The same type of criticism of unrealized potential can be made against David Kelsey's constructive suggestions in To Understand God Truly.
Not exact matches
They are: i) revelatory experiences are common to all religions, ii) revelation is received under finite human condition, iii) the three
types of criticisms, mystical, prophetic and secular help to address the distortions that crept into revealed religions, iv) History
of Religions makes «a concrete theology that has universal significance» possible and v) an acknowledgement that «the sacred is the creative ground and at the
same time a critical judgement
of the secular».
Either the Bible was absolutely infallible, as it is for the fundamentalists; or it was subject to the
same type of rational
criticism that the Protestants had already brought to bear against the papacy.
Unfortunately, a lot
of writers looking for that
same type of validation trick themselves into believing they're actually looking for constructive
criticism, and are thus disappointed with the feedback they receive.
However the executive body appears to be seeking to bundle up various
types of «illegal» content into the
same problem bucket — and quickly drew
criticism it risks encouraging algorithmic censorship by seeking to create one set
of rules to apply to copyrighted content and terrorist propaganda, for example.