Dan McClellan podcast has caused much concern....

[huckelberry]

On Dan's social media channels he primarily just reports out on the findings of mainstream Biblical scholarship in regards to various topics and claims by other social media channels. And it's just a fact that Biblical scholarship doesn't agree with LDS dogmas (or the dogmas of mainstream Christianity for that matter). The criticism you refer to above seems really like the typical fundamentalist's kneejerk reaction when confronted with academic Biblical scholarship.

This very thing shows itself in the eighteen-page thread over on the other board. Dan is the messenger the apologists are trying to shoot, when in fact, their beef is really with critical Bible scholarship.

Sunstoned, with a bit of curiosity and a bit of respect for Mak, I checked out some of the thread over there and did not really find the sort of hostility to Dan that you appear to suggest. The thread is long and I had patience for only a selection of comments. I notice you have posted there so probably followed more fully than I did. I found some good clarification of Dan's views on monotheism and I notice Smac was able to be respectful speaking a mixture of agreement and disagreement.I thought Dan was getting measured respect over there but I may have missed portions of the thread not fitting that picture.

Youtube has shorts of Dan contradicting odd Biblical propositions. He can be a bit abrupt but he is relating to some very poor presentations needing to be corrected. I stumbled upon an example where some fellow was claiming that astronomy showing a lunar eclipse near the likely time of Jesus crucifixion verified the darkness. Dan explained lunar eclipses occur at night and do not produce darkness. I would have imagined getting through high school science should have provided that information but maybe not.