Giles, a longtime egalitarian, establishes what the Bible actually teaches by critiquing biblical arguments for the permanent subordination of women; in other words, Giles critiques complementarian theology and methodology.
Ron Clark offers a passionate and personally informed response to the issue of male-to-female violence. Drawing on his pastoral care efforts and experience of working with a variety of couples coming out of violent relationships, a reader can tell that he deeply cares about the issue at hand and that his personal reflections are well thought out. Overall, this book is easily accessible to a lay audience but may not be for those expecting rigorous theological exegesis or expansive social science research.
In Breaking the Marriage Idol, Kutter Calloway describes how the modern church has become distracted by pagan norms for sexual expression and marriage, and why this contributes to our idealization of marriage and the marginalization of unmarried persons. Arguing that the church has bought in to the Hollywood notion that marriage is the antidote to sexual promiscuity, Callaway calls the church to provide new stories to refute this superficial formula. He offers vision for how the church can become a place where love for the other is the pinnacle, and both unmarried and married persons lead and follow side by side, representing the best expression of God's intent for his people.
Pure examines the harmful effects of evangelical Christianity's purity culture with particular emphasis on the long-lasting and outward-rippling effects of shame. Of particular interest to CBE's audience, the book details the ways in which purity culture cooperates with patriarchy and harms women.
Theologian and author Alice Mathews recently said in a Christianity Today interview with Hannah Anderson, “Satan knows that if he can keep women out of service, in the church and in the world, he will have won an enormous victory.” Mathews’s most recent book, Gender Roles and the People of God, takes back some of the territory gained by the enemy.
Based on my reading, Winter in each instance seems to interpret key texts in dispute in a way completely in sympathy with the hierarchical-complementarian agenda. If his exegesis were compelling we would need to listen, but it is not.