tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8685278893942695106.post1869751116407312063..comments2023-10-25T05:31:07.486-04:00Comments on The Paperback Pursuer: Review # 262: Off Target: 18 Bull's-Eye Exposés by John Noe, PhD Anonymoushttp://www.blogger.com/profile/12304034500941795921noreply@blogger.comBlogger1125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8685278893942695106.post-65796975108525599782013-01-10T19:14:48.258-05:002013-01-10T19:14:48.258-05:00Ugh, here we go again John. Let's analyze wha...Ugh, here we go again John. Let's analyze what was said in this "review" <br /><br />TXT#1 "I wholeheartedly agree with John Noe, we have in-fact been led astray by the “modern” word of God." <br /><br />CHK#1 What in the world is the "modern" word of God? Before we go any further there should be qualification, not just throwing out words like this. I suspect the person actually means the most prevalent current interpretation of the Word of God -- since the Word of God hasn't changed. Unless this person has an issue with specific "modern" translations; which again should be qualified. <br /><br />TXT#2 " It seems that some church leaders/congregants have spun the meaning of scripture to fit their own agendas, changing the context subtly..." <br /><br />CHK#2 This appears to partially qualify the first sentence, however the next question would be where do the "modern" church leaders/congregants spin the meaning of scripture or change context. Can your reviewer be a bit more specific or at least give an example. <br /><br />TXT#3 "...while others have simply misread or misunderstood what they study." <br /><br />CHK#3 By what criteria is this conclusion made? Why does the reviewer believe he/she can discern the correct way to read or understand what they study compared to other people. By what authority or qualification?<br /><br />Again, all of your books have the SAME THEME -- "Everyone else is in error and John Noe is here to 'expose' the errors and tell people what they should really believe."Roderickhttp://thekingdomcome.comnoreply@blogger.com