The Counter-Cultural Approach is the first path proposed by Lauren Winner. She calls on couples to counter the culture by shifting the focus of dating away from themselves to Christ. Community also plays an important role in this approach for feedback and accountability. Despite Winner’s excellent writing style (the best in the book in my opinion) and intriguing explanation of the history of dating, I was ultimately disappointed with the position she advocated. For instance, her standard for physical intimacy in a dating relationship is basically to only go as far as you’re comfortable going in public. Unfortunately this principle would lead to sin for some couples.

Douglas Wilson advocates The Courtship Approach. Fundamental to this approach is the involvement of some sort of parental figure, either the actual parents or the headship of the church. Additionally fundamental is that the courting relationship be conducted with marriage in mind. Wilson also emphasizes the headship of the male in the relationship, which, while not necessary to a courting model, does reflect the biblical order. He does make some comments about platonic relationships being impossible without adequately substantiating the claim.

The third approach is the Principled Approach by Rick Holland. Distinctive to this path is that the rules of “dating” or “courting” aren’t significant. What is significant are the general principles for relationships given by the Bible, such as each individual being a Christian, each of good character, and each finding contentment in God. Holland’s argument against dating and courting is that the rules for each system distract from the biblical principles. This is a fallacious argument since it presumes that the rules aren’t biblical principles, which is what the advocates of each position hope to convince us of. The pertinent question is whether the rules do reflect biblical principles or not.

Jonathan Lindvall puts forward the Betothal Approach. There is not dating or courting; when a guy is interested in a girl he seeks the advice and permission of his parents first, then her parents, then asks for her hand. The betrothal period is much like engagement, except that it is a committed covenant that cannot be broken (like marriage) and no physically intimacy whatsoever is allowed. While there are some good qualities to this approach, it an incredibly faulty application of a theological analogy- that Christ is betrothed to the church. The Bible does offer certain principles about how marriage relationships should persist, such as husbands loving their wives as much as Christ loved the church, but to apply these principles to pre-marital relationships is to step outside the indications of scripture and if followed to their logical extent would result in absurdities.

The final approach is offered by Jeramy and Jerusha Clark- the Purposed Approach. Contrary to most of what the others said, the Clarks are fine with dating for couples who are not likely to pursue marriage any time soon, such as high school students. The key factors are that romantic relationships are pursued within the guidelines of holiness, trustworthiness, and the support of family and friends. Heavily discussed in this approach is dependency on the Holy Spirit, especially by way of listening for his “still small voice.” Aside from this unbiblical principle, this path seems to approach romantic relationships with too much frivolity.

Alex Chediak closes the book outlining the major agreements and disagreements between the approaches. Several of the points made in this section are helpful for better understanding the big picture of the book as well as the individual paths.

My one major disappointment with the book is that the contributors don’t interact with each other, which is usually a feature of books advocating multiple perspectives. I would have really liked to see how Winner would respond to Holland saying that her standard for purity is too subjective, or how Lindvall would respond to Wilson citing the theological absurdities of his position. Defending one’s view under criticism is one of the best tests for correctness.
Even without interaction between the authors, the book is generally helpful for mapping out the various perspectives with their strengths and weaknesses. For those who’ve been brought up considering only one or two of the perspectives, this will expand their knowledge to some relatively new ones, such as betrothal. I would recommend this book to anyone who is interested in deciding upon a formal approach for their romantic relationships.