I wasn’t going to discuss this, but since I started feeling compelled to add my voice to the calls for correction and health in the charismatic church, I’ve noticed there is an elephant in the room: Charismatics are predominantly egalitarian, or egalitarian-adjacent. As we urge each other to clean up our doctrine and flee from Gnosticism and excesses, and begin to lock arms with the rest of the Body of Christ rather than trying to be overly special and separate from them (a lure I believe contributes to many of the errors in the Bethel stream), one of the things that gets brought up is the question of women in ministry, or the role of women generally speaking (including in marriage).
Now, if charismatic reconstructionists wish to jump on the complementarian bandwagon and are convinced it is the only scripturally valid approach, and that egalitarianism is mutually inclusive with charismatic excesses and unhealthy forms of progressivism – God bless them. People need to honour their conscience and understanding. (Understanding does tend to change how our conscience responds.)
However, I genuinely believe complementarianism (rather than mutualist complementarity) is an outworking of the curse of Genesis 3 and is logically inconsistent within itself and the full counsel of scripture. Jesus died to free mankind from the curse, and this includes any imbalance or lack of unity between men and women (in marriage and elsewhere).
The early church, including St. Irenaeus who authored “Against Heresies” within a generation of Apostle John, emphasized in his writing that Mary inverted the sin of Eve through her obedience (and Christ’s human nature being made from the flesh of a woman clearly inverts or mirrors Eve being made from Adam). Authentic gospels tended to emphasize the role of women in a way that embarrassed the culture of the time; this has become a hallmark of authentic versus heretical gnostic gospels. Deborah was a great leader of a nation, in a spiritual and judicial capacity. . .in the Old Testament, before Jesus became a curse for us. Efforts to write this off are, in my opinion, influenced by a) culture and b) the serpent. There is no need to write it off – she should be held up as a model. The woman didn’t have a bad word written about her, and that is rare for Biblical leaders. (The Bible is mercilessly honest.)
Mutuality (or egalitarianism) is not theologically unsound – but because voices like Mike Winger are very loud and persuasive, and we live in a moment where such voices are right about many things, I fear many charismatics who reform their theology will start to believe he/they must be right about *all* things. This will shake the confidence of women who desire to serve the Lord, men who desire to support them, and can quite possibly make godly mutualist men insecure about their healthy relationships with their wives (where they do not focus on who is in charge, but live in Christlike harmony and mutual servanthood).
Complementarian is much like communism, in that wherever it results in abuse its advocates claim it simply wasn’t done properly. I would argue that where complementarianism does not result in abuse, the couple or community is functionally egalitarian (or living in “mutualist complementarity” – I like this term).
All that to say, Winger is not entirely right about women. I say that with respect – I’m a fan of Winger, generally. The man is a hero in many ways.
While I’ve posted one lame video to my youtube sharing my thoughts so far, I’m not a scholar. These guys (Andrew Bartlett and Terran Williams) have actually done the work of responding to Winger’s 40 hours of “what women can and can’t do and why.” (lol) I share this for all our good, that we’d resist the curse of power struggle between men and women, and the enmity between the woman and serpent, and would instead focus on celebrating our shared humanity and spreading the light of Christ, in mutual submission and with respect in a meritocracy.
I also share it so charismatics reeling from the errors and exposures in our own movement don’t experience a grief and offense in their heart towards scripture, believing (incorrectly) that it dishonours women when applied faithfully. This could cause many to fall away, or be lured into various errors dangled in front of them by those offering rejection of scripture as a solution. Sharing rigorous scriptural and historical evidences supporting mutuality and egalitarianism in scripture is an antidote to this potential falling away.
I’ve ordered Terrans’ book– it’s on its way. lol. (Link to this post on X, and on fb.)
Also, here is my thoughts on my podcast if anyone is interested – but for deep scholarship, start with the video above.
dustymaytaylor.com 
The Lord is working with you to shine the light on this issue. Men ignoring the mistreatment of women are not only devaluing women, they are cutting themselves off from their full potential. The more I learn about this issue, the more I wonder if misogyny might be the leaven than leavened the whole lump of the Way in the first place. Men rejoicing that their curse has been broken while telling women to remain under their curse do not understand the nature and value and impact of the crucifiction and resurrection. As you said: the full curse needs to break and Christ is due the fullness of his victory.
The epistles are a bunch of corrections, warnings, and worries that the body of Christ might lose the plot if we aren’t deliberately careful. The body did lose the plot, but I believe that disconnection is part of the grand story.
Christ, our head, died and rose on the third day. The church was alive and empowered by God to spread the word in the early days, and relegated to mere religous status by the time of the Nicene council three centuries later. Christianity brought an empire to submission, and lost the edge and spark and vitality at the same time.
A dying of the collective body is part of the story long term. A thousand years are as a day to the Lord, and a day is as a thousand years. That isn’t poetic expression, it is a formula.
The main reason the epistle of Barnabas wasn’t included in the official Bible is that Barnabas saw Christ coming back after two millenia, and that was unimaginable and unacceptable to the council at the time.
Now here we are. All these centuries later. Saints have been raised and rescued generation after generation for thousands of years (because God is good), but the miraculous power and authority and access of the Acts church has been dead almost since the beginning.
Jesus is still due a full inheritance. Jesus saw the church that hasn’t ever fully been but will be one day be. He knew the horrors that would be carried out in his name. He knew the shame of greedy televangelists, and the inquisition, and all other perversions of his original promise. He also saw the bride awaiting him on his eventual return and saw that it was good.
Thank you for sharing your voice on this topic and other issues involving the body of Christ holding itself for far too long to a small-minded standard that shames the spotless and unblemished ideal of our calling.
When men honor women to the degree that we see your disgrace as our disgrace, the curse will be broken and the body of Christ will be whole.