Mike Winger's Complementarianism: A Critical Response Overview

Mike Winger's complementarian views on women in ministry are challenged by Bartlett and Williams' detailed refutation.

Mike Winger is Wrong on Women and the Church

Introduction: Mike Winger's work on complementarianism and a response by Andrew Bartlett and Taran Williams

Mike Winger, a popular American pastor/theologian, has written extensively on complementarianism.

Andrew Bartlett and Taran Williams created a detailed response to Winger's work due to its significant online influence.

The response addresses Winger's key assertions point by point.

The interview covers topics like women apostles (Junia), submission in marriage, and 1 Timothy 2.

The discussion also explores the practical implications of different viewpoints.

Background of Andrew Bartlett and Taran Williams

Andrew Bartlett, based in the UK, works in international arbitration and wrote a book on the topic.

Taran Williams, author of *How God Sees Women*, was contacted by Andrew after releasing his book.

Mike Winger is a successful YouTube Bible teacher with millions of subscribers.

Winger's 43-hour series on women in ministry argues for complementarianism.

Taran Williams' journey from complementarian to egalitarian perspective is discussed.

Discussion of Key Arguments and Responses

Analysis of the debate regarding Junia as an apostle in Romans 16.

Examination of Mike Winger's views on male headship and female submission in marriage.

Interpretation of 1 Timothy 2 and the meaning of the word *authentein*.

Discussion of the practical implications and potential negative consequences of complementarianism.

Missiological and Practical Considerations

The impact of complementarian views on the global church, particularly in contexts like China and Iran.

A call for ongoing dialogue and understanding between different perspectives.

Summary of Mike Winger's correct and incorrect points.

Reference to a comprehensive response to Winger's work.

Taran Williams' perspective on Winger's failure to engage with their critique.

Concluding thoughts on the importance of the discussion and the value of the respondents' work.