Some of you may not be aware, but I write a lot<\/a> on God, Jesus, the Bible, and things of that sort. I also find\u2014as do others\u2014that every once in a teensy weensy while I get criticized for what I say, which, as I never grow tired of saying, is par for the course. If you take on every\u00a0criticism, don\u2019t write. And definitely don\u2019t write about faith.<\/p>\n So criticism is fair game, but one type of criticism is quite annoying to me: \u201cEnns wrote about X, but he is wrong because he did not mention the following items that I think should always<\/em> be mentioned every time one\u00a0writes about X, namely A-L, Q, U-W, and, to be on the safe side, Z. Enns therefore is a closet-atheist-wolf-in-sheep\u2019s-clothing-liberal-lukewarm-tool-of-Satan.\u201d<\/p>\n Well, I\u2019ll have you know that I\u2019ve been reading the Bible lately<\/em> (finally getting around to it), and I\u2019ve begun to wonder what would happen if the same criticism were leveled at biblical writers, like Paul<\/a>.<\/p>\n Though given ample opportunity to so do, Paul never mentioned that Jesus is born of a virgin. I mean, right there in Romans Paul had a golden opportunity to preach the true gospel, but he failed. I\u2019m talking about Romans 1:3-4. There, at the very outset of his letter, where one would expect him\u00a0to have\u00a0been extra careful, Paul says of Jesus that he,<\/p>\n descended from David according to the flesh\u00a0and was declared to be Son of God with power according to the spirit of holiness by resurrection from the dead, Jesus Christ our Lord.<\/em><\/p>\n Hmm.\u00a0Is that all\u00a0he\u2019s\u00a0got? \u201cDavid according to the flesh\u201d?<\/p>\n![\"apostle](\"https:\/\/peteenns.com\/wp-content\/uploads\/2017\/02\/apostle_paul-1024x683.jpg\")
<\/p>\n