They sure didn’t give too many lines to the Evangelical Universalist.
Can’t these folks ever write a neutral report without labelling folks as either “conservative” “traditional” “liberal”. Or mentioning that those who may not follow the “traditional” path also follow less “traditional” beliefs.
Don’t they see that by peppering the article by labelling the different views in this fashion, that they influence the reader. Most will see the word “conservative” and assume safety and fear those teachings that the editors label “liberal”. Most people have been so conditioned in this way, that they will not give the time of day to anything labelled “liberal” or “non-traditional”. I know, I was such a person once. I never would read any book that was not published by my list of “safe” publishers. That’s how I had been discipled.
And how many times do they have to mention that this “conservative” book has a forward by J.I. Packer.
Their bias bled everywhere.
Otherwise, it was an all-right article, IMO. It gave a few new resources that I had not heard of before.