Book Review - Hook Line and Sinker

Hook Line and Sinker is a book based on what the author, Michael Bresciani, calls “refutation preaching.” “Refutation preaching as its name implies serves to refute some doctrine or teaching that has previously been established and generally accepted. Often these previously established teachings have been based on the scriptures themselves. Still other teachings have gained acceptance through oral communication” (page 9). Refutation preaching, says the author, is as old as the Bible’s record of human history. The prophets of the Old Testament were called to refute what had become accepted theology, but went against God’s Word. In this book, Bresciani seeks to refute some of the cliches and theology that have become accepted within the church. He does so with mixed results.

Some of what the author refutes is far overdue. God is testing you. I claimed a verse of Scripture. God told me to tell you. These are all phrases we hear used in a way that is foreign to any Scriptural understanding of God’s work in our lives.

Unfortunately, I had many areas of concern with the author’s theology. He seems to be an eclectic mixture of Conservative Protestant and Charismatic theology. Obviously he does not believe, as I do, in cessationism. He believes that God may give me a message of prophecy for someone else or that I should seek the gift of tongues. The theological inconsistency left me bewildered at times.

The book also seemed to suffer from the spelling and grammatical issues that plague books that are self-published. It was far better than others I have read, but did not rise to the standards of books that have been professionally published.

In the end, I appreciated what the author attempted to do, but felt that the shortcomings outweighed the strengths. His theology and mine are too often too far apart to allow me to agree with him as much as I would have liked.

Evaluation		Support
	Theology/Accuracy Some good and some bad, but it seemed inconsistent throughout.
	Readability Quite easy-to-read, but with problems in spelling and grammar.
	Uniqueness An overdue attempt at refuting common errors.
	Importance Would be more important were it more consistent.
	Overall A noble but flawed attempt to refute common errors.
More About Ratings & Reviews