You’ve missed my point.
Only, it wasn’t mine, it came from Socrates who quoted Thames’, king of Egypt, reply to Theuth, the father of the art of writing:
“O most expert Theuth, one man can give birth to the elements of an art, but only another can judge how they can benefit or harm those who will use them. And now, since you are the father of writing, your affection for it has made you describe its effects as the opposite of what they really are. In fact, it will introduce forgetfulness into the soul of those who learn it: they will not practice using their memory because they will put their trust in writing, which is external and depends on signs that belong to others, instead of trying to remember from the inside, completely on their own. You have not discovered a potion for remembering, but for reminding; you provide your students with the appearance of wisdom, not with its reality. Your invention will enable them to hear many things without being properly taught, and they will imagine that they have come to know much while for the most part they will know nothing. And they will be difficult to get along with, since they will merely appear to be wise instead of really being so.”
In other words, “book knowledge” is not the same as real knowledge and one must put down his book to gain the latter. In fact, there is no equivalence between book learning and hands-on experience and a person who has only read books about London cannot tell anyone what it actually feels, smells and tastes like to be a resident of The Big Smoke, which city, itself, is like smoke in that it is forever ethereal and constantly changing.
Even more importantly, it seems you missed one of what I take to be the most basic points of this article which is-at least as I understand it-that one can read much about Christianity and know nothing about Jesus, the person.
Perhaps the essential deficiencies of language are the primary reason that the really great philosophers-Socrates, Buddha, Jesus, etc.-committed absolutely none of their wisdom to writing and didn’t insist that their adherents read books, either theirs or anyone else’s.
Yes, I understand that Jesus supposedly referred to scripture on occasion but as often as not it was only to say that the text was passé or that a verse had been misunderstood.