Whew, this is bad. I anticipated liking, or at least appreciating this book. I have very much enjoyed the one other book I've read by the author (A Tale of Three Kings). But this one, though I believe to have been well intentioned, was tedious, uncharitable, poorly written, and poorly argued. I actually think his proposals for interpretation of a few texts of Scripture were not without merit, though he did not persuade me of their greater probability. His agenda came across more powerfully than his exegesis, and his scholarship and exegesis were presented in such a subpar fashion that it was harder to see his position as fully reasonable. Also, I dove in deeper with his main historical nemesis, Jerome, and found his treatment of him completely one-sided, ignoring or ignorant of contrary biographical data and meaningful historical context. His lack of necessary historical nuance (nobody is as big a fan of the more distasteful statements of Jerome as he accuses) is matched by his absolute dogmatism that his minority report biblical interpretation is absolutely settled against the greater history of interpretation (blame Jerome, of course). Unfortunately, he rarely cites sources. He leans heavily at times on Will Durant, and the knowledgeable reader has good reason to question his wisdom in doing so. He misattributes and misquotes sources (sometimes making the sources for his quotations harder to find). In the end, I simply did not find the book trustworthy.
In the end, it reminded me of War in The Pews by Chester Weigle I reviewed about a year ago. Neither left me with any good impression of the house church movement.