|
|
|
I do not have an opinion about NRM scholars except about J. Gordon Melton whom I consider unrealistically uncriticial after reading one of his books. If you do not believe the stories of apostates, like Melton, then you stay in a state of self-perpetuating naivety. I am happy that there is somebody like David C. Lane to balance him. And yes, Ron Geaves should have written in Nova Religio that he was a follower of Rawat. And yes, Nova Religio should insist in such cases that the author reveals his background in such strong cases of personal involvement. I sincerely do not understand why some NRM scholars consider apostates unreliable. To me, it sounds crazy. I have to read more of their work to find out. Andries
Modified by Andries at Fri, Mar 11, 2005, 18:33:29
|
