<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	
	>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Rick Nanez: Full Gospel, Fractured Minds?</title>
	<atom:link href="https://pneumareview.com/rick-nanez-full-gospel-fractured-minds/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>https://pneumareview.com/rick-nanez-full-gospel-fractured-minds/</link>
	<description>Journal of Ministry Resources and Theology for Pentecostal and Charismatic Ministries &#38; Leaders</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Wed, 06 Jun 2018 18:30:06 +0000</lastBuildDate>
		<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
		<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>https://wordpress.org/?v=4.0.38</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: Pneuma Review</title>
		<link>https://pneumareview.com/rick-nanez-full-gospel-fractured-minds/#comment-35628</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Pneuma Review]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 06 Nov 2014 02:59:21 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://pneumareview.com/?p=6684#comment-35628</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[In the Spring 2008 issue, this response from subscriber E.E. appeared: &quot;I would like to respond to the review by Dave Johnson of Rick Nañez’s book, Full Gospel, Fractured Minds? which in appeared in the Winter 2008 issue. I want to challenge some of the thinking of the review. I agree there has been growth in academic training among Pentecostal/charismatics. However, if Pentecostal/charismatic institutions are &#039;turning the tide&#039; on anti-intellectualism this does not seem to be filtering down and helping most congregations. Most congregations continue to embrace an anti-intellectual attitude. Some obvious errors are still being preached from the pulpit, and where does this leave the congregations? Also, the reviewer seems to be expecting too much from the book. Pointing out that Nañez’s thesis about intellectual study wouldn’t apply in every culture is nothing short of setting up a straw man argument since no such thesis would work in every culture.&quot;]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>In the Spring 2008 issue, this response from subscriber E.E. appeared: &#8220;I would like to respond to the review by Dave Johnson of Rick Nañez’s book, Full Gospel, Fractured Minds? which in appeared in the Winter 2008 issue. I want to challenge some of the thinking of the review. I agree there has been growth in academic training among Pentecostal/charismatics. However, if Pentecostal/charismatic institutions are &#8216;turning the tide&#8217; on anti-intellectualism this does not seem to be filtering down and helping most congregations. Most congregations continue to embrace an anti-intellectual attitude. Some obvious errors are still being preached from the pulpit, and where does this leave the congregations? Also, the reviewer seems to be expecting too much from the book. Pointing out that Nañez’s thesis about intellectual study wouldn’t apply in every culture is nothing short of setting up a straw man argument since no such thesis would work in every culture.&#8221;</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
