The "numerous factual errors" referred to by the previous reviewer are actually only disagreements between the author and the reviewer.
The author's statement that for Baptists "truth is what each individual says it is, and any attempt to suggest otherwise is a violation of individual freedom." Is perhaps strident in its tone, but IS factual. While it is true that Baptists state that truth claims must be judged against scripture, the proliferation of Baptist denominations and "non-denominational" fellowships underscores the authors point. To say that "Carlton has no idea what Baptists really believe" is simply the reviewers way of attempting to out-polemicize the Baptist seminary trained author.
The "numerous other deficiencies in this book" can be summed up by stating that the author is an Orthodox Christian and not a protestant like the reviewer.
Carlton does an excellent job of tracing the outline of his thought processes in his conversion to Orthodoxy, though I would have striven to be less strident and connect the dots a little better.
Clark Carlton's "The Way" is a solid text with good analysis on the diferrence between Protestant denominations and Eastern Orthodoxy. Though some reviewers have critized the text about Clark's understanding of Protestantism and the Southern Baptists Convention (SBC) in particular, they have not addressed the schisms in the Baptist faith (and Protestantism) nor have they been fair to Clark's text. The groups who have left Orthodoxy are much diferrent in dynamics than the splits in Protestantism (for one, when one leaves Orthodoxy, they are no longer Orthodox; but a schismatic Protestant is still a Protestant and is the logical outworking of Protestent doctrine).
As a former Baptist, I found nothing in error with Clark's review of the SBC. His review on other issues like 'sola scriptura' and 'tradition' are above average chapters, however, his refutation of 'sola' proof texts used by Evangelicals is average and I wish more detialed analysis on the texts were used. The chapter is only 15 pages and many texts have been dealt with more througohly by some of the Catholic Apologists. I assert he goes on a red herring in saying that Paul was only asserting the Old Testament when writing about the sufficiency of scripture- yes, that is a given, but the New Testament is still inspired scripture and when he finaly deals with this, his conclusion (which I agree with) is not as forceful as it should be.
I wanted to give this book a higher approval rating because I essentially agree with him on almost all points, but the book is too small and many other essenial tenets of Orthodoxy are either not discussed or barely touched such as Theosis. This book is probably very good for someone who is just being introduced to Orthodoxy and is him or herself at wits end with the heresies and schisms of Protestantism. For the seasoned reader looking for an apologitic to aid in articulating the faith, there is much better material elsewhere.