I decided to pick up a copy of one of Campolo's books to see if in context he was as bad as he sounds out of context.

I can't believe what I read. Maybe my expectations were way off base. I was expecting to read a man writing in a very polite, considerate, grandfatherly manner. What I have found is what appears to be a bitter man.

I'm trying to give him the benefit of the doubt so I'm only making notes on what I perceive to be some of his most obnoxious comments.

Regarding women as leaders in the church, on pages 2-3 he writes: "It always amazes me to see the lengths to which some of my Evangelical brothers and sisters are willing to go in concealing the fact that women held prominent leadership roles in the early church. They even seem ready to change the Bible...When certain Evangelicals produced their own translation of Scriptures (NIV)...I think it was an attempt to restructure the Bible to legitimate their own chauvinist ideas about who should be eligible to lead the church."

Writing on page 4 about the differences between Evangelicals on the right and left of the political spectrum he states "Those on the right tend to put their trust in the private sector...whereas those on the left believe that the government must play a major role in solving social problems."

Notice "the right put(s) their trust in the private sector" but the left does NOT put their trust in the government.

On page 21 he contrasts "extreme Calvinists" with "Wesleyan Arminianism."

Addressing inerrancy of scripture he writes on page 23 "Personally, I think the question of the inerrancy of the original manuscripts is irrelevant because the originals are not available to us."

And so it went. It sure was an eye opener. I certainly don't look at him as a nice old grandpa with some liberal tendencies. He may not be a bitter old man but he certainly isn't charitable towards those with whom he disagrees. ( )