16 announces a power struggle where the woman desires to control the man but the man will dominate her instead.

Scholarly support for the control/conflict interpretation

Romans 16 Romans 16:1-2 Junia N.T. Wright Romans 16

NT Wright on Romans 16: women as church leaders and Phoebe as letter bearer

Continuation of Wright's argument about Romans 16.

Colossians 4:15 Discovering Biblical Equality Nympha Lynn Cohick

Nympha in Colossians 4:15 -- Lynn Cohick's claim she led a house church

Mike begins examining individual women named in the NT, starting with Nympha.

Acts 12:12 Linda Belleville hosting vs. leading Mary mother of Mark

Acts 12:12 refutes host-as-leader: Mary mother of Mark hosted a prayer gathering

Mike presents another counter-example.

Acts 17:5-9 hosting vs. leading Jason Acts 17:5-9

Jason in Acts 17:5-9 does not prove host-as-leader; shows external cultural accountability only

Mike addresses the one passage egalitarians use to support host-as-leader.

Philippians 1:1 Linda Belleville Two Views on Women in Ministry Euodia

Belleville's logic: Philippians 1:1 lists saints, overseers, deacons -- Euodia/Syntyche must be in one category

Mike reconstructs Belleville's reasoning from Two Views (p. 60).

Linda Belleville Euodia Syntyche

Belleville's third argument: their disagreement jeopardized church unity, proving leadership role

Mike addresses Belleville's final argument for Euodia/Syntyche as leaders.

Priscilla women teaching men private instruction

Principle from Priscilla: a woman can instruct a man in doctrine, at least in private/informal contexts

Mike draws a principle from the Priscilla account.

1 Timothy 2 women in ministry 1 Timothy 2 teaching and authority

Mike's tentative position: teaching allowed if it doesn't carry eldership authority; real-life examples balance rules

Mike begins articulating his personal landing point.

Ephesians 6:21-22 Colossians 4:7-8 letter carrier as teacher Ephesians 6:21-22 Colossians 4:7-8

Ephesians 6:21-22 and Colossians 4:7-8: Tychicus gave personal updates, not letter interpretation

Mike examines the remaining biblical references cited by Keener.

women in ministry complementarian overcorrection spiritual gifts

Women gifted for ministry hold back in complementarian churches due to fear

Mike describes a pastoral observation.

Romans 16:1-2 1 Timothy 3:11 Acts 6 women deacons Phoebe Romans 16:1-2

Two reasons for women deacons and three counter-arguments

Mike lays out the debate structure on women deacons.

2 Corinthians 8:18-24 Linda Belleville scholarly methodology 2 Corinthians 8:18-24

Belleville's second footnote: 2 Corinthians 8:18-24 -- all males, no deacons, no women

Mike checks the second footnoted passage.

Philippians 2:19-30 Linda Belleville Discovering Biblical Equality scholarly methodology

Belleville's third footnote: Philippians 2:19-30 -- all males, no women deacons

Mike checks the third footnoted passage.

Romans 16:2 Philip Payne Phoebe prostatis

Philip Payne's claim: Phoebe was Paul's personal leader based on 'prostatis' in Romans 16:2

Mike examines an extraordinary claim about Phoebe's role.