1 reply

  1. I just read his article on Christmas. Is he having a laugh? Literally nothing he argues can be evidential of the virgin birth from a Biblical perspective. At one point he indicates that Mark and Luke are “independent”, when he means “completely and totally contradictory”. Perhaps though, what is most interesting is his use of the criterion of embarrassment. In this case he appeals to Jewish law, but does not offer any solution as to why Mary was not killed – the Qur’an does with Jesus coming to his mother’s defense. Pursuant to this, he then candidly admits Isaiah 7:14 was not interpreted as Messianic before Jesus, but only done so after, but then he comes to the conclusion that this re-interpretation cannot be for theological reasons. Quite odd reasoning there.

    All in all, I really think he’s struggling for content and trying to write “new” material after I called him out for plagiarizing Rogers on the Mal’ach YHWH, Wood and Shamoun on women in Islam. So I suppose this is him not copy pasting for once and its absolutely poor and shoddy reasoning. Perhaps he should stick to plagiarism.

    Liked by 3 people

Please leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: