Title: An author with a biased agenda
Product review: I am afraid that Ehrman is not an objective scholar. His self publication in the media, as a reactionary sceptic, in reaction to his former protestant (sola scriptura) fundamentalism means his work is suspect at best.Ehrman's origins as a naive fundamentalist were exploded at university and this embittered him to the point that he became a biblical iconoclast. This is not the foundation for sound scholarship. Ehrman's academic blood is poisoned. Any academic work Ehrman produces has a sceptical agenda which is either explicit or, in this case, implicit. My advice, leave well alone and use the work of the more balanced and objective.
Would you say this review depicts the product in a flattering or unflattering light?
