- by Carrie Shaw
- on May 23, 2025
Mike Winger has released a 13-video, 40+ hour series arguing that women cannot hold positions of leadership or teach men within the church. He claims to rely solely on Scripture, but in doing so, he overlooks the broader narrative of the gospel, imposes culturally-conditioned interpretations, and ignores the lived witness of the early church.
This article is not a response to every minute of his content – who has that kind of time? – but a focused reply to his main arguments, written from someone who takes the Bible seriously, believes in the authority of Scripture, and also believes women are not second-tier citizens in the kingdom of God.
1. Framing Scripture Through a Cultural Lens
Mike Winger begins his series with a confident claim: his position is simply “what the Bible says.” He insists he has no agenda and that his conclusions arise from plain, unbiased exegesis.
The problem? There is no such thing as a cultural vacuum. Every reading of Scripture involves interpretation – and interpretation always carries assumptions. Mike’s reading, like all of ours, is shaped by context, tradition, and theology. What he calls “the plain reading” often turns out to be a deeply Western, male, and post-Reformation reading.
To suggest that complementarian theology is simply what the church has always taught is also historically inaccurate. As I’ve outlined elsewhere, this framework arose in reaction to feminism, not from the early church or the apostolic witness.
What we often forget is that Jesus didn’t offer a system of rules but a radically reoriented way of being human. The gospel does not codify patriarchy – it upends it.
If you want to explore this more fully, I’ve written about the influence of culture and tradition on our reading of Scripture here: “Women, the Church, and the Gospel Story”
2. Genesis and the Myth of Male Headship
A cornerstone of Mike Winger’s argument is Genesis. He frames male authority as part of God’s original design – suggesting that Adam’s creation before Eve, his role in naming her, and Paul’s later references to this order all establish a male “headship” that is prescriptive, not cultural.
But this reading forces a hierarchy onto a text that says nothing of the sort.
Genesis 1 is unequivocal: “So God created mankind in his own image… male and female he created them” (v27). There is no hierarchy here, only shared image-bearing. It’s not until after the fall – after sin has entered the story – that we read “he will rule over you” (Genesis 3:16). That is not God’s ideal. It is the tragic consequence of a world fractured by sin. To treat it as prescriptive is to treat the curse as the blueprint.
Mike argues that Adam being formed first indicates leadership. But that’s not how the Genesis narrative functions. The animals were formed before Adam too. Sequence does not imply superiority.
Instead, what we see in Genesis is mutuality: a shared calling to steward creation, a partnership that is fractured by sin – not created by God.
If you want to go deeper into this, I’ve written extensively about the Genesis text and the problems with gendered hierarchy here: “Stop Promoting Gendered Hierarchy”
3. The Troubling Texts: 1 Corinthians 14 and 1 Timothy 2
Mike Winger leans heavily on two texts: 1 Corinthians 14:34–35 and 1 Timothy 2:11–12. For him, these are clear, universal commands that silence women in the gathered church and prohibit them from teaching men. But this approach treats the letters like legal codes rather than pastoral responses to specific issues.
Let’s start with 1 Corinthians 14. Just a few chapters earlier, Paul acknowledges that women were praying and prophesying in the assembly (1 Corinthians 11:5). If Paul was universally forbidding women from speaking, why would he instruct them on how to do it respectfully? The likely explanation is that Paul is addressing disorder in the Corinthian gatherings – not issuing a blanket ban. Some scholars suggest these verses may even be a Corinthian quotation that Paul is refuting. Either way, the silence is not total, and it is not gendered in the way Mike insists.
As for 1 Timothy 2, Mike reads Paul’s instruction as a timeless prohibition. But Timothy was leading a community in Ephesus – a city steeped in Artemis worship and spiritual elitism. Women in this context were not simply learners; many were recent converts, potentially influenced by false teaching. Paul’s command that a woman learn “in quietness” was actually radical – it made space for female discipleship in a world that denied it. “I do not permit” is not “God does not permit.” It’s a pastoral instruction, not a permanent law.
Mike’s method here is rigid – it insists on uniformity in a New Testament that consistently shows women speaking, leading, teaching, and witnessing to the gospel. The early church didn’t silence women. Why should we?
To go deeper on these texts, I’ve written a detailed treatment here: “Women Must Keep Silent – Examining The Troubling Texts”
4. Women in the Early Church: The Examples He Downplays
One of the more frustrating parts of Mike Winger’s series is how quickly he moves past the women who actually appear in Scripture – real women with names, roles, and authority – in favour of building arguments from silence or extrapolated hierarchy.
Take Phoebe. Paul calls her a diakonos of the church in Cenchreae (Romans 16:1) – the same word used for male deacons – and prostatis, often translated “benefactor,” but more accurately meaning leader or patron. She is the one entrusted to carry Paul’s letter to the Romans. That alone should give us pause. Would Paul really commission a woman to carry, explain, and represent his most theologically rich epistle if her voice was not to be trusted?
Or Junia, who Mike argues was “well known to the apostles” rather than “outstanding among the apostles.” But this reinterpretation didn’t arise until centuries after the early church unanimously understood her as a female apostle. It’s revisionism, not clarity.
Then there’s Priscilla, who, along with her husband Aquila, taught Apollos – a learned man – and corrected his doctrine. Paul mentions her first more often than not, likely indicating her prominence in ministry. Mike downplays this by saying she taught “with her husband“, as if that somehow neutralises her teaching gift or authority.
None of these women fit neatly into the box Mike wants to build. They were leaders. They taught. They travelled. They hosted churches. They weren’t exceptions – they were part of the Spirit-filled church Paul celebrated.
For a fuller exploration of these women and others, see: “Women in the Early Church.“
5. Headship and Marriage: Not a Model for Church Order
A recurring theme in Mike Winger’s series is the link he draws between so-called male “headship” in marriage and male-only leadership in the church. But conflating the two does more harm than good – both theologically and pastorally.
Let’s start with Ephesians 5, where Paul tells husbands to love their wives as Christ loved the church. That’s not a licence for control. It’s a call to cruciform love. “Head” (kephalē) in this passage doesn’t mean authority or rule – it means source or origin, as in the head of a river. Paul’s point is not to install a chain of command, but to reframe relationships around mutual sacrifice and Christ-shaped service.
Mike treats this as a template for church leadership – but the text doesn’t go there. The household codes of the New Testament were already radical in their insistence on the humanity and dignity of women. Paul was working within a patriarchal society, not endorsing its structures as divine design. The gospel didn’t reinforce the power imbalance – it introduced mutuality, equality, and self-giving love into relationships where one-sided dominance was the norm.
In fact, the one command that applies to both husband and wife, before anything else, is this: “Submit to one another out of reverence for Christ” (Ephesians 5:21). That mutual submission frames the whole passage – and should shape our marriages and our churches.
For more on this, including how Jesus redefined power and leadership, see: “Husbands and Wives.“
6. The Gospel Story Is Bigger Than Gender Roles
Perhaps the greatest flaw in Mike Winger’s series is that it shrinks the gospel. It reduces the sweeping, world-upending story of Christ’s redemption into a set of rigid rules about who can speak, lead, or teach based on gender – as if that were the heartbeat of Christian faithfulness.
But the gospel doesn’t start in 1 Timothy 2. It starts in a garden with male and female made in the image of God. It moves through a story where God raises up women – like Miriam, Deborah, Huldah — to speak truth to his people. It crescendos in the life of Jesus, who welcomed women as disciples, defended them publicly, and first appeared to them after the resurrection. And it continues in the early church, where the Spirit is poured out on sons and daughters alike.
When we make gender the gatekeeper of spiritual gifts, we quench the Spirit. When we silence half the church, we rob the body of voices it needs to hear. And when we defend this with selective proof-texts while ignoring the story of Scripture as a whole, we end up protecting a tradition, not the truth.
The call of the gospel is not to enforce hierarchy – it’s to follow Jesus. And following Jesus means lifting up the lowly, breaking down dividing walls, and calling the church to live into the fullness of the new creation.
Conclusion: 13 Videos Later
Thirteen videos, 40+ hours – and not a single woman truly heard.
This isn’t about having the last word. It’s about returning to the first Word – the Word made flesh – and asking what kind of kingdom he came to bring. One where the Spirit is poured out on all flesh. One where leadership looks like servanthood. One where the voice of a woman, entrusted by God, is not silenced – but welcomed.
For more, I’ve written a range of articles exploring this deeply. You can find them all at carrielloydshaw.com.
Want to hear from others on this topic? Check out what Terran Williams has to say here: https://terranwilliams.com/what-mike-winger-gets-wrong-on-what-women-cant-do/
As always, feel free to drop me a comment below or get in touch via email or socials. I’d love to hear how this subject has impacted or continues to impact you?
