David Marshall: Liar, Lunatic or Legend in His Own Mind? I Think I Know!

David Marshall is not your average bear. I have heard a few people I respect say there is something mentally wrong with Marshall. Not the usual delusionary stuff found among all believers to different degrees, which evangelicals have to the highest degree. Nope, something else is going on. What it is, hasn't been clear to me until now. I've wondered if it's because Marshall has lived in the Orient so long he thinks like an oriental person rather than an occidental one like ourselves [Readers can disambiguate these differences in the comments if they so desire]. He doesn't think like the rest of us, that's for sure. At the very least Marshall is another liar for Jesus, a person who is unjustifiably certain his faith is true and has mentally absorbed a whole host of lies as truths because of a false assumption he was raised to believe despite the overwhelming evidence to the contrary. With him the force is additionally strong, since there's no doubt he also suffers from the Dunning-Kruger Effect. Maybe though, he's just a boldfaced unashamed liar?

Not long ago I wrote a smack-down of the entire edifice of David Marshall's apologetics right here. Later Marshall wrote a non-response, which he linked to and said
Here's my refutation. It's really not necessary, though. All anyone has to do is read my actual remarks, to realize what an absolute botch Loftus has made of my arguments. And don't make up junk, and put it in my mouth. And he's accusing me of misrepresenting him, in this new book? Cripes.
But if you look closely he doesn't engage me with any counter-arguments, but instead makes plenty of bold faced assertions that he should know are merely bold faced assertions, mere rhetoric disguised as arguments to the untrained eye. He throws up a lot of word dust. He also claims I didn't share the context of what he said. However, I quoted him in full, and even linked to what he said in its context for my readers to decide for themselves. I did so even though what I quoted from him in the heading has been his stated view in many other contexts. So I didn't misrepresent his views even if he's right that I didn't share the context (which is not true either). I thought at that time he's lying and prancing about as if his non-response is a response even though he must know it wasn't.

Then Matthew Ferguson wrote a comprehensive post detailing Marshall's lies, right here. After thinking about the many times Marshall has received his due and then bounced back to the surface smiling as if nothing is wrong, I'm inclined to say Marshall is in fact a bold-faced liar. The reason why is obvious to me now. It's because of the one lie I know is in fact, nothing but a lie. Marshall called Ferguson "a simpleton." I can understand that assertion of Marshall's in no other terms but that Marshall lied when saying it of Ferguson. One cannot call a biblical scholar a simpleton and not lie. I've said something similar for comparison here on my blog: "I might be wrong but you cannot call me ignorant. That option is not available to you." The only people who could call me ignorant without lying are ignorant people who don't know who I am. Marshall knows Ferguson's credentials. Therefore Marshall is a liar. I'm sad to come to this conclusion but it is my conclusion. David Marshall is a bold-faced liar. That conclusion best fits all of the facts about Marshall.