Originally Posted by Tom
Pilgrim

My point in using that particular critique, was not whether he was sound himself.
It was whether or not he is accurately reviewing the book. I think he is, yet I also don't think he takes a strong enough stances against the book.
Perhaps you might want to deal with what the critique actually says?
MY point is that I would prefer to use someone who is sound in doctrine and life to critique someone who is not vs. using someone who is likewise unsound in doctrine and/or life. The real danger is that some/many may not be able to discern where such a person doing the critique is in error and who is held in high esteem in some circles thus luring such a person to read more of such a one and be drawn away from the truth in other areas. I simply think it unwise and perhaps if you had taken a bit more time you could have found someone who is sound and who does not represent such a spurious group as the Gospel Coalition. (this last remark will most likely cause some/much negative reaction from those who think the Gospel Coalition and/or some or all of its leaders to be 'saints') [Linked Image]

Oh, yes I could most definitely critique DeYoung's critique of C.S. Lewis, particularly where he takes Lewis' view of the atonement to task. But... I have a better idea!! evilgrin Why don't YOU critique his statements concerning the atonement since you think he correctly found fault with Lewis' view. scratchchin


[Linked Image]

simul iustus et peccator

[Linked Image]