Räisänen inconsistencies?

I am beginning to think that Räisänen's "descriptive approach" to early Christian thought (cf. his new book, The Rise of Christian Beliefs) looks ironically pretty similar to the "New Testament Theology" approaches he so vigorously critiques - with a few more inconsistencies to-boot. Yet I am only just at the beginning of his book, so I should better suspend judgment for a while. Actually, I'll just stop typing and go to bed.