(For example, I like John Piper’s thoughts in his book Don’t Waste Your Life, while I dislike/disagree with his thoughts about gender roles. But if I praise the first, and don’t add that caveat about my queasiness regarding his gender ideas, I risk having casual readers/listeners think that I’m wholeheartedly endorsing everything he says/preaches/writes. Some people would assume that because they aren’t careful enough readers or only hear what they want to hear.)

It may be easier to ignore the praiseworthy than to risk a detailed analysis of certain issues, simply because the analysis would likely be long and difficult to write with the correct nuance and might be easily misunderstood. I don’t know if that’s the issue in this book; I haven’t read it. I hope this made sense. I’m sure there are other factors involved.