gengwall

“I took the time and effort to contact complementarians and invite them to interact with me regarding my research and my exegesis on the hard passages”

I will offer a humble observation. The Mike Seaver style of interaction is probably the best within this forum for a meaningful discussion. (It is indeed a shame Mike did not follow through to the end) But the regular “style” of dialog in the blog is not conducive to an effective debate. It is true that Mark held tough for a long time. But even he and the topics pursued with him have faded under the inevitable progress of a popular blog. Again, my hope is that John Starke was good willed in his brief post. If so, then I have no choice but to see his subsequent absence as reluctance to get into a stream of commentary which is both too deep and too wide for him to swim against. Unfortunately, I also sense that he and others at CBMW have no interest in the Mike Seaver style Q&A either. It may just be that WIM is just too intimidating for them regardless of the style of forum.