Why Randal Rauser is Impervious to Reason

To the left is a typical discussion with Dr. Randal Rauser on his blog (click to enlarge). It concerns how poorly he defended the historicity of the nativity narratives in the gospels against Jonathan Pearce. This isn't to deny he did a superior job of it, because he did. It's to say that at even at its very best this was a poor attempt. So I asked him why he really believes and you can see the result. At the end I linked to what he's doing, which can be found here.

Rauser is an epistemological solipsist just as I argued with regard to William Lane Craig, a second post of which can be read here. I had previously argued Rauser is impervious to reason. This is why. If anyone is living in a house of delusion they are. They are both impervious to reason. They are epistemological solipsists. I don't really care if they are, and I like them both, but so long as this is true I'll keep pointing it out to more reasonable people.

Too bad for Christianity if this represents its best defenders.