While Goldingay certainly is more liberal in his approach than Roy Zuck, say, he is a respected scholar.
Consequently, there is a way in which we need to be in conversation with him and those whose
presuppositions are similar, agree with what we can, challenge what we should and nuance other parts in ways
that demonstrate that we agree “in kind” on a certain point but don’t altogether swallow everything hook, line,
and sinker.
Again, it is quite permissible to use the web to explore the presuppositions of the author.
You may chat with me about this to point the writer in the right direction. I have included a former paper written
to give you a guide