There were things that I remember liking about the book, particularly some of the experiences he related. My critique is not necessarily theological or even methodological, I just don't think the book was well written. He seemed to have an idea of how he was going to write the book, like, "Hey, I'll be kinda random." It just didn't work. It didn't seem natural. Could the style he attempted to employ be effective? Sure. But his attempt, at least in my opinion, failed.

__________________
Jon Peters
Member, Reformation Fellowship (OPC) (Roseville, CA)
Folsom, CA