[boatbums]

Yes, thank you for posting the WHOLE of the final paragraph review of a book which was written FOUR years ago. I can see why it was omitted from the original post.

As I read those who moved from evangelicalism to Catholicism, I couldn’t help but think of my own experience. As one who moved from Catholicism to evangelicalism, I have to agree with the authors’ assessment of the insufficiency of evangelicalism. But the proper movement is not to Rome, but back to Scripture. The best and biblical option in the face of these “conversions” is embedded in the beauty of Reformed theology. A proper understanding of the self-authentication of Scripture, of union with Christ (from which both justification and sanctification necessarily flow), of the church as God’s chosen vehicle of the means of grace (the Word, sacraments, and prayer) for all who are in Christ, brings a biblically rich and glorious response to anyone who would contemplate “swimming the Tiber” (p. 23). The most natural transition for evangelicals is not to Rome, but to the glorious truths that flowed from the Reformation, where alone can be found the self-authenticating Christ of Scripture.

As one who also moved from Catholicism to Evangelical Christianity, I did so specifically because of Scripture. I can only assume those who have gone the other way either don't realize yet that Rome forces them to give up on their assurance of salvation (they call it a "sin of presumption") or they didn't really reach that understanding in their faith. No telling WHICH denomination they came from.

[mrobisr]

“I did so specifically because of Scripture.”

Every ex-roman I have ever conversed with and it has been several over the years I have asked what made you see the light of Jesus?

Every single one said they read the Holy Word of God and realized that the roman church was completely opposite of the gospel of Christ.