We now come to Part 5 of my book analysis series on Francesca Stavrakopoulou’s (Dr. S) controversial book, God: An Anatomy. In this post, I am going to look at Part 3 of Dr. S’s book, which is entitled, “Genitals,” and includes four chapters: Chapter 4 (“Cover Up”), Chapter 5 (“Phallic Masculinities”), Chapter 6 (“Perfecting…
Welcome to the next installment of my book analysis series on Francesca Stavrakopoulou’s book, God: An Anatomy. In this post, I will be looking at “Part 2” of her book, entitled, “Feet and Legs,” which constitutes chapters 2-4, “Grounded” (Chapter 2), “Footloose” (Chapter 3), and “Sensational Feet” (Chapter 4). As I said in an earlier…
It’s the end of the week and I have a little time to write my third post on Francesca Stavrakopoulou’s controversial book, God: An Anatomy. In these next few posts, I will be diving into the specific things she argues in her book. Truth be told, though, I have been a bit hesitant to get…
Here in Part 2 of my book analysis of Francesca Stavrakopoulou’s controversial book, God: An Anatomy, I am going to lay the groundwork of my book analysis by highlighting what I feel are the main arguments and fundamental problems in the book. In my previous post, I simply gave the backstory that led to my…
First, a BackstoryThe inspiration for this new book analysis series has a curious backstory. A few weeks ago, as I was thumbing through my Twitter feed, I chanced across a certain video made by a biblical scholar who has his own YouTube (or is it TikTok?) channel. This gentleman was commenting on something yet another…
Hi Everyone. As the title says, a few weeks ago I was interviewed to talk a bit about the early Church Father, Irenaeus. In particular, the talk is in regard to his reading of Genesis 1-3 and the figures of Adam and Eve. I hope you enjoy it!
This year, in addition to my adjunct work, I am teaching high school English full-time at a public charter school. And, for the first time in sixteen years, I am teaching 9th grade English. Without going into a terrible amount of detail, I will say the school is very diverse, to the point where I,…
I haven’t written anything about the creation/evolution debate or Ken Ham for quite a long time. In fact, it has been almost a year. Yet although my writing on the topic has decreased quite a lot, I still follow some of goings on in those circles. And since it is the beginning of the new…
Welcome to Part 3 of my short critique of blogger Matthew Hartke’s post in which he puts forth the argument that the best way to explain the birth of Christianity is not the resurrection of Jesus, but rather that after his death, his disciples suffered from cognitive dissonance and who, much like the later Millerites,…
In my previous post, I outlined blogger Matthew Hartke’s basic argument regarding why he thinks Cognitive Dissonance Theory (CDT) best explains the reason for the rise of Christianity. Again, you can read his post here and my summary of his post here. As for this post, I am going to do two things (all within…