Dr Craig questions from all over the world of pouring in let's go to him.

Dear Dr Craig, if the virgin birth of Jesus, as you told Nicholas Christoph in the New York Times,

is logically confirmed by its unique departure

from pagan and Judeic theology,

how can the personhood and mission of Jesus be taught typology as a culmination of

Judeic tropes rather than a radical departure from a Christian perspective, a multi-dimensional and multi-valenced transformation of

prior precedent. Would this not in and of itself be a counterproof not to Christianity

but to Messianic Jewish evangelism which proclaims the Christian

savior not as de novo but as a logical extension of Judaism? I think that the Mezienic Jewish

evangelism does exaggerate the continuity between Jesus of Nazareth and the Old Testament concepts of the Messiah.

I think it's important to affirm what a radical departure Jesus of Nazareth does represent from typical Jewish mezianic expectations.

When you read the Old Testament prophecies about the Messiah, it's no wonder that the Jewish leadership of Jesus'

day disputed his authenticity and thought him to be an imposter.

When he was crucified, they mocked him saying,

if you really are the Messiah, the king of the Jews,

then come down from the cross, destroy your enemies.

This is the kind of Mezianic warrior and ruler that they were expecting, and for them the crucifixion of Jesus

was just a mockery of his claim to be the fulfillment of these misianic

prophecies. So I don't think that we should exaggerate the continuity here.

There is a radical newness in Jesus of Nazareth

that is vindicated by the resurrection.

It is the God of Israel's raising Jesus from the dead

...