Much of this very well may be true. Given the nature of SDG's inquiry, I think it's best that SDG doesn't adopt a hermeutic that automatically determines the answer to the question under consideration. So I posted some material that suggests that Wright requires careful consideration to separate the gold (if any) from the surrounding rock.

Reasonable men have reached your conclusions, Pilgrim, after much consideration of Wright's views that was both charitable and discerning. On the other hand, some have rendered a verdict without adopting such an approach. Whatever the verdict on Wright (something I cannot render because I have not read enough of the material in question), I hope SDG approaches Wright seeking to understand before he seeks to adjudicate. I am not advocating some sort of big tent tolerance of serious error. I am advocating merely a hermenutical approach that seeks understanding; takes into account the breadth, complexity, and ecclesial context of Wright's teaching; and eschews judgments about Wright's intentions and desires (used twice in your post, Pilgrim, strongly imply for example that Wright "desires to deny Biblical truth) that are not discernable outside a close personal relationship with Wright himself.

Blessings!

onefear